Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
UAxDEATH
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
714
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:15:03 -
[1] - Quote
Introduction We are the people of nullsec! Living for years in this epic and massively rich in conflict environment, we set aside our differences to join forces against destructive actions from CCP against sovereignty mechanics.
The new game mechanics, called by many fozziesov, turned out to be the greatest discrimination against nullsec dwellers in all of EVE Online history. This untested release shouldnGÇÖt build the platform for life in 0.0 for the most organized, united and active part of New Eden. Alliance leaders, who signed this statement, have collected enormous amount of proof that confirms this statement. We, like no one else, can see that this release leads to stagnation in 0.0 and death to nullsec. Only in a short while since the release, we have collected a record amount of negative opinions about the new sov. We combined our strengths and analyzed, what does it mean to live in fozziesov for the nullsec people.
Our opinion is - this game mechanics needs to be tweaked and the shortest time possible.
Problems and suggestions
Problem: fozziesov in its current state critically reduces chances for large scale fights, fights that significantly separate EVE Online from its competitors. Large amount of spawned beacons, motivates sides to not engage, but to hunt down ships fitted with entosis link. In one of those cases, to defend off 2 structures players spent 6 hours of game time, most of which was spent jumping through gates and warping around in systems. Pilots who took part in all of this were rewarded with exhaustion and emptiness, instead of glory from being victorious and enjoyment from the overall process. Besides that, fleet commanding and fleet bonus structure took a hit as well. We want massive fights, not cockroach races. Solution: reduction of beacons (nodes) , to about 1-3 per system, which are located next to a contested structure.
Problem: low skill requirement practically affirms harassment towards any sov owner. While new player harassment is subject to a support ticket. Roaming fleets or interceptors shouldnGÇÖt be able to affect sovereignty. The game mechanics shouldn't be a tool to force exhausting actions upon players - a single ship can force entire alliance of players to take part in tiresome and hollow defence. Currently the entosis link module is a tool for trolls, not a key to sovereignty contest. Solution: reduce the amount of tactics that create invulnerable situations, which are currently based on shipGÇÖs speed. Entosis module should reduce speed dramatically, up to 0 m/s.
Problem: CCP didnGÇÖt give the right interface tools for players to engage in sov-wars, every aspect of ever changing situation has to be memorized, written down somewhere and kept up to date. This results in quick exhaustion and aggravation towards the game instead of enjoyment. Solution: introduction of a new sov window, similar to watchlist, that displays information about structures/nodes that are being defended or attacked using entosis module, with pilot's nickname, solar system, structure id and progress.
Problem: fozziesov has a potential exploit in relation to Entosis Link II - using this module allows attackers to do a quick 2 minute cycle, which sets structure vulnerable, regardless of vulnerability period or until the status of vulnerable structure becomes known to its owner. Vulnerable structure can be noticed after a close inspection. This aspect of game mechanics negates vulnerability period. Solution: remove vulnerability from such structures at the the end of the vulnerability period, but allow owners to entosis structure back up. If structure was partially attacked, it should be clearly visible.
Problem: structure that exits reinforce timer, doesnGÇÖt regenerate back, which in the old game mechanics served as a defensive mechanism against sov trolling. Attacked systems spam node beacons, which can last forever, which is discrimination against sovereignty owners - they must defend their space despite the fact that no one will show up to contest it. Solution: a new type of status - defended. If the nodes are not being captured by any attackers during contested campaign for a period of time dependent of defence index, then structures change from contested to defended.
Problem: notifications about attack contain no useful information except the fact of aggression (and system). Solution to this should be inclusion of information about the system, structures and nicknames of attackers. Command node names are too long, which obstructs quick overview of the system nodes and forces to expand overview window to 1/4 of the screen, just to see the full list of nodes. Solution: to use abbreviations TCU, iHUB, Station and remove "command" from the name.
Problem: in Dominion sov, alliances had means to transfer sov between them, however long and inconvenient it was. In the new sov, this ability was removed, which is ridiculous for a sci-fi game. Solution: allow executor corporations to transfer remotely structures via listed sov structures context menu, similar in the way it is now with the customs offices.
Conclusion
Fozziesov is currently a long, exhausting and inconvenient sovereignty warfare model. Sovereignty is absolutely unprotected against sov trolling. This game mechanics stimulates unintended usage. This situation can no longer exist in its current state. We are highly determined and if all our demands and solutions are not addressed in a week's time, we reserve the right to fight back for our game time and fun, which we were stripped off by the new game mechanics. |
UAxDEATH
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
714
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:15:17 -
[2] - Quote
Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
18
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:20:26 -
[3] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote: Problem: low skill requirement practically affirms harassment towards any sov owner. While new player harassment is subject to a support ticket.
I'm not in null, so I don't care, but to clarify, new player harassment in rookie/SOE arc systems is subject to a support ticket.
If a newly created account is trolling you in null, harass away. |
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
176
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:20:47 -
[4] - Quote
"This game mechanics stimulates unintended usage."
Is this not the definition of emergent game play? Adapt.
Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE
Check out the Youtube Channel and be sure to subscribe!
|
Cpt Patrick Archer
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
48
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:27:11 -
[5] - Quote
I 100% support all the solutions brought up in this post.
CCP, please listen to your players, or at least the CSM. That would be a start. |
Julia Hillan
Sanctuary of Shadows Triumvirate.
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:28:34 -
[6] - Quote
+1 |
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
976
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:38:26 -
[7] - Quote
I wonder why speed penalty is the to-go request to nerf trollceptor-like ships. If you aim at trollceptors, hitting other ships with nerfhammer seems like unfortunate consequence. Wouldn't it be better to, say, do something like this:
- Increase PWG usage of T2 entosis to BS levels; - Add role bonus to CBC and command ships that reduces fitting requirements of entosis link.
Optional: - make T1 entosis link into cruiser module; - fitting role bonus for AF (add "assault" into AFs at last).
It's not fun to pilot what's basically gimped brick. Let people use their ships at their fullest, but make sure they aren't denying any content.
UAxDEATH wrote:Problem: structure that exits reinforce timer, doesnGÇÖt regenerate back, which in the old game mechanics served as a defensive mechanism against sov trolling. Attacked systems spam node beacons, which can last forever, which is discrimination against sovereignty owners - they must defend their space despite the fact that no one will show up to contest it. Solution: a new type of status - defended. If the nodes are not being captured by any attackers during contested campaign for a period of time dependent of defence index, then structures change from contested to defended. If that is what I'm thinking it is, I'm afraid it's abusable.
Also, this probably belongs to F&I.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Swind
FREE GATES Nulli Secunda
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:38:37 -
[8] - Quote
+1 for original post |
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:40:53 -
[9] - Quote
I, as BOT manager and XWX manager, completely agree on this thread and i hope CCP will hear our voice. |
corebloodbrothers
Volition Cult The Volition Cult
1242
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:41:25 -
[10] - Quote
Like i mentioned in other places i agree that fozzie sov lacks the deeper motivation and drivers behind them, why own and hold sov, why defend it ratehr then evade the fight. Thr meaningless of activity makes it turn into fw, or arranged fights, which isnt why we play eve. Feels like a test server battle.
Purpose too null, unique opertunities and perks for holding sov, buidable sov over time with niche oppertunities, make those first, combine that with fozzie, fix bugs, and then u revive null and the game we love |
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
3883
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:45:24 -
[11] - Quote
Highsec carebear posting in page 1 of a potential threadnaught.
73% of EVE characters stay in high security space. 62% of EVE subscribers barely PvP. 40% of all new accounts just "level up their Ravens". Probably that's why PvE content in EVE Online is sub-par and CCP is head over heels for PvP...
|
Karl Jerr
Herzack Unit
103
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:47:47 -
[12] - Quote
... And Lowbear following, ready for the summer tears |
Deborah Aumer
The Flying Dead. The Afterlife.
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:51:30 -
[13] - Quote
totally agree with this post |
Archie Wah Wah
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:52:57 -
[14] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:muh rentals(((
)))
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5469
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:53:57 -
[15] - Quote
I'd suggest that GD is possibly not the best place to post this. (the churn tends to be high)
We have asked for feedback here?
And possibly into the assembly hall, or Jita park.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3f60qd/csm_share_your_experiences_with_fozziesov/
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Kasarch
Surreal corp The Afterlife.
4
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 20:54:27 -
[16] - Quote
Agree with all, except first point. I not like too much lagging "epics" where f1 monkeys shooting to broadcasts and no brain orbiting anchors. But current mechanics forces troll-ceptors instead fights of mobile fleets. |
Sapporo Jones
Upvote Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:13:39 -
[17] - Quote
In it's current incarnation, my fellow TEST pilots would rather be playing the dominion sov game rather than this. We tried to hold our breath and see what CCP would deliver, and while the system shows there was clearly a ton of thought and effort put in to it, it is still not ready for primetime.
While this system does promote fights, it doesn't promote battles.
We tend to see one or two people in interceptors or frigs/dessies who run the second you form to defend. There are times when you see 4 person omen navy fleets and you fight them, there are no real skirmishes anymore over sov as far as I can tell. Gone are the large fleet battles that we came to nullsec for in the first place.
It was explained that this would be a system more akin to the faction war style of gameplay, I was not fully aware of how deep that meaning would go.
I strongly agree with the OP and feel that CCP needs to pay a bit more attention to this sooner rather than later. |
Fafer
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
46
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:17:24 -
[18] - Quote
Hello Steve,
I googled for your platform with great interest http://indecisivenoob.blogspot.com/2015/02/csm-x-candidate-analysis-steve-ronuken.html
According to this, its seems you are representing the hard-working industrialists. I would like to invite you to a place where top level, end-game industrialists make heroic efforts and take great risks to produce end-game products, to a place where you can experience first hand and better understand what kind of involvement is now actually needed to survive in Nullsec. You can also participate in defence. Then I think you would understand the problems involved behind this initiative, and why the place is GD.
If you are interested, poke me. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16771
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:19:12 -
[19] - Quote
"A BLOO BLOO MY RENTAL INCOME!"
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5144
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:46:27 -
[20] - Quote
Some alliances are recruiting mining corps, can you believe it!?! MINING CORPS!
Next thing you know we'll have human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! |
|
Shonion
FREE GATES Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:48:48 -
[21] - Quote
I need a bigger dish to collect all of this... |
The Slayer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
266
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:50:08 -
[22] - Quote
Suck it nerds. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
119
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:54:56 -
[23] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
What wars have any of these people done with the new sov system that lets them make informed ideas on how to fix a sov system thatGÇÖs just over two weeks old that will affect every single person in null sec? What has any one done in the new sov system other than get some unused systems attacked? None of these people speak for me.
|
Zimmy Zeta
Lisa Needs Braces.
58802
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:55:53 -
[24] - Quote
this is gonna be good
I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it.
Yes, I do feel bad about it.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2658
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:56:14 -
[25] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:We the renter coalitions of nullsec! FTFY |
Jabbrail
Red Scorpion Corp
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 21:56:32 -
[26] - Quote
I d like to support the petition. The situation where whole system can be influenced or better say harassed by 1 small interceptor is not going to bring additional people to claim sectors, but in opposite will be drawing them away from claims and from the game as well.
Another suggestion is to make the size of Entosis Links available to use them on Battlecruisers and Battleships only. Another thing which can be added is to have a cycle for Entosis Link similas as a cycle for Cyno Unit - 10 min per cycle and ship can not be controlled and it will become very vulnerable to defenders.
The idea of it is to force the attackers to bring some additional vessels in order to protect a ship carrying the Entosis Link.
Right now there is no fun at all to have a multiple "catch my interceptor" atta |
Zimmy Zeta
Lisa Needs Braces.
58803
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:01:41 -
[27] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote: Another suggestion is to make the size of Entosis Links available to use them on Battlecruisers and Battleships only.
Sounds like an easy enough fix for me. Or, Entosis links remove the "Interduction Nullified"- ability from any ship they are fitted on, no matter what.
I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it.
Yes, I do feel bad about it.
|
davet517
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
120
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:05:17 -
[28] - Quote
Problem: You're trying to hold more space than you can defend, and in some cases, rent it out, when the mechanics don't allow that anymore.
Solution: Stop that. |
Fafer
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
46
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:08:40 -
[29] - Quote
Tappits wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
What wars have any of these people done with the new sov system that lets them make informed ideas on how to fix a sov system thatGÇÖs just over two weeks old that will affect every single person in null sec? What has any one done in the new sov system other than get some unused systems attacked? None of these people speak for me.
Its old more than two weeks, its been explained and analysed before, and its been on Duality, where some of the people mentioned won the sov competition, and also all of them have hands on experience at this moment, which gives them base to be informed. None of this people ever claimed to speak for you, but for sure they don't need your informed approval to voice their opinion about the tweaks.
|
Paranoid Loyd
6463
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:11:09 -
[30] - Quote
Is "collective petition" high or lower on the tears scale than "open letter"?
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!
|
|
Jabbrail
Red Scorpion Corp
4
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:16:30 -
[31] - Quote
davet517 wrote:Problem: You're trying to hold more space than you can defend, and in some cases, rent it out, when the mechanics don't allow that anymore.
Solution: Stop that.
There is no "stop" solution for this. Cause if you want to get a claim - bring your fleet. If your fleet wins - you ll get the claim. Right now it is more like OMFGLOLZ type attack on multiple systems with 1-2 interceptors or even t1 frigs.
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
258
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:17:39 -
[32] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
I'd like to propose some questions to the above alliances:
What type of systems have you been defending? How many pilots are typically active in them, what do they do in those systems, and how far do they have to travel in order to mount a defense? Why do you want to retain those systems?
What type of systems have you been attacking? What made you want to have Sov in those systems?
Your goal should be preventing anything from being reinforced in the first place. If you cannot do that, you do not effectively hold Sov of that system and you deserve to lose it, or get burned out trying to win the capture events. You should stop fighting over those systems you can't hold on to. Getting burned out is your punishment for trying to operate in the Dominion Sov paradigm.
Interceptors are perfectly suited for effecting Aegis Sov - because they only Sov they can challenge for is unoccupied Sov, and unoccupied Sov isn't sovereignty at all. If you want to hold on to a system but can't be bothered to have pilots in it during it's vulnerability window, you don't deserve to hold Sov there.
In NPC null, chasing off a lone Interceptor is incredibly easy. We simply undock. They never stay within 25km, the range of a T1 Entosis. If a hostile Interceptor is Entosing your Outpost, undock. Blap them if they stick around, enjoy the view of the stars for a little bit if fly off and ruin their Entosis cycle. If they're after a TCU or I-hub, simply warp a Navy Vex or Caracal or whatever to it. If this happens in an empty system four jumps away from anybody, you shouldn't have Sov there and it's your own fault you're burning yourself out. You need to adapt. That burnout is Aegis Sov working as intended.
And if that Interceptor is bait for a 100-pilot T3 gang on the other side of a wormhole - there's your large fleet fight you're looking for.
I do agree that there should be a sort of passive regen of defense index, so that simply going after hostile ships without bothering with your own Entosis ships is a valid defense tactic. That way defenders can put all their pilots into mobile offensive ships if they so desire. This passive regen should not happen if there is even a single node being Entosed by an attacker, so that it does not extend the time of an active attack effort.
|
meandeane651
Intergalactic Fight Club Gentlemen's.Club
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:20:43 -
[33] - Quote
As head diplomat and alliance command for Gentlemen'sClub, we support the reforms proposed by UAxDEATH. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
258
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:24:04 -
[34] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote:davet517 wrote:Problem: You're trying to hold more space than you can defend, and in some cases, rent it out, when the mechanics don't allow that anymore.
Solution: Stop that. There is no "stop" solution for this. Cause if you want to get a claim - bring your fleet. If your fleet wins - you ll get the claim. Right now it is more like OMFGLOLZ type attack on multiple systems with 1-2 interceptors or even t1 frigs.
Multiple systems that are so empty you can't even blap a single t1 frig? Sounds like the very definition of "holding more space than you can defend" to me. Even a lone Skiff can chase off or kill a single t1 frig.
|
davet517
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
121
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:25:21 -
[35] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote: There is no "stop" solution for this. Cause if you want to get a claim - bring your fleet. If your fleet wins - you ll get the claim. Right now it is more like OMFGLOLZ type attack on multiple systems with 1-2 interceptors or even t1 frigs.
There is. Here you go:
1. Claim only the space that you intend to live in. 2. Live in it. Your indexes will rise. 3. If someone comes during your prime time to troll space that you are actually living in, kill them. 4. Profit.
Your days of being an absentee landlord are behind you, or holding an entire region of systems populated by one nullified tengu and a tower are over. Adapt. |
Jabbrail
Red Scorpion Corp
4
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:32:11 -
[36] - Quote
davet517 wrote:Jabbrail wrote: There is no "stop" solution for this. Cause if you want to get a claim - bring your fleet. If your fleet wins - you ll get the claim. Right now it is more like OMFGLOLZ type attack on multiple systems with 1-2 interceptors or even t1 frigs.
There is. Here you go: 1. Claim only the space that you intend to live in. 2. Live in it. Your indexes will rise. 3. If someone comes during your prime time to troll space that you are actually living in, kill them. 4. Profit. Your days of being an absentee landlord are behind you. So are your days of holding an entire region of systems populated by one nullified tengu and a tower. Adapt.
My point is, that I am absolutely for a Good Fight. Have your fleets ready and claim everything you can claim! I am not against the principles. But it looks crazy then you start a war with a country, gather your troops and next day 1 spy is putting enemy flag on central square and you lose your capital. WTF?!!!! I want a fight, not "hide and seek" game. I have them enough in a kindergarden. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
259
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:36:16 -
[37] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote:Have your fleets ready and claim everything you can claim!
NO. No! You're still not getting it. Claim [/i]only what you can occupy[/I]. It is easy, by design, to claim something with Aegis Sov yet it's difficult to retain if - unless you live in it.
Quote:But it looks crazy then you start a war with a country, gather your troops and next day 1 spy is putting enemy flag on central square and you lose your capital.
No big deal - simply attack a target that is vulnerable during your invulnerability window. Then they cannot attack you while you are on the offensive.
|
davet517
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
124
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:37:08 -
[38] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote:[quote=davet517]I want a fight, not "hide and seek" game. I have them enough in a kindergarden.
You're joking, right? I used to live in your neighborhood, remember? Explain to me how what you are describing is any different from planting an AFK cloaker in a system 23/7. Hide and seek game, right?
If you live in the space, you can deal with the trolls. If you deal with the trolls, you will have no timers. If you have no timers, you will have no problem. The only time you will have to actually defend your sov in a capture event is when someone comes heavy, looking to take it.
|
PAPULA
Black Aces I N F A M O U S
69
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:41:41 -
[39] - Quote
When CCP thinks it's ready, it' done. It's the same thing with the new icons, players just don't like the new icons, what happened ? Absolutely nothing, CCP will not go back to old icons, and so CCP doesn't care about sov anymore, it will stay no matter what we do. |
Marigo Silas
Ad Perpetuam Memoriam Heideran VII Union of 1812
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:46:17 -
[40] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote:davet517 wrote:Jabbrail wrote: There is no "stop" solution for this. Cause if you want to get a claim - bring your fleet. If your fleet wins - you ll get the claim. Right now it is more like OMFGLOLZ type attack on multiple systems with 1-2 interceptors or even t1 frigs.
There is. Here you go: 1. Claim only the space that you intend to live in. 2. Live in it. Your indexes will rise. 3. If someone comes during your prime time to troll space that you are actually living in, kill them. 4. Profit. Your days of being an absentee landlord are behind you. So are your days of holding an entire region of systems populated by one nullified tengu and a tower. Adapt. My point is, that I am absolutely for a Good Fight. Have your fleets ready and claim everything you can claim! I am not against the principles. But it looks crazy then you start a war with a country, gather your troops and next day 1 spy is putting enemy flag on central square and you lose your capital. WTF?!!!! I want a fight, not "hide and seek" game. I have them enough in a kindergarden.
Well if that one spy drove up in a jeep and you didn't have any soldiers for miles to shoot him, then yeah, that could happen.
You're treating this like dominion sov: ignore the first attack and defend if necessary only at the reinforcement timer. The defender wins by making the attacker do the work 2 or 3 times to win, while the defender only has to show once. You win battles in this system by having lots of buffer systems and exhausting your opponent. It rewards holding more space, if only to make it more painful to attack you.
The goal of fozziesov is for you not to let them reinforce it in the first place. In fozziesov, holding space you don't need, don't regularly use, and don't defend, is DESIGNED to be painful. It's to tell you that you need to downsize a little bit.
You get to select a limited window, when you should have your maximum population on, as the only time you can be attacked. Furthermore, if you are actually using your systems, attackers have to orbit for silly amounts of time, uncontested, to do anything. If you can't deal with it in that amount of time, you probably have too many systems.
Now certain things I could see, certainly fixing any outright bugs like vulnerability timer issues, maybe bumping up the fitting or penalty requirements a *little* bit so that you can clearly counter an entosis ship with its mirror if its undefended. But your post just comes as someone basically wanting the entire basis of the changes reversed, because they liked the way it was. To be expected, since many of the alliances on that list of yours paid for lots of space and/or made lots of money renting it out. This system will no longer work, by design.
|
|
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
179
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:48:20 -
[41] - Quote
Welcome to 2 months ago, when the rest of null sec realized how bad all these points that you bring up are.
Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!
|
Syndic Thrass
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
146
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:49:30 -
[42] - Quote
I agree with rusrus
Reguards,
Iskies-mommies-toonies-corpies-goonies 0707 m8m8m8
|
Syndic Thrass
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
146
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:50:54 -
[43] - Quote
Also one stupid mechanic that should be fixed is the ability to buzz out of entosis range and make your link cut off so you can warp away. Much like cloaks show the secondary timer that runs back counter-clockwise to note your recloaking timer, entosis links should have the same thing, although this would be fixed by adding a speed penalty which is exactly what should be done.
Reguards,
Iskies-mommies-toonies-corpies-goonies 0707 m8m8m8
|
Zihao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 22:51:19 -
[44] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:"A BLOO BLOO MY RENTAL INCOME!" |
Buhhdust Princess
mind games. Suddenly Spaceships.
9136
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 23:03:37 -
[45] - Quote
Slight alteration:
Make entosis link reduce speed to under 100m/s for ALL ships.
Make ships available to be repaired by logistics ships, or other means.
You will pull more people in to grid, and provoke more fighting!
As attackers of xxdeath's space, I will say that we have done a lot to just harass them, and its worked nicely, but it has been too easy. -Signed |
Johan Civire
Flux Technologies Inc Gentlemen's.Parlor
958
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 23:12:55 -
[46] - Quote
Redwyne Vyruk wrote:I, as BOT manager and XWX manager, completely agree on this thread and i hope CCP will hear our voice.
You think CCP will listen? Think again. The have already change to game to iphone mode. That interface. Please do not let me started with the rest... |
Dradis Aulmais
RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic
980
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 23:13:43 -
[47] - Quote
1 5 and 7 maybe some tweaks but over all I support fozzie sov
Not signed
Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896
Free The Scope Three
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
123
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 23:16:49 -
[48] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
I'd like to propose some questions to the above alliances: What type of systems have you been defending? How many pilots are typically active in them, what do they do in those systems, and how far do they have to travel in order to mount a defense? Why do you want to retain those systems? What type of systems have you been attacking? What made you want to have Sov in those systems? Your goal should be preventing anything from being reinforced in the first place. If you cannot do that, you do not effectively hold Sov of that system and you deserve to lose it, or get burned out trying to win the capture events. You should stop fighting over those systems you can't hold on to. Getting burned out is your punishment for trying to operate in the Dominion Sov paradigm. Interceptors are perfectly suited for effecting Aegis Sov - because the only Sov they can challenge for is unoccupied Sov, and unoccupied Sov isn't sovereignty at all. If you want to hold on to a system but can't be bothered to have pilots in it during its vulnerability window, you don't deserve to hold Sov there. In NPC null, chasing off a lone Interceptor is incredibly easy. We simply undock. They never stay within 25km, the range of a T1 Entosis. If a hostile Interceptor is Entosing your Outpost, undock. Blap them if they stick around, enjoy the view of the stars for a little bit if fly off and ruin their Entosis cycle. If they're after a TCU or I-hub, simply warp a Navy Vex or Caracal or whatever to it. If this happens in an empty system four jumps away from anybody, you shouldn't have Sov there and it's your own fault you're burning yourself out. You need to adapt. That burnout is Aegis Sov working as intended. And if that Interceptor is bait for a 100-pilot T3 gang on the other side of a wormhole - there's your large fleet fight you're looking for. I do agree that there should be a sort of passive regen of defense index, so that simply going after hostile ships without bothering with your own Entosis ships is a valid defense tactic. That way defenders can put all their pilots into mobile offensive ships if they so desire. This passive regen should not happen if there is even a single node being Entosed by an attacker, so that it does not extend the time of an active attack effort.
Yep... We are still cleaning up after domi sovGǪ thousands of unused systems all over eve that had sov the day fozisov kicked in that needs purging of sov as thereGÇÖs no other way of doing it now. People are trying to defend these unused systems for some random resign.. There are no real wars going on. No one is actively trying to take over some one elseGÇÖs space so they can live there. All thatGÇÖs going on at the moment is a clean-up of dead systems and trolling to try and make people fight.
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
123
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 23:20:14 -
[49] - Quote
Fafer wrote: and its been on Duality, where some of the people mentioned won the sov competition
We won by dropping titans on everyone making 70% of the people doing it quit in the 1st week and then NAPing the other 30%
Not one single alliance in this game has any really proof of anything other than wield speculation on what might happen, as not one single active alliance has done anything of note with the new system to come up with any sort of evidence showing anythingGǪ when a few alliances have had a few wars and real fights over systems then maybe we can start coming up with what the problems areGǪ the only problems any one knows about so far is everyone hates 4k/s+ entotsis Interceptors and itGÇÖs a point in the ass to do the nodes in systems you donGÇÖt even live in. thatGÇÖs it thatGÇÖs all any one really knows as thatGÇÖs as far as any one has really got with the systemGǪ no one has tried to actively take anything people use from any one yet.
UAxDEATH wrote:Solution: reduction of beacons (nodes) , to about 1-3 per system, which are located next to a contested structure.
The whole point of the changes was to stop someone dropping 1000 people into one system or in to very few grids and try to fight. The point was to make every one split up hence nodes all over and you needing 10 of them to win so you cannot just sit 500 people on one grid and 500 on another and win. Just having 1-3 nodes that you have to get is just going back to slowcat fleet on node 1 all supers sat on node 2 and all your blues sat on node 3 and never having to move or do anything Yes having 10 nodes you have to defend is hard if you live 10jumps away but itGÇÖs not hard if you live in the constellation and were able to stop them RFing your stuff in your own prime time before it even gets to the nodes. Most of the time even if they do entosis your stuff there is no real rush to do the nodes if the attackers donGÇÖt come back.. you can just continue using the systems and slowly do a few nodes per hour on alts.
Also CCP donGÇÖt like the big fights as it kills there servers |
tekmin
hahaha JC
4
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 23:51:56 -
[50] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Introduction Problem: structure that exits reinforce timer, doesnGÇÖt regenerate back, which in the old game mechanics served as a defensive mechanism against sov trolling. Attacked systems spam node beacons, which can last forever, which is discrimination against sovereignty owners - they must defend their space despite the fact that no one will show up to contest it.Solution: a new type of status - defended. If the nodes are not being captured by any attackers during contested campaign for a period of time dependent of defence index, then structures change from contested to defended.
see bold.
no1 shows up to defend but you want to keep it?
if no1 shows up to defend it means you dont want it bad enough... |
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
125
|
Posted - 2015.07.31 23:56:54 -
[51] - Quote
tekmin wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Introduction Problem: structure that exits reinforce timer, doesnGÇÖt regenerate back, which in the old game mechanics served as a defensive mechanism against sov trolling. Attacked systems spam node beacons, which can last forever, which is discrimination against sovereignty owners - they must defend their space despite the fact that no one will show up to contest it.Solution: a new type of status - defended. If the nodes are not being captured by any attackers during contested campaign for a period of time dependent of defence index, then structures change from contested to defended. see bold. no1 shows up to defend but you want to keep it? if no1 shows up to defend it means you dont want it bad enough...
And if a whole alliance cannot muster up 5 alts in there semi prime time to afk 2 nodes each at 12mins per node (i.e 24mins per afk alt) they don't deserve sov. |
Kalen Pavle
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:06:27 -
[52] - Quote
The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game? |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
126
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:20:40 -
[53] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote:The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game?
that will not happen if you stop attacking empty space.
even a 6x system is now quicker to take than in domi sov... its just your trying to use domi sov tactics and ships to do it. |
xxLATVIANxx
Russian Thunder Squad The Afterlife.
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:26:05 -
[54] - Quote
I was looking forward to fozzie sov, but last 2 weeks been most boring in 7 years playing eve. |
Kalen Pavle
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
55
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:27:05 -
[55] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Kalen Pavle wrote:The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game? that will not happen if you stop attacking empty space. even a 6x system is now quicker to take than in domi sov... its just your trying to use domi sov tactics and ships to do it.
Except we're not. Orbiting nodes on alts is not fun. Orbiting them on mains is less fun. It's only quicker when you consider the additional timer. Actual time commitments are immensely longer than in dominion sov. |
Remiel Pollard
Black Hydra Consortium. CODE.
6716
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:28:06 -
[56] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote:The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game?
Isn't that what it already was?
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Kalen Pavle
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
55
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:44:52 -
[57] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Kalen Pavle wrote:The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game? Isn't that what it already was?
Previously through judicious use of capital ships you could reduce the boredom to mere minutes. Now the boredom is a predetermined amount of orbiting nodes playing world of warships. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
126
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:47:43 -
[58] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote: Except we're not. Orbiting nodes on alts is not fun. Orbiting them on mains is less fun. It's only quicker when you consider the additional timer. Actual time commitments are immensely longer than in dominion sov.
I would ask how many systems are you taking to live in? tri has 1400 people in 22 corps. so how much space do you need? if you are taking more than you need i would have to ask why? the whole sov system is designed to make it a bit easier to carve out your own home.. but much much harder to take and hold more than you need so why are you trying to take more than you could possibly need even if you were 2x the size? |
Kalen Pavle
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
55
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:52:19 -
[59] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Kalen Pavle wrote: Except we're not. Orbiting nodes on alts is not fun. Orbiting them on mains is less fun. It's only quicker when you consider the additional timer. Actual time commitments are immensely longer than in dominion sov.
I would ask how many systems are you taking to live in? tri has 1400 people in 22 corps. so how much space do you need? if you are taking more than you need i would have to ask why? the whole sov system is designed to make it a bit easier to carve out your own home.. but much much harder to take and hold more than you need so why are you trying to take more than you could possibly need even if you were 2x the size?
It's not about the sovereignty, or holding the sov, it's about getting people to fight. As it is now, the most effective way to get your opponent to go away is not to fight them, it's to force them to afk on nodes with alts while the rest of the fleet says '**** this, i'm going back to [insert staging system here].'
Defense now is about stationary objects in space, which don't shoot back, which use boredom as their primary tool of dissuading the enemy from engaging. |
Nituspar
Shiva Nulli Secunda
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:53:00 -
[60] - Quote
As an FC that's currently abusing all of these mechanics to hit back at an opponent, I fully agree with the need for all these changes and points that Uaxdeath brings up.
Being able to set entire regions on fire and making defenders have to deal with thousands of nodes due to 20-50 trollceptors sent from several regions away, without any intention or commitment to taking the sov we're attacking, is horrible gameplay for everyone involved. It just happens to be 5-10 times more horrible for the defender than it is for the attacker.
The system is currently extremely broken, and the current consensus between a lot of groups seems to be that the best way to deal with Fozziesov in its current state is to not care about it at all. |
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
126
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 00:56:48 -
[61] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote:Tappits wrote:Kalen Pavle wrote: Except we're not. Orbiting nodes on alts is not fun. Orbiting them on mains is less fun. It's only quicker when you consider the additional timer. Actual time commitments are immensely longer than in dominion sov.
I would ask how many systems are you taking to live in? tri has 1400 people in 22 corps. so how much space do you need? if you are taking more than you need i would have to ask why? the whole sov system is designed to make it a bit easier to carve out your own home.. but much much harder to take and hold more than you need so why are you trying to take more than you could possibly need even if you were 2x the size? It's not about the sovereignty, or holding the sov, it's about getting people to fight. As it is now, the most effective way to get your opponent to go away is not to fight them, it's to force them to afk on nodes with alts while the rest of the fleet says '**** this, i'm going back to [insert staging system here].' Defense now is about stationary objects in space, which don't shoot back, which use boredom as their primary tool of dissuading the enemy from engaging.
So your way of getting people to fight is to create so many timers (that you hate making) that there are for sure not going to bother fighting? |
Randy McSoggybotto
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:00:40 -
[62] - Quote
the only people complaining are the people that dont live in their space/arent competent enough to defend their space |
Brian Harrelstein
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:06:23 -
[63] - Quote
If you beat that dead horse any harder, it's going to turn into a pulp.
|
Kalen Pavle
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
55
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:09:52 -
[64] - Quote
Brian Harrelstein wrote:If you beat that dead horse any harder, it's going to turn into a pulp.
It should have been pulped before it ever made it live.
We were forced to retaliate by trolling Insmother after they trolled the Spire. |
Sorgio
Zion foundation Legion of xXDEATHXx
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:15:42 -
[65] - Quote
+1 for original post |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
126
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:17:05 -
[66] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote:[forced
Realty....
Did they come over to your house put a gun to your head and say entosis 600 things all night?
or did you at the time (before the 1st entosis cycle) think it would be super funny to troll entosis all there space in one go? |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5145
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:19:12 -
[67] - Quote
There are no nodes to deal with when you defend.
If you are dealing with nodes, then you are doing it wrong. Nodes only appear if you allow reinforcement.
It takes 3 people per system (tcu, ihub, station) to defend against troll-ceptors during the vulnerability window. |
Zappity
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
2410
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:27:44 -
[68] - Quote
It seems to be promoting skirmishes but not battles. I would be concerned about the missing half of the equation if I was CCP.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2319
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:37:58 -
[69] - Quote
Zappity wrote:It seems to be promoting skirmishes but not battles. I would be concerned about the missing half of the equation if I was CCP. Battles will happen when people stop trolling and make a serious push at actually capturing a new area of space. Of course battles don't happen if all you are doing is trolling around the edges of someone's sov. |
Pol macWolf
Zima Corp Infinity Space.
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 01:39:40 -
[70] - Quote
+1 |
|
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
22596
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 02:13:00 -
[71] - Quote
Cant help but smile when I read the list of alliance in the OP.
Please enjoy this nice BBC article on what they have dubbed 'the majestic artic unicorn'.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2149
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 02:15:05 -
[72] - Quote
Signed on a personal level as a compromise.
Problem
Fozzie SOV is contrived. You wave a wand that has a fixed cycle time. You can not augment your ship to improve damage and grind the structure down. You can not augment your ship to repair the structure faster. Shoot the Hairy Potthead fan who loves waving wands around.
Solution
- Cut carrier and dreadnaught DPS by 10% - Heavily nerf Titan and Super Carrier DPS. - Roll back to Dominion SOV and cut the hit points off that you no longer need.
Additionally, find a way to hard limit how many Supers and Titans an alliance can have active.
Causes for the stagnation
- No space for small independant corporations and alliances to grow big enough with the super / titan fleets to contest for space. - The ships were the problem. Not the structures.
Now you have ruined SOV for sub capitals. Our SOV has gone from building castles out of stone to building it out of plastic. It feels cheap, nasty and childish, catering to giggly little griefers that have too much energy and no patience.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other spaces, where they can grow
Fozzie SOV is treating a symptom.
|
Slutty McCarrierPilot
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 02:21:14 -
[73] - Quote
tl;dr -
Owners of the largest renter empires in EVE are in a tizzy because they hold massive swathes of space that NOBODY uses. In Dominion nobody could contest the empire at all, now they're complaining that they might actually have to do something to hold onto their space.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2149
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 02:35:07 -
[74] - Quote
Slutty McCarrierPilot wrote:tl;dr - Owners of the largest renter empires in EVE are in a tizzy because ... Check Reddit. It is not only xxDeath, it is many other people from all over Null Sec.
Interesting. Phoebe saw much change and fragmentation. Fozzie SOV is seeing fewer and larger coalitions.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other spaces, where they can grow
Fozzie SOV is treating a symptom.
|
davet517
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
131
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 02:58:44 -
[75] - Quote
Things will be fine when people get used to the new sov equation. The essential problem is that people have delusions of old grandeur, when an entity that could field a decent sized fleet could hold a region or more. Forget that. In this new regime, the maths are going to look more like this:
Call a CTA in your prime time. How many do you get consistently? 50? 100? 200, 500?
Divide that number by 20. That's probably about how many systems you can hold. Try to take more than that, and you're going to have a bad time. Get yourself established in a realistic amount of space. Bring in some indy types if you don't want to mine and stuffs. Once you are well established, you can pew-pew with your neighbors. You'll have a good time. If you get big enough (use the number you can get in a CTA, so you don't BS yourself) take some more space.
You're going to have to adjust your expectations to the new reality. The new reality isn't going to adjust to your expectations that used to be realistic, but aren't anymore.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2149
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:01:46 -
[76] - Quote
davet517 wrote:Things will be fine when people get used to the new sov equation. The essential problem is that people have delusions of old grandeur, when an entity that could ... ... have fleet battles, will now have silly little gang / solo spats that could be better done in Low Sec if that is your style of playing the game.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
.
High Sec needs a stepping stone to other spaces, where they can grow
Fozzie SOV is treating a symptom.
|
HeXxploiT
Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn
166
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:03:09 -
[77] - Quote
Little early for this since most people don't even understand fozziesov yet. |
Ransu Asanari
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
308
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:06:22 -
[78] - Quote
I agree with a few of the pain points made, but strongly disagree on others.
Quote:Problem: fozziesov in its current state critically reduces chances for large scale fights, fights that significantly separate EVE Online from its competitors.
Spreading fights out between systems was part of the original design of the Aegis sov system, to avoid creating a chokepoint where all battle activity must happen on one node, and to better use the resources of the server cluster housing New Eden. When we look at large scale battles like B-R5RB, 6VDT-H, and HED-GP they are remembered for their scale, but those who actually participated remember the sub 10% TiDi, lag, and 20-22 hour slogfests. Large blocs are quick to cry out that these battles are what gives EVE the best publicity, but we know that many of the pilots drawn in from these do not experience these type of epic battles, and leave due to incorrect expectations.
Quote:Problem: low skill requirement practically affirms harassment towards any sov owner. While new player harassment is subject to a support ticket. Roaming fleets or interceptors shouldnGÇÖt be able to affect sovereignty.
Solution: reduce the amount of tactics that create invulnerable situations, which are currently based on shipGÇÖs speed. Entosis module should reduce speed dramatically, up to 0 m/s.
I strongly disagree with this, and I'm slightly amused by the large nullsec blocs comparing "sov trolling" to player harassment requiring GM tickets. HTFU.
Entosis is designed to influence the type of ships brought to contest nodes as little as possible. There may be some extreme cases that need to be dealt with, but there are viable counters you can bring to most of these situations. A 12km/s Vagabond orbiting the beacon at 250km? Park a T1 frigate with a T1 Entosis module on the beacon and pause their progress. Or hunt down their links ship and kill it instead. Right now a 1M ISK Griffin can jam out that ship and force them to go through the warmup cycle again; or a Maulus can damp down the Vagabond to lose its lock at that range, and force it to come in closer.
If ADM indexes are raised for the systems owned, it will take 40 minutes to reinforce a structure - giving lots of time to form up and chase off the invader. The increased ADM will also result in a lower vulnerability window, so there is less time the defense fleets will have to be vigilant. And that's the point of occupancy sov - if you are living in the space and raising the indexes, you'll be able to defend it before the structures go into reinforced.
As for roaming gangs, I'm finding Entosis a great way of encouraging fights. It is creating content and a more vibrant Nullsec. Rather than roaming through regions of empty space, where ratters and miners POS or dock up as you come through, we can provoke a reaction and get a good fight. If the residents would rather not form up, then they'll have a lot of timers to deal with in the next few days, and risk having someone come and 3rd party it. Some good examples of this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3ej5oy/therabois_demonstrate_the_proper_use_of_fozziesov/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3f8wta/voc_genocides_phoenix_company_sov_defense_fleet/
Quote:Problem: fozziesov has a potential exploit in relation to Entosis Link II - using this module allows attackers to do a quick 2 minute cycle, which sets structure vulnerable, regardless of vulnerability period or until the status of vulnerable structure becomes known to its owner.
I agree with this issue - sov kiting shouldn't be a thing. Even if a structure is partially captured, at the end of the vulnerability window, it should go invulnerable and save any capture progress for the next day. Being able to partially capture a structure, and then come back out of timezone to complete it is not balanced or intended design, in my opinion. Especially where the amount captured is almost unnoticable - this seems more like a UI problem.
We could discuss a similar exception to the POS reinforcement - where when the remaining time on the structure capture is < 10-25% the structure does not go invulnerable, allowing the attacker to continue reinforcement. This would prevent race conditions like what we've seen in the past with with SBU destruction but still leave enough time for the sov owners to form up to defend the structure. |
Ransu Asanari
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
308
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:07:14 -
[79] - Quote
Quote:Problem: structure that exits reinforce timer, doesnGÇÖt regenerate back, which in the old game mechanics served as a defensive mechanism against sov trolling....
Solution: a new type of status - defended. If the nodes are not being captured by any attackers during contested campaign for a period of time dependent of defence index, then structures change from contested to defended.
I would also agree with this. Sov ownership shouldn't feel like work, and cleaning up uncontested nodes should be able to be done with a minimum amount of effort.
One suggestion I would have is if no parties show up to attempt to capture any of the command nodes, the original owners can run through ONE Entosis Link cycle on the original structure to defend it. If any parties attempt to capture any of the Command Nodes, this progress pauses. Otherwise, once completed the structure goes into a "Defended" state, is invulnerable until the next day's vulnerability window, and all Command Nodes disappear without having to be individually captured.
Quote:Problem: notifications about attack contain no useful information except the fact of aggression (and system). Solution to this should be inclusion of information about the system, structures and nicknames of attackers.
No complaints about this. Optimizing the information received through the notification system, or via CREST would both be very helpful. Similar to how Dominion and POS structure attack notifications would show you the corporation or alliance attacking, that is valuable intel which will help determine your response without having to send a scout to confirm for every notification.
Quote:Problem: in Dominion sov, alliances had means to transfer sov between them, however long and inconvenient it was. In the new sov, this ability was removed, which is ridiculous for a sci-fi game.
Solution: allow executor corporations to transfer remotely structures via listed sov structures context menu, similar in the way it is now with the customs offices.
I completely agree with this, in fact I posted about this in the "Sov Little Things" thread. I think we need a lot more micromanagement with the sov structures themselves: Being able to drop sov and unanchor to reclaim TCU/IHUB rather than exploding them.
Also we need a way to micromanage IHUB upgrades, as we are only allowed one per system now, and currently you cannot remove or online/offline specific IHUB upgrades.
I would like to see the ability to turn off/on individual IHUB upgrades as long as it is not being reinforced. Having the ability to unplug and move unneeded upgrades would also be helpful - so we can recoup some cost if those upgrades aren't needed, or we want to strategically reposition them. |
Emma Kado
Fractured Glory The CORVOS
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:14:28 -
[80] - Quote
"It Is Not the Strongest of the Species that Survives But the Most Adaptable to change" - Charles Darwin.
Any change to any system within EVE will come with those who win from the changes and those who will lose from the changes. I would like to point out that all the signatories to this post are the powers of old, those who adapted to the dominion sov system and built their empires using the tactics and strategies that worked for that system and those times. They are obviously the ones losing out on the new system, but does that make fozziesov a bad system?
I would ike to offer a counter perspective as a new alliance taking sov in nullsec for the first time.
We (The CORVOS) were determined that we would not become a part of a coalition when we made the move to sov null. Many of our leadership had been involved in sov before but we wanted to own our space in our own right. Ours to hold or lose on our own merits. We made some allies, but no supercoalitions with blues for 30 jumps. So far we have been able to hold off much larger groups with better ship comps and numerical advantage by adapting to fozziesov. Small teams (2-3 pilots) have been able to effectivley stop the enemy gaining any control whatsoever. sure we havent won every fight but we have been able to maintain our sov without simply being forced to face the enemy head on. We can fight hit and run gurella style, deny the enemy pilots their F1 pressing sessions while giving our own pilots invaluable small gang experince as we destory entosis ships and their escorts. Fozziesov has allowed us, as well as many other smaller independant groups to compete in the sov game.
Of course it is no wonder the empires of olde are unhappy, they lose out on this. Their weaknesses of old are now gaping holes in their battle plans. Their pilots and FCs will need to change if their alliances are to be able to survive.
No longer are fights decided on one single massive engagement. Individual pilot skill matters. A small team of commited and experienced pilots can hold off or at least delay a larger force. Big F1 pressing fests are not what every player wants. I want to be able to, mid fight, take command of a small detachment of a larger fleet and hit enemy positions and eliminate enemy entosis ships and their escorts.
If you cannot adapt to the new system you will die. And those who can adapt and survive will take your place at the top of the food chain. You will not be able to have massive afk empires that noone can ever threaten.
Welcome to fozziesov boys.
And to CCP: Keep up the good work. |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2149
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:16:24 -
[81] - Quote
Ransu Asanari wrote:.... Large blocs are quick to cry out that these battles are what gives EVE the best publicity, but we know that many of the pilots drawn in from these do not experience these type of epic battles, and leave due to incorrect expectations. .... There is a huge gap between High Sec and Null Sec, while Low Sec is not bridging that.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Slutty McCarrierPilot
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:17:17 -
[82] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:[quote=Slutty McCarrierPilot]tl;dr - Owners of the largest renter empires in EVE are in a tizzy because ... Check Reddit. It is not only xxDeath, it is many other people from all over Null Sec.
Alliances signed petition
Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance - who the **** are these guys Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra - Renting Empire Malpais and region Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel - Irrelevant Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate. - Renting Empire Eth-Reach and Spire I Sam, leader Solar Fleet - Renting Empire Outer Passage Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet - No idea who the **** these guys are NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union - Renting Empire Eso/Feyth/Impass titanokiller, leader Infinity Space. - Irrelevant tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate - Do these guys even have space? UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx - Pretty sure he bought a couple of bugattis with the sweet renter isk RMT Unionn, leader The Afterlife. - lol pseudo russians Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx - Do I really need to spell this out? meandeane651, head diplomat and alliance command for Gentlemen'sClub Gentlemen's.Club - Renting Empire Immensea Rots Mijnwerker, leader The Blood Covenant - irrelevant
#dunkedm8 |
Jenshae Chiroptera
2149
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:26:30 -
[83] - Quote
Slutty McCarrierPilot wrote:... #dunkedm8 One social circle.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
274
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 03:38:18 -
[84] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Introduction Problem: fozziesov has a potential exploit in relation to Entosis Link II - using this module allows attackers to do a quick 2 minute cycle, which sets structure vulnerable, regardless of vulnerability period or until the status of vulnerable structure becomes known to its owner. Vulnerable structure can be noticed after a close inspection. This aspect of game mechanics negates vulnerability period. Solution: remove vulnerability from such structures at the the end of the vulnerability period, but allow owners to entosis structure back up. If structure was partially attacked, it should be clearly visible.
This was a touted feature and is EASILY seen by any alliance member in the alliance sov tab as indicated by the phrase "Overtime" which means a structure has been partially entosis'd and the vulnerability is in "Overtime"
UAxDEATH wrote:Introduction Problem: in Dominion sov, alliances had means to transfer sov between them, however long and inconvenient it was. In the new sov, this ability was removed, which is ridiculous for a sci-fi game. Solution: allow executor corporations to transfer remotely structures via listed sov structures context menu, similar in the way it is now with the customs offices. Conclusion Fozziesov is currently a long, exhausting and inconvenient sovereignty warfare model. Sovereignty is absolutely unprotected against sov trolling. This game mechanics stimulates unintended usage. This situation can no longer exist in its current state. We are highly determined and if all our demands and solutions are not addressed in a week's time, we reserve the right to fight back for our game time and fun, which we were stripped off by the new game mechanics.
This was also acknowledged by Fozzie on the 5th reply on the original Sov thread and he said they are working on a method to elegantly transfer sov, there is no need to keep pinging on a core feature, that IMO, they know they left out and know is needed |
Xavier Azabu
Fluid Motion Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
19
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 05:06:04 -
[85] - Quote
Quality OP. Nice to get Eastern European voices in on this. |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
793
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 05:19:27 -
[86] - Quote
Sorry I'm late, there was a huge line at the the popcorn stand.
http://i0.wp.com/www.brobible.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/XO685d2.gif?resize=350%2C191
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
262
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 05:36:13 -
[87] - Quote
Emma Kado wrote:"It Is Not the Strongest of the Species that Survives But the Most Adaptable to change" - Charles Darwin.
Any change to any system within EVE will come with those who win from the changes and those who will lose from the changes. I would like to point out that all the signatories to this post are the powers of old, those who adapted to the dominion sov system and built their empires using the tactics and strategies that worked for that system and those times. They are obviously the ones losing out on the new system, but does that make fozziesov a bad system?
I would ike to offer a counter perspective as a new alliance taking sov in nullsec for the first time.
We (The CORVOS) were determined that we would not become a part of a coalition when we made the move to sov null. Many of our leadership had been involved in sov before but we wanted to own our space in our own right. Ours to hold or lose on our own merits. We made some allies, but no supercoalitions with blues for 30 jumps. So far we have been able to hold off much larger groups with better ship comps and numerical advantage by adapting to fozziesov. Small teams (2-3 pilots) have been able to effectivley stop the enemy gaining any control whatsoever. sure we havent won every fight but we have been able to maintain our sov without simply being forced to face the enemy head on. We can fight hit and run gurella style, deny the enemy pilots their F1 pressing sessions while giving our own pilots invaluable small gang experince as we destory entosis ships and their escorts. Fozziesov has allowed us, as well as many other smaller independant groups to compete in the sov game.
Of course it is no wonder the empires of olde are unhappy, they lose out on this. Their weaknesses of old are now gaping holes in their battle plans. Their pilots and FCs will need to change if their alliances are to be able to survive.
No longer are fights decided on one single massive engagement. Individual pilot skill matters. A small team of commited and experienced pilots can hold off or at least delay a larger force. Big F1 pressing fests are not what every player wants. I want to be able to, mid fight, take command of a small detachment of a larger fleet and hit enemy positions and eliminate enemy entosis ships and their escorts.
If you cannot adapt to the new system you will die. And those who can adapt and survive will take your place at the top of the food chain. You will not be able to have massive afk empires that noone can ever threaten.
Welcome to fozziesov boys.
This isnt to say its perfect. UAXDeath does make some good points, such as not having to clean up uncontested nodes. But with CCPs new release cycle they will be able to monitor and change the system as it needs. But the system as a whole is great, if the powers of old are complaining its an indication that fozziesov is working.
And to CCP: Keep up the good work.
That's doing it right.
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Triumvirate.
515
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 05:39:17 -
[88] - Quote
Tappits wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
What wars have any of these people done with the new sov system that lets them make informed ideas on how to fix a sov system thatGÇÖs just over two weeks old that will affect every single person in null sec? What has any one done in the new sov system other than get some unused systems attacked? None of these people speak for me.
None whatsoever. Furthermore, Garst Tyrell has signed this RMT rental whine without any kind of mandate from the alliance, and he is acting here as a single player, and as such his personal opinions in no way represent the official stance of Triumvirate alliance.
|
Shonion
FREE GATES Nulli Secunda
64
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 06:30:10 -
[89] - Quote
It is working as intend.
There are no sov wars ongoing in EVE or just some small scale local fights for not much important systems or taking space undefended. Almost 3 weeks spent in the new system, and its visilbe, that if you not live in your space, your defense multiplier will be close to 1 and you can easily lost the system. You shouldn't own regions without manpower and ppl living out there. Thats the point.
As someone already mentioned earlier, the new system prefer the preventing defense, so if you live there, your defens multiplier is high then troll ceptors will need 60 mins for reinforce anything in a 3 hour window and your primary interest to defend yous space preventively, so kill that damn ceptor.
Well if you not live there, you deserve to lose that space... the old style renter empires are over. Goons already adapting instead of typing wall of text on forum. |
Shonion
FREE GATES Nulli Secunda
64
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 06:33:32 -
[90] - Quote
Nituspar wrote:As an FC that's currently abusing all of these mechanics to our advantage, I fully agree with the need for all these changes and points that Uaxdeath brings up.
Being able to set entire regions on fire and making defenders have to deal with thousands of nodes due to 20-50 trollceptors sent from several regions away, without any intention or commitment to taking the sov we're attacking, is horrible gameplay for everyone involved. It just happens to be 5-10 times more horrible for the defender than it is for the attacker.
The system is currently extremely broken, and the current consensus between a lot of groups seems to be that the best way to deal with Fozziesov in its current state is to not care about it at all.
You wouldn't be able to do that if they live there. Its works as intend. You can say its not sweet, but still work as planned from my view. Just try to entosis some CFC systems where ppl live around, you will see the difference comparing with the south rus empty space. |
|
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp Chao3 Alliance
278
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 06:35:18 -
[91] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote: Solution: reduction of beacons (nodes) , to about 1-3 per system, which are located next to a contested structure. ... Solution: a new type of status - defended. If the nodes are not being captured by any attackers during contested campaign for a period of time dependent of defence index, then structures change from contested to defended.
Yes to reducing the number of nodes if they are left uncontested. No to regroup them next to a contested structure. ... Yes, even have them automatically revert to the defender if left untouched for a while.
UAxDEATH wrote: Solution: reduce the amount of tactics that create invulnerable situations, which are currently based on shipGÇÖs speed. Entosis module should reduce speed dramatically, up to 0 m/s.
Yes, speed reduction is a must for entosis ships, and make sure entosis forces a value commitment to the action, and not be done with worthless hulls (like the ridiculousness of rookie cyno ships).
UAxDEATH wrote: Solution: introduction of a new sov window, similar to watchlist, that displays information about structures/nodes that are being defended or attacked using entosis module, with pilot's nickname, solar system, structure id and progress.
Absolutely not. Local intel/activity and scouting must be a thing and not being spoon-fed information.
UAxDEATH wrote: Solution: remove vulnerability from such structures at the the end of the vulnerability period, but allow owners to entosis structure back up. If structure was partially attacked, it should be clearly visible.
Makes sense.
UAxDEATH wrote: Solution: allow executor corporations to transfer remotely structures via listed sov structures context menu, similar in the way it is now with the customs offices.
+1
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope...
|
Felicia D'Arch
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 06:41:18 -
[92] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Tappits wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
What wars have any of these people done with the new sov system that lets them make informed ideas on how to fix a sov system thatGÇÖs just over two weeks old that will affect every single person in null sec? What has any one done in the new sov system other than get some unused systems attacked? None of these people speak for me. None whatsoever. Furthermore, Garst Tyrell has signed this RMT rental whine without any kind of mandate from the alliance, and he is acting here as a single player, and as such his personal opinions in no way represent the official stance of Triumvirate alliance.
...Didn't you guys have like 350 nodes to contest just the other day? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16781
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 06:51:16 -
[93] - Quote
Emma Kado wrote:"It Is Not the Strongest of the Species that Survives But the Most Adaptable to change" - Charles Darwin.
Any change to any system within EVE will come with those who win from the changes and those who will lose from the changes. I would like to point out that all the signatories to this post are the powers of old, those who adapted to the dominion sov system and built their empires using the tactics and strategies that worked for that system and those times. They are obviously the ones losing out on the new system, but does that make fozziesov a bad system?
I would ike to offer a counter perspective as a new alliance taking sov in nullsec for the first time.
We (The CORVOS) were determined that we would not become a part of a coalition when we made the move to sov null. Many of our leadership had been involved in sov before but we wanted to own our space in our own right. Ours to hold or lose on our own merits. We made some allies, but no supercoalitions with blues for 30 jumps. So far we have been able to hold off much larger groups with better ship comps and numerical advantage by adapting to fozziesov. Small teams (2-3 pilots) have been able to effectivley stop the enemy gaining any control whatsoever. sure we havent won every fight but we have been able to maintain our sov without simply being forced to face the enemy head on. We can fight hit and run gurella style, deny the enemy pilots their F1 pressing sessions while giving our own pilots invaluable small gang experince as we destory entosis ships and their escorts. Fozziesov has allowed us, as well as many other smaller independant groups to compete in the sov game.
Of course it is no wonder the empires of olde are unhappy, they lose out on this. Their weaknesses of old are now gaping holes in their battle plans. Their pilots and FCs will need to change if their alliances are to be able to survive.
No longer are fights decided on one single massive engagement. Individual pilot skill matters. A small team of commited and experienced pilots can hold off or at least delay a larger force. Big F1 pressing fests are not what every player wants. I want to be able to, mid fight, take command of a small detachment of a larger fleet and hit enemy positions and eliminate enemy entosis ships and their escorts.
If you cannot adapt to the new system you will die. And those who can adapt and survive will take your place at the top of the food chain. You will not be able to have massive afk empires that noone can ever threaten.
Welcome to fozziesov boys.
This isnt to say its perfect. UAXDeath does make some good points, such as not having to clean up uncontested nodes. But with CCPs new release cycle they will be able to monitor and change the system as it needs. But the system as a whole is great, if the powers of old are complaining its an indication that fozziesov is working.
And to CCP: Keep up the good work.
Well said and bravo to your alliance, good sir
Keep on Doing It Right.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5146
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 07:01:34 -
[94] - Quote
Felicia D'Arch wrote:...Didn't you guys have like 350 nodes to contest just the other day? ... or they could have just prevented the reinforcement in the first place and have 0 nodes to deal with.
And if they couldn't be bothered to do that, then why would they bother to deal with the nodes!
/facepalm |
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1609
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 08:38:47 -
[95] - Quote
Literally a rogues gallery of RMT. |
Virus ll
Death Magnetic. Legion of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 09:00:02 -
[96] - Quote
+1 thoughtful and true post!!! |
Nituspar
Shiva Nulli Secunda
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 09:15:07 -
[97] - Quote
Shonion wrote:Nituspar wrote:As an FC that's currently abusing all of these mechanics to our advantage, I fully agree with the need for all these changes and points that Uaxdeath brings up.
Being able to set entire regions on fire and making defenders have to deal with thousands of nodes due to 20-50 trollceptors sent from several regions away, without any intention or commitment to taking the sov we're attacking, is horrible gameplay for everyone involved. It just happens to be 5-10 times more horrible for the defender than it is for the attacker.
The system is currently extremely broken, and the current consensus between a lot of groups seems to be that the best way to deal with Fozziesov in its current state is to not care about it at all. You wouldn't be able to do that if they live there. Its works as intend. You can say its not sweet, but still work as planned from my view. Just try to entosis some CFC systems where ppl live around, you will see the difference comparing with the south rus empty space.
Occupancy bonuses are something I've always been advocating for, just beacuse that's a facet of the current system doesn't mean the system itself isn't utterly flawed and designed for one side of any sov conflict to bore the other one to tears without any kind of meaningful fleet engagements ever happening, which is honestly the biggest problem with Fozziesov's design.
There's also quite a difference between having decent defensive bonuses tied to occupancy and using your space, and any systems you don't mine or rat in for a few weeks to be able to be burned down by a handful of people in trollceptors at almost any given time. |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
590
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 09:31:52 -
[98] - Quote
Can you please rationalise why proper discussion of EVE is done better on a 3rd party site rather than the official General Discussion forum?
You can't.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Carribean Queen
Vadimus Quarrier Works The Big Dirty
69
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 09:41:22 -
[99] - Quote
Oh look, another nullsec group who enjoys telling everyone to HTFU when change happens to highsec and lowsec.
And now a balanced -BALANCED- nullsec change occurs and?
Out come the giant alligator tears and cries of 'this sucks'. This is AIDS. This is ruining game play.
No, it's made it so groups like yours can't own HUNDREDS of nullsec systems that sit empty and unused. CCP wants you to defend your land. Can't? Figure out how. Still can't? Your problem.
HTFU. Only keep what you can defend.
Adapt or leave null. Simple as that. |
Konrad Kane
136
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 09:49:55 -
[100] - Quote
I love the fact rental alliances have signed this. |
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
981
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 10:42:21 -
[101] - Quote
Buhhdust Princess wrote:Slight alteration:
Make entosis link reduce speed to under 100m/s for ALL ships. Can you please justify gimping "legit" combat fits with entosis link even when it is only specific denying fits that is the problem?
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 11:05:48 -
[102] - Quote
Wow claim discrimination against null sec. That joke right?
What needs to change here is way of thinking. They need to stop claiming sov on those systems that they dont use. This will drastically reduce the entosing. Example the big populated systems in CFC have had no attempt to entosis(besides some obvious attempt to get you to fight). You wonder why? Cos they are heavelly populated. If you look at the systems that are been attacked, they are systems that have either no people or very few people in it. So example CFC needs to stop claiming those systems they dont use and therefore cant defend cos of the absurd amount of timers. This will cause much much less entosis timers. Mittani tried to counter this not by releasing systems but instead they tried to fill them up with renters. It has not worked. The new sov system was created to give greater chance for smaller entities to gain space and force the large ones to realease those systems they dont really use.
Stop blaiming fozzy sov or ships or other mechanics for your inability to hold a system which you obviously cant defend cos its stretches you alliance activities(entosis defence) way too much. Pull back and release those system for other entities the same way that the new sov was meant to be utilised. Dont and suffer the consequences!
Prior this, I want to ask how many big fight happened in the last year? Not much cos most of these entitties did not really fight each other. One coult speculate cos they got some kind of agreement and the blue donut was born. The big fight will happen no matter what. I seriosly think it will cause a lot more animosity cos now you will have to relase systems you cant really control. Now who gets those systems and what will they do with them? Very interesting stuff.
Big battle will certainly happen when important systems will be contested. Sov is still new and everyone is learnign from mistakes and succescess of others and themselves. Everyone is watching. |
Baki Yuku
Boob Heads Black Legion.
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 11:53:53 -
[103] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:
Your goal should be preventing anything from being reinforced in the first place. If you cannot do that, you do not effectively hold Sov of that system and you deserve to lose it, or get burned out trying to win the capture events. You should stop fighting over those systems you can't hold on to. Getting burned out is your punishment for trying to operate in the Dominion Sov paradigm.
Dunno what dream you are dreaming but keep dreaming while you dream that dream my alliance is holding an entire region and we have nowhere near enough dudes to be active in every system. Yet outside of "The Imperium", NC. & PL you cannot take it from us. Sure as hell you can RF some systems and even take some but can you actually life there? No you cannot we'd probably even let your ****** alliance number 1209 take a station wait for you to get settled and once you do we'd crush you with a hammer. The new sov system does not change the fact that power is power. Just because you can take sov does not mean it is viable. The mare presence of a superior capital and super capital force is more than enough to keep full control of a region.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2150
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:06:06 -
[104] - Quote
Throwing the gold apple in, "You don't use it for mining and ratting, so you are not using it and deserve to lose it. This makes it easy for small alliances to get some space," seems to be the general counter argument.
1) Said many times, there is more than those two ways to use systems. 2) Easy into space, easy out. These systems are honey traps and make delicious snacks for the huge estabilished alliances to farm and feed upon.
This is not some amazing equality mechanics, it is annoying for defenders who are griefed and it is devastatingly crushing for the naive.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Jeanne Tivianne
100
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:24:12 -
[105] - Quote
*Straps into her seat and slaps a helmet on, popcorn in hand*
Oh ho ho, this thread is going places, and I am ready for the ride. |
Hemmo Paskiainen
493
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:28:56 -
[106] - Quote
Jeeez, learn 2 think, it not too hard to get the solution: From Rental to Extortion... and just get a bigger coalition than your neighbour > problem solved
"Relativity equals time plus momentum: if it can be erased by a single click on a button, would it be worth spending your time?"
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16785
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:31:29 -
[107] - Quote
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:Jeeez, learn 2 think, it not too hard to get the solution: From Rental to Extortion... and just get a bigger coalition than your neighbour > problem solved
That would require being able to make credible threats.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Glasgow Dunlop
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
276
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:37:15 -
[108] - Quote
1) where is popcorn?
2) do you have salted caramel popcorn?
3) I <3 new sov.
@glasgowdunlop #tweetfleet
TDSIN Recruitment Director : Join 'TDSIN pub'
Glasgow / Edinbvrgh Meet Organiser
|
Baki Yuku
Boob Heads Black Legion.
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:46:51 -
[109] - Quote
Glasgow Dunlop wrote: 3) I <3 new sov.
Because you don't care about it thats why you love it. For people who don't care about it and all they care about is griefing potential the new system sure is amazing no denying that. Now if that makes a good system thats a different question entirely. |
Silvia Heart
Black Aces I N F A M O U S
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:50:26 -
[110] - Quote
Shonion wrote:It is working as intend.
There are no sov wars ongoing in EVE or just some small scale local fights for not much important systems or taking space undefended. Almost 3 weeks spent in the new system, and its visilbe, that if you not live in your space, your defense multiplier will be close to 1 and you can easily lost the system. You shouldn't own regions without manpower and ppl living out there. Thats the point.
As someone already mentioned earlier, the new system prefer the preventing defense, so if you live there, your defens multiplier is high then troll ceptors will need 60 mins for reinforce anything in a 3 hour window and your primary interest to defend yous space preventively, so kill that damn ceptor.
Well if you not live there, you deserve to lose that space... the old style renter empires are over. Goons already adapting instead of typing wall of text on forum.
This is funny coming from someone who has no sov and does nothing but fly troll ceptors. We've tried fighting nulli, all we've found is they run away even faster then darkeshi.
I have nothing really against the idea of fozzie sov but its just so broken and lopsided.
My suggestions for fixing it (everyone who has sov has some). -Hard cap the speed of etosis ships, T1 1000m/s T2 1500m/s -If no nodes are being attacked the defender gets 5% back ever hour.
Done fixed, maybe then we'll get some fights out of this joke instead of experiencing world of cowards. |
|
Erick Asmock
Patriotic Tendencies Executive Outcomes
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:56:02 -
[111] - Quote
I love FozzieSOV!
It's so good we should allow it to affect all stations and structures in all of New Eden. At the very minimum LS and NPC NS....
I mean it's great right? Everyone should be given the opportunity to love FozzieSOV in game by promulgating it everywhere.
In all seriousness...it's boring. FozzieSOV is boring to defend and it is boring to attack.
Fozzie (and his team) have replaced one type of grind with a more horrible type of grind.
CCP has allowed the rise of a juvenile level of play with FozzieSOV that in the end will cause major power blocks to become bigger and stronger.
CCP continues to ignore and understand the human condition and how it affects the sandbox. Making Game Mechanics that run counter to that tide only destroy a game.
The best quote I have heard from a member of an entosis fleet, "This is worse than mining"
That said...I think everyone should be given the opportunity to "Adapt" to a horrible and boring mechanic.
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Bagel and Lox
701
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 12:58:47 -
[112] - Quote
IMO fozziesov is awful and basically undercuts alot of what was unique to eve. It shouldnt have been implemented and it should be rolled back.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
TiMeZeRo225
Bulls and Cows Red Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 13:18:34 -
[113] - Quote
To those who say that "you should not claim more than you can actually occupy" - i can hardly see any changes regarding the number of sov holding alliances after the fozziesov. In other words - the sov change was intended to make people actually go and capture 0.0 space, but someone had forgotten that it's actually held by big nullsec alliances that will protect it. And it actually does't matter if someone will claim some god forgotten system anywhere in space - those guys won't be able to live there cause the same big sov holding alliance will sit in it 24\7 and\or just pop any incoming ships. I think the correct term is "power projection". That's why we have what we have, and such changes as fozziesov will never change it.
CCP has to understand 1 simple thing - people come to 0.0 for blob warfare, so the only thing they have to change is to create something worthy to fight for. Currenly, sov itself brings no such benefits (r64 moons, for example, are not sov-dependent at all).
So i would like to support the OP and ask CCP to respect the hours that nullsec players had spent capturing all that they have and stop that crap with entosis-inties. (been there, done that. 20 minutes to RF a station in a lone intie ! really ?) At least make the same as siege mechanics (speed 0, PG \ CPU depentent, BC \ BS size, etc etc).
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
12020
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 13:27:59 -
[114] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Zappity wrote:It seems to be promoting skirmishes but not battles. I would be concerned about the missing half of the equation if I was CCP. Battles will happen when people stop trolling and make a serious push at actually capturing a new area of space. Of course battles don't happen if all you are doing is trolling around the edges of someone's sov.
So it takes "some getting serious". If so that demonstrates the flawed base of this system. I know everyone hated DominonSov, I didn't like it either, but in that system and the "POS SPAM" system before if, you HAD to come in "serious" in the 1st place if you wanted to do anything with sov.
The 'focus' of this sov system is off, and one of the side effects is that it does produce boring cat and mouse skirmishes rather than encouraging people to actually fight.. This gives big groups the ability to wear smaller groups down even easier than in dominion Sov, already I'm finding it harder and harder to join up with a fleet because I kow it's going to be a hour or two of chasing/killing ceptors and fighting Slippery pete Tengus or hit and run "but not serious about sov" Tornado or T3D gangs.
It's just not fun at all. I'm amazed at how Fozzie group could take something fairly grindy and boring (dominion sov and it's structure grinding) and make it MORE boring (mininglaserSov).
Fozzie said in an interview that it was between this system and a kind of "sovless Sov". From where I'm sitting, they chose wrong, sovless sov might have been way better than this current experience, CCP "iterating" on this system will simply be the act of polishing a turd. |
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
983
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 13:51:50 -
[115] - Quote
Baki Yuku wrote:Dunno what dream you are dreaming but keep dreaming while you dream that dream my alliance is holding an entire region and we have nowhere near enough dudes to be active in every system. Yet outside of "The Imperium", NC. & PL you cannot take it from us. Sure as hell you can RF some systems and even take some but can you actually life there? No you cannot we'd probably even let your ****** alliance number 1209 take a station wait for you to get settled and once you do we'd crush you with a hammer. The new sov system does not change the fact that power is power. Just because you can take sov does not mean it is viable. The mare presence of a superior capital and super capital force is more than enough to keep full control of a region. Sure enough, but why? Ofc you can keep doing what you are doing, but burnout will be real.
That's not to say that current system don't have to be tweaked, but gotta face what we have right now.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Escobar Slim III
YOLOSWAGHASHTAGDOLLARBILLZSWIMMINGPOOLICECREAMS
139
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 13:58:21 -
[116] - Quote
I personally believe that some nullsecs are unable to do fozzie sov because some out there in our game don't even have maps and I believe that our education in the new system like such as in Scadling Pass and the Thrium Reach and everywhere like such as, and, I believe that they should practice sov when the lowsec and pvp comes to take it, our education over here in the nullsecs should help the nulls., and should help nullsecs understand the need of small fight and not big and should help the future and the Rus renter allices, so we will be able to build up our future for our children play new eve's fozzie sov and make greater battle but smaller.
this is the future where no more big renter blib. and no crying change it and threats not welcomed at all said. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
2151
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 14:30:48 -
[117] - Quote
Baki Yuku wrote:Glasgow Dunlop wrote: 3) I <3 new sov.
Because you don't care about it thats why you love it. For people who don't care about it and all they care about is griefing potential the new system sure is amazing no denying that. Now if that makes a good system thats a different question entirely. For emphasis. I think this is the motive behind most of the noise supporting Fozzie SOV.
P.S. Glasgow, learn to ASCII. GÖÑ
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Crazy Mineer
Shifting Sands Trader Cartel Bleak Horizon Alliance.
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 14:54:07 -
[118] - Quote
i have nothing to do with sov living in lowsec but you have my axe and my merry band of men |
PromisedOne
Immortals of New Eden DARKNESS.
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 15:16:18 -
[119] - Quote
As a casual pvper I have to say this last month has been the absolute crap experience since the old POS spam days. I would rather have Dominion sov back over this turd. Fozzie has is essence head shotted all of null sec in one patch. Went from finding gangs of roaming T3 cruisers, BCs, and other things in enemy space to only finding interceptors galore and T3 destroyers. All the "good fights" have died out. I think we need to force all the CCP employees to join a new alliance out here in null sec and troll ceptor the **** out of them. |
Hinamori Tsesuda
13th Reserve Squadron
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 15:27:04 -
[120] - Quote
I can understand that people don't like change and that those notifications popping up all the time might be annoying, but hey were you actually using those systems?
Dominion was stagnant, tedious and mostly just a pain. You'd have a target or two, reinforce it or them, wait and then blap it. All very nice if you like reading or have a show you can watch. Not much difference between taking SOV, Stations, POSes or POCOs...
Then comes fozziesov... (Still not finished as far as I can see) Yeah! It needs tweaking, but hey its CCP! Its a race and exausting, but having sov isn't suposed to be "We don't use the system, but cyno in the CAPS!" Hey, if you actually used the system and it is under attack, you would know "who, what and where" Also... Wait for it... It's you SOV, you defend it!
Apologies for ranting slightly, but contiuing on....
Most of the points by OP are mostly mewling that the safety of Dominion SOV is no longer there. They can no longer "sell or buy" systems. Oh, and renters can nab the sov... if they so please, after all its them using not you...
To conclude, I believe that fozziesov is here to stay, though tweaked.
Yours, rambling slightly Anmia Ambraelle |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2153
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 15:58:14 -
[121] - Quote
Hinamori Tsesuda wrote:... but hey were you actually using those systems?... Yes, we are. Now try think of all the ways that we do that aren't mining or ratting. Give you a hint to start you off; there are other infrastructure hub upgrades.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16790
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 16:00:30 -
[122] - Quote
So any way, now that the buggy whip manufacturers have vented their pwecious feewings about allowing those nasty horrible auto-mobiles on the roads...
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
266
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 16:01:07 -
[123] - Quote
Baki Yuku wrote:Eli Stan wrote:
Your goal should be preventing anything from being reinforced in the first place. If you cannot do that, you do not effectively hold Sov of that system and you deserve to lose it, or get burned out trying to win the capture events. You should stop fighting over those systems you can't hold on to. Getting burned out is your punishment for trying to operate in the Dominion Sov paradigm.
Dunno what dream you are dreaming but keep dreaming while you dream that dream my alliance is holding an entire region and we have nowhere near enough dudes to be active in every system. Yet outside of "The Imperium", NC. & PL you cannot take it from us. Sure as hell you can RF some systems and even take some but can you actually life there? No you cannot we'd probably even let your ****** alliance number 1209 take a station wait for you to get settled and once you do we'd crush you with a hammer. The new sov system does not change the fact that power is power. Just because you can take sov does not mean it is viable. The mare presence of a superior capital and super capital force is more than enough to keep full control of a region.
Yes, it's very obvious that a larger entity with supers can evict a smaller one. Aegis Sov wasn't meant to alter that. The question is whether you'll be able to handle, mentally, the challenges to your unoccupied areas (see the earlier post by Emma Kado on CORVOS's tactics.) If you enjoy the process of capturing command nodes and can avoid getting burned out from it, more power to ya! o7
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
795
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 16:51:52 -
[124] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:So any way, now that the buggy whip manufacturers have vented their pwecious feewings about allowing those nasty horrible auto-mobiles on the roads... Not an empty quote.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Karer II
Legion of xXDEATHXx Support Legion of xXDEATHXx
292
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 18:21:23 -
[125] - Quote
So. I saw two of the most frequent opinions: 1) you crying about your rent/RMT empire 2) you doing it wrong, adapt.
Well, let's see in facts.
Fact #1. Only one who can say "they doing RMT". This is CCP. If it says someone else, it's just unsubstantiated allegations. As coCEO I spend for my alliance 200$ per month for characters, hosting, licences and other stuff. I have good job and I don't need RMT.
Fact #2. In last half of year we gave 45% of space for friends, allies and small alliances who wants to try themself as sov-nullsec players. Space for free. For free, Carl! And process continues. Year ago all this space was under rent. When I read that the petition is aimed for preservation rent empire I laugh (like Philip Philipovich in novel "Heart of a Dog"). This is absolutly wrong. Fozziesov just boring and exhausting mechanics - that a point.
About adaptation. We (I mean GemiCo first) had two weeks of new Sov War. I wrote full and detailed report about one of them on Russian forum few days ago. Translation can be found here. We prepared doctrine, plan and changed fleet behaviour. What we got? Hours of rat race. In summary of two weeks we spent 22 hours, got 3 fights hit-a-run rat races. I was coordinator and for myself I got at least 15 of files with information about nodes, patrols and etc (like this). Eve always been a game of routine. But now amount of routine is max that I ever seen in last 7.5 years of my game in Eve. Fortunately I'm a programmer and I can try to help myself. Me and another guy from XIX made prototype in 2 days. Idk, why CCP didn't same thing. Maybe they just lazy. They happy cos their players not lazy.
Conclusion
We are not against Fozziesov at all. New mechanics can be enteresting. Really. Small groups, coordination, all pilots must be much more clever and etc. All it is good. But mechanics have too much bad parts right now. They must be fixed. |
tekmin
hahaha JC
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 18:42:03 -
[126] - Quote
you guys are stuck in the old method, you got comfortable for years with sov now you have to adapt and actually "work" for your sov
hence you are bitchin
adapt or die as anything else in EVE :)
thanks for the hilarity of this post |
Karer II
Legion of xXDEATHXx Support Legion of xXDEATHXx
293
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 18:45:22 -
[127] - Quote
tekmin wrote:you guys are stuck in the old method, you got comfortable for years with sov now you have to adapt and actually "work" for your sov
hence you are bitchin
adapt or die as anything else in EVE :)
thanks for the hilarity of this post
You guy is stuck in young age and can't into text. |
tekmin
hahaha JC
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 18:50:20 -
[128] - Quote
Karer II wrote:tekmin wrote:you guys are stuck in the old method, you got comfortable for years with sov now you have to adapt and actually "work" for your sov
hence you are bitchin
adapt or die as anything else in EVE :)
thanks for the hilarity of this post You guy is stuck in young age and can't into text.
what does that even mean?
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
796
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 18:52:33 -
[129] - Quote
Goonswarm Federation: 103 systems, ~14k members. Very few systems being sovlazored. Fozzie sov is okay.
Legion of xXDEATHXx: 96 systems, ~1.7k members. OMG IT'S ALL ON FIRE FOZZIESOV SUX!!!1!1!!1!one
Shadow of xXDEATHXx: 253 systems, ~2k members. OMG FOZZIESOV SUX!!! CCP CHANGE IT!!!!1!!1!!!!111!one
I'm beginning to see a pattern here.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Shonion
FREE GATES Nulli Secunda
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 18:55:52 -
[130] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Goonswarm Federation: 103 systems, ~14k members. Very few systems being sovlazored. Fozzie sov is okay.
Legion of xXDEATHXx: 96 systems, ~1.7k members. OMG IT'S ALL ON FIRE FOZZIESOV SUX!!!1!1!!1!one
Shadow of xXDEATHXx: 253 systems, ~2k members. OMG FOZZIESOV SUX!!! CCP CHANGE IT!!!!1!!1!!!!111!one
I'm beginning to see a pattern here.
+1 :) |
|
Links of course
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 18:57:55 -
[131] - Quote
only thing i see here is russians crying that everything is on fire and they cant run their RMT empire anymore, because they dont have enough people to properly hold the sov they have, hell as much as i hate cfc they actually make smart decisions, such as downsizing their sov count to properly accomidate their entire memberbase |
Karer II
Legion of xXDEATHXx Support Legion of xXDEATHXx
295
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 19:02:42 -
[132] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Goonswarm Federation: 103 systems, ~14k members. Very few systems being sovlazored. Fozzie sov is okay.
I'm beginning to see a pattern here.
Aha, fozziesov is ok.
|
Silvia Heart
Black Aces I N F A M O U S
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 19:05:32 -
[133] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Goonswarm Federation: 103 systems, ~14k members. Very few systems being sovlazored. Fozzie sov is okay.
Legion of xXDEATHXx: 96 systems, ~1.7k members. OMG IT'S ALL ON FIRE FOZZIESOV SUX!!!1!1!!1!one
Shadow of xXDEATHXx: 253 systems, ~2k members. OMG FOZZIESOV SUX!!! CCP CHANGE IT!!!!1!!1!!!!111!one
I'm beginning to see a pattern here.
So the answer is we should recruit everyone with a pulse and carebear till then end of eve.
Why fight when you can shoot rats and rocks all day? |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
271
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 19:13:46 -
[134] - Quote
Silvia Heart wrote:Falin Whalen wrote:Goonswarm Federation: 103 systems, ~14k members. Very few systems being sovlazored. Fozzie sov is okay.
Legion of xXDEATHXx: 96 systems, ~1.7k members. OMG IT'S ALL ON FIRE FOZZIESOV SUX!!!1!1!!1!one
Shadow of xXDEATHXx: 253 systems, ~2k members. OMG FOZZIESOV SUX!!! CCP CHANGE IT!!!!1!!1!!!!111!one
I'm beginning to see a pattern here. So the answer is we should recruit everyone with a pulse and carebear till then end of eve. Why fight when you can shoot rats and rocks all day?
Or... try holding onto only one system per 100 alliance members? |
Borascus
653
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 19:21:02 -
[135] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:
Or... try holding onto only one system per 100 alliance members?
That would occupy 200-400 systems at prime time and expose fleets to empty roams. Good luck with that. |
Silvia Heart
Black Aces I N F A M O U S
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 19:59:06 -
[136] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Silvia Heart wrote:Falin Whalen wrote:Goonswarm Federation: 103 systems, ~14k members. Very few systems being sovlazored. Fozzie sov is okay.
Legion of xXDEATHXx: 96 systems, ~1.7k members. OMG IT'S ALL ON FIRE FOZZIESOV SUX!!!1!1!!1!one
Shadow of xXDEATHXx: 253 systems, ~2k members. OMG FOZZIESOV SUX!!! CCP CHANGE IT!!!!1!!1!!!!111!one
I'm beginning to see a pattern here. So the answer is we should recruit everyone with a pulse and carebear till then end of eve. Why fight when you can shoot rats and rocks all day? Or... try holding onto only one system per 100 alliance members?
So my alliance should hold one constellation and carebear the **** out of it until we die of bordem?
We aren't going to get more fights that way, it promotes PVE to an extreme extent.
This change is toxic to eve, we get no fights, we get no fun and we spend stupid amounts of time orbiting a structure because one guy can spent 10min of his time to waste almost 2 hours of our time and we have to turn up to every single one because some moron thought it would be great to make it stay that way forever because defenders should turn up and waste massive amounts of time, even if the "attacker" (rolls eyes) has no intention of turning up because why? Because **** anyone trying to hold more then 1 system per 100 players?
Come down here and try holding sov you piece of **** and see how you like watching the guys you play the game with get less and less active and probably quit the game given enough time, all because some moron in CCP had a "good idea".
We didn't like dominion sov, but we ******* hate this coward carebear piece of **** that replaced it. |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
882
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 20:26:06 -
[137] - Quote
I don't care if you halve capital ship DPS and tank, give them a damn role already. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
12022
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 21:46:57 -
[138] - Quote
An amusing thing about this thread is that it's a repeat of the past. When Dominion came and it's sov system hit, we saw the same kind of discussion.
"You just don't like change"
"you don't like how small groups can come in and take your stuff because you can't just spam POSes anymore"
"you'll get used to it"
"the old system was stagnant, this one is much better, now all you have to do is shoot 1 I-Hub instead 20 POSes!!"
It's like Battlestar Galactica, this is happened before, and it will happen again, mainly because some people can't be critical of a thing until they've had 6 years of it to understand why it's bad.....
Good news is the year 2021 is right around the corner. |
Zappity
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
2411
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 22:00:49 -
[139] - Quote
1. Reduce number of nodes to 5.
2. Leave entosis fitting requirements alone but reduce the time required to complete one-sided events (e.g. no defence or no offence). Maybe #1 is adequate for this but if not they should degrade over time.
3. Reduce the effect of the Sovereignty index - it should be less tedious to take space that is held but not used.
4. There should also be some sort of depletion mechanic to encourage resource competition. Moons? Or convert R32 and below to depleting mining sigs.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1713
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 22:17:11 -
[140] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Goonswarm Federation: 103 systems, ~14k members. Very few systems being sovlazored. Fozzie sov is okay.
Legion of xXDEATHXx: 96 systems, ~1.7k members. OMG IT'S ALL ON FIRE FOZZIESOV SUX!!!1!1!!1!one
Shadow of xXDEATHXx: 253 systems, ~2k members. OMG FOZZIESOV SUX!!! CCP CHANGE IT!!!!1!!1!!!!111!one
I'm beginning to see a pattern here.
He shoots, HE SCORES!!!!
Some people are on the pitch...... |
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
801
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 22:28:18 -
[141] - Quote
Silvia Heart wrote:
So my alliance should hold one constellation and carebear the **** out of it until we die of bordem?
We aren't going to get more fights that way, it promotes PVE to an extreme extent.
This change is toxic to eve, we get no fights, we get no fun and we spend stupid amounts of time orbiting a structure because one guy can spent 10min of his time to waste almost 2 hours of our time and we have to turn up to every single one because some moron thought it would be great to make it stay that way forever because defenders should turn up and waste massive amounts of time, even if the "attacker" (rolls eyes) has no intention of turning up because why? Because **** anyone trying to hold more then 1 system per 100 players?
Come down here and try holding sov you piece of **** and see how you like watching the guys you play the game with get less and less active and probably quit the game given enough time, all because some moron in CCP had a "good idea".
We didn't like dominion sov, but we ******* hate this coward carebear piece of **** that replaced it.
Use your space, and only have a three hour window of vulnerability where attackers have to entosis for almost an hour, or run around putting out sov fires for 18 hours a day while an attacker can just take ten minutes to F*** your s*** up, your choice.
It seems to me that you have gone with THIS third option.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5479
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 22:48:23 -
[142] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Silvia Heart wrote:
So my alliance should hold one constellation and carebear the **** out of it until we die of bordem?
We aren't going to get more fights that way, it promotes PVE to an extreme extent.
This change is toxic to eve, we get no fights, we get no fun and we spend stupid amounts of time orbiting a structure because one guy can spent 10min of his time to waste almost 2 hours of our time and we have to turn up to every single one because some moron thought it would be great to make it stay that way forever because defenders should turn up and waste massive amounts of time, even if the "attacker" (rolls eyes) has no intention of turning up because why? Because **** anyone trying to hold more then 1 system per 100 players?
Come down here and try holding sov you piece of **** and see how you like watching the guys you play the game with get less and less active and probably quit the game given enough time, all because some moron in CCP had a "good idea".
We didn't like dominion sov, but we ******* hate this coward carebear piece of **** that replaced it.
Use your space, and only have a three hour window of vulnerability where attackers have to entosis for almost an hour, or run around putting out sov fires for 18 hours a day while an attacker can just take ten minutes to F*** your s*** up, your choice. It seems to me that you have gone with THIS third option.
Then there's the recruitment option. Where you recruit people to handle the carebearing for you, leaving you to defend your space, and attack other space.
(The system's not perfect. It needs work. but some of the complaints I'm seeing are a touch inane)
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5479
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 22:52:24 -
[143] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:I don't care if you halve capital ship DPS and tank, give them a damn role already.
Caps aren't in the world best position right now. I don't think anyone is disagreeing there.
Exactly what role they should have, that's the interesting question. If you have any thoughts, I'd certainly like to hear them
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
801
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 23:04:27 -
[144] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote: Then there's the recruitment option. Where you recruit people to handle the carebearing for you, leaving you to defend your space, and attack other space.
SHH! Don't tell them, I want them crying because they have to crab to get the indexes up. delicious tears.
Steve Ronuken wrote:(The system's not perfect. It needs work. but some of the complaints I'm seeing are a touch inane) Truth!
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2326
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 23:10:27 -
[145] - Quote
Borascus wrote: Are targets going to be belt-ratting in unoccupied systems? At least there is something to engage in sov, and the owning alliance gets a mail to say 'turn up for fight'.
If the launcher explains that there are 20-40k players online any given time, and picturing that people log in / out every minute, it makes more sense for people online for more than an hour to own more systems than 1:100players, so they can co-ordinate fights.
Log-in, sit in system, wait for ratter. On the other side of the coin is 'log-in, wait to defend'. This is the reason interceptor entosis is not enjoyable, there is no fight, it's literally 'turn up here to see an interceptor'. The aggressing alliance should already have enough sov for their 1:100 pilot ratio, 14k pilots gives 140 systems? 828 empty systems? What about hi-sec/low-sec/wh players?
Null-sec sov holders want to own more sov than they can manage to have an abundance of possible fights.
600bil isk is 50 years of subscription if you aren't losing ships. Last I saw CCP had an e-mail address for plex purchases over 300.
Your issue here is that you are equating sov with fights. The two are only tangentially related, not a direct correlation.
Try doing other things to get fights. Also, who cares if there are empty systems? That's systems you then don't have to waste time with if you are searching for a large scale fight against another null alliance. Just go direct to their active systems with a Battleship fleet, wait for them to escalate, then drop your own cyno's. Hey presto, massive fight. Or just jump a titan in with said BS fleet, and watch the server go crazy.
If you want a big cap fight, look at the actual reasons big cap fights have happened. Nothing to do with nibbling away at unimportant sov and troll roams. Those happened under the old sov mechanics as well, cloaky roams almost never escalated to titan fights. It was form ups over critical hub systems, or a tackled titan (who may have pressed jump not bridge) that made the big fights. So use those reasons, not sov for the sake of sov. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 23:28:56 -
[146] - Quote
Ransu Asanari wrote:Entosis is designed to influence the type of ships brought to contest nodes as little as possible. There may be some extreme cases that need to be dealt with, but there are viable counters you can bring to most of these situations. A 12km/s Vagabond orbiting the beacon at 250km? Park a T1 frigate with a T1 Entosis module on the beacon and pause their progress. Or hunt down their links ship and kill it instead. Right now a 1M ISK Griffin can jam out that ship and force them to go through the warmup cycle again; or a Maulus can damp down the Vagabond to lose its lock at that range, and force it to come in closer.
This. If you are spending hours repairing the damage done when you didn't bother to defend your system in the first place then you have yourself to blame.
Marech. |
Morgan A'doulende
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 23:29:44 -
[147] - Quote
That's rich. The alliance I'm in rents from Tri and they seem to be ok with hassle free income from us renters. |
Lucius Kalari
Limited Power Inc It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 23:37:09 -
[148] - Quote
If people aren't liking fozziesov, I heard that wormhole space has plenty of unoccupied systems for people to take
Hi, I'm Lucius Kalari and I'm .LIMP
LichReaper - according to zkill they probably wont make it past the undock
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.01 23:51:19 -
[149] - Quote
I disagree with the limitations suggested on entosing. Based on my observations is the majority of this large alliances althought they are very powerfull they all have the same issue. The issue is vast amount of unused space. Every second system its empty. As a result large amount of jumps have to be perfomed. This is specially true in the Drone region, CFC space and Catch. The drone region been the worst where only 3 out of 10 systems are actually in use. I think its time they adjust the amount of sov systems the occupy from the ones they dont really occupy. If you drop those unused space you dont have to defend it. Why keep sov if you dont use it? We see this all the time with the CFC. We got people coming from all the corners of the globe for a 20 man fleet and they show up in 80+ minimum. They even bring supers and carriers. The amount of jumps they are doing is too much and all because they want to keep vast amount of empty space which they clearly are having difficulty defending. Drop sov systems and get your numbers into the core system. If you look the systems that are been attacked, the vast majority are insignificant systems cos the numbers are either too low or no one lives in them. I believe the worst idea is to give zero m/s speed to entosis ships. Why would anybody bother entosing if all you have to do is jump a titan and snipe it. After all CFC has tried to do this many times already. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
39
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 00:01:51 -
[150] - Quote
TiMeZeRo225 wrote: CCP has to understand 1 simple thing - people come to 0.0 for blob warfare, so the only thing they have to change is to create something worthy to fight for.
You need to understand that people in all parts of space are there for a variety of reasons. I live in null, have never been part of a blob, and am happy about that.
Marech. |
|
Whisperen
Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels
43
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 00:02:02 -
[151] - Quote
Those are not problems they are features. |
Gimme Sake
State War Academy Caldari State
204
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 00:22:52 -
[152] - Quote
Games should be fun, not a love hate relationship. If games stop being fun they become something we try to get detached from and relax: REALITY. Reality with the daily mundane grind and eventual cubicle romance decorated with post-it sentimental reminders to buy toilet paper on the way back home. And so it goes Eve online seems more and more like a failing marriage. A lot of effort put into it but... ya know. Yeah I know Eve is real but... ya know. Alt tabbing to play another game while playing a game is... ya know... adultery. CCP better not ask what other people are playing while alt tabbing, might find out they're being cheated with Farmville... ya know...
"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16798
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 00:29:49 -
[153] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I disagree with the limitations suggested on entosing. Based on my observations is the majority of this large alliances althought they are very powerfull they all have the same issue. The issue is vast amount of unused space. Every second system its empty. As a result large amount of jumps have to be perfomed. This is specially true in the Drone region, CFC space and Catch. The drone region been the worst where only 3 out of 10 systems are actually in use. I think its time they adjust the amount of sov systems the occupy from the ones they dont really occupy. If you drop those unused space you dont have to defend it. Why keep sov if you dont use it?
We see this all the time with the CFC. We got people coming from all the corners of the globe for a 20 man fleet and they show up in 80+ minimum. They even bring supers and carriers. The amount of jumps they are doing is too much and all because they want to keep vast amount of empty space which they clearly are having difficulty defending. Drop sov systems and get your numbers into the core system. If you look at the systems that are been attacked, the vast majority are insignificant systems cos no one lives in them aka empty.
I believe the worst idea is to give zero m/s speed to entosis ships. Why would anybody bother entosing if all you have to do is jump a titan and snipe it. After all CFC has tried to do this many times already.
I can tell you this with all sincerity. We have been waiting for this changes forever. Now that they are here we are trully enjoying it. We finally can actually herass a larger entity and pick a fight when we want and disapear into the jungle when we dont want to fight them. I think now gorilla warfare has a great future in eve at the momment. We have forced the CFC to reevalute their possition and hire lots of renters to keep the indexes of their systems up. This is what a 1000 man alliance has been able to archive vs a 50k coalition of alliances.
I only ask CCP to look at the sov systems and see how many are actually have presence or used effectively. The truth is right there! You are keeping systems you can not defend and expanded way too much and therefore you spend most of the night jumping way too much.
The "CFC" actually has one of the highest player per system densities in sov null.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 00:42:15 -
[154] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Icycle wrote:I disagree with the limitations suggested on entosing. Based on my observations is the majority of this large alliances althought they are very powerfull they all have the same issue. The issue is vast amount of unused space. Every second system its empty. As a result large amount of jumps have to be perfomed. This is specially true in the Drone region, CFC space and Catch. The drone region been the worst where only 3 out of 10 systems are actually in use. I think its time they adjust the amount of sov systems the occupy from the ones they dont really occupy. If you drop those unused space you dont have to defend it. Why keep sov if you dont use it?
We see this all the time with the CFC. We got people coming from all the corners of the globe for a 20 man fleet and they show up in 80+ minimum. They even bring supers and carriers. The amount of jumps they are doing is too much and all because they want to keep vast amount of empty space which they clearly are having difficulty defending. Drop sov systems and get your numbers into the core system. If you look at the systems that are been attacked, the vast majority are insignificant systems cos no one lives in them aka empty.
I believe the worst idea is to give zero m/s speed to entosis ships. Why would anybody bother entosing if all you have to do is jump a titan and snipe it. After all CFC has tried to do this many times already.
I can tell you this with all sincerity. We have been waiting for this changes forever. Now that they are here we are trully enjoying it. We finally can actually herass a larger entity and pick a fight when we want and disapear into the jungle when we dont want to fight them. I think now gorilla warfare has a great future in eve at the momment. We have forced the CFC to reevalute their possition and hire lots of renters to keep the indexes of their systems up. This is what a 1000 man alliance has been able to archive vs a 50k coalition of alliances.
I only ask CCP to look at the sov systems and see how many are actually have presence or used effectively. The truth is right there! You are keeping systems you can not defend and expanded way too much and therefore you spend most of the night jumping way too much. The "CFC" actually has one of the highest player per system densities in sov null.
i beg to differ. Go into pure blind and see. You will be hard pressed to find many. Fade , Tribute has also alot of systems as well as space around Venal. A lot of unused systems or has very little people in system. The only real region that get alot of use is Deklein and Branch. Also its in the ratting statistics! Which also prove my point |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
801
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 03:01:17 -
[155] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Malcanis wrote: The "CFC" actually has one of the highest player per system densities in sov null.
I beg to differ. Go into pure blind and see. You will be hard pressed to find many CFC's. Fade , Tribute has also alot of systems as well as space around Venal. A lot of unused systems or has very little people in system. The only real region that get alot of use is Deklein and Branch. Also its in the ratting statistics! Which also prove my point. I know where I live after all I kill in it every day and do several roams. Before the Aegis expansion, Pure Blind was really not good space. Most of what we have of Pure Blind has really bad truesec, none of the "good" anomalies would spawn even if we ratted it up to level 5, and even then Pure Blind was not "ours" to rat in. Then six days before Aegis hits BAM! Fozzie drops that on us. Suddenly all that cruddy space no one really wanted, or could use unless it had a money moon or jump bridge, had a lot less suck attached to it. Hell, people are going to be able to actually make some money in them running the anomalies, not as great as with "good" truesec systems, but decent ISK none the less. That last minute change caught us off guard, and a few of us are trying to rectify that. Talk to a Goonswarm rental agent today. (Certain terms and conditions apply.)
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3142
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 05:56:13 -
[156] - Quote
Icycle wrote:
I beg to differ. Go into pure blind and see. You will be hard pressed to find many CFC's. Fade , Tribute has also alot of systems as well as space around Venal. A lot of unused systems or has very little people in system. The only real region that get alot of use is Deklein and Branch. Also its in the ratting statistics! Which also prove my point. I know where I live after all I kill in it every day and do several roams.
I too can cherry pick data points....
Let me see,
Goonswarm: 13954/103 = 135.5 pilots/system FCON: 4896/80 = 61.2 pilots/system Co2: 2857/34 = 84 pilots/system Get Off My Lawn: = 2121/53 = 40 pilots/system EXE: 1221/14 = 87 pilots/system
Compare this too Legion of Death, Shadow of Death, Brothers of Tangra and we see vastly smaller numbers as in the teens or even single digits for Shadow of Death.
Does this mean that each and every system in Deklein will have 135.5 pilots in it? No, it's an average. Some will have more, some less. Keeping in mind that not all of them will be logged in at once either.
So now we know why some alliances are struggling with Fozziesov. I'd say working as intended (note: I'm not saying it is good or bad here, but if the intent was to free up unused systems...well, sounds like it is going to happen one way or the other....). If you insist on remaining as an "elite and exclusive alliance" and also insist on holding a large number of systems....you are going to be very busy going forward in game.
This information was presented earlier too.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
335
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 07:42:09 -
[157] - Quote
PROBLEM: nullsec got all buddy-buddy, made non-aggression pacts and wouldnt fight except one staged fight per year to ensure that CCP was nullsecs b**ch, since CCP needed that one fight for advertising purposes.
SOLUTION: introduce new game mechanics so that smaller groups that are not part of the buddy-buddy system can stir up nullsec and get them to actually defend their holdings.
We can check this one off and look at nullsecs thread which should have been titled, "pout, stomp our feet and cry like a two year old", as proof of effectiveness.
PROBLEM: nullsec apparently cannot combat low skill pilots.
SOLUTION: everyone that has every been ganked by a nullsec 3 week old pilot laughs their collective asses off and decries nullsecs attitude on the subject as seriously hypocritical.
PROBLEM: Nullsec that has long held that CCP shouldnt be holding players hands suddenly wants theirs held.
SOLUTION: stand agape at the criminal levels of hypocrisy nullsec is showing on the issue, and of course laugh our asses off some more.
PROBLEM: seeming exploit allows entosing attacker to move the defense window.
SOLUTION: hotfix the issue because unlike the rest of this pout-fest this is actually a real problem that needs addressing.
PROBLEM: nullsec doesnt like being annoyed, while spending more than a decade doing this to the rest of EVE.
SOLUTION: I have to use the word hypocrisy yet again, seriously, wtf ???
PROBLEM: nullsec is so accustomed to sitting on their collective asses they cant be bothered to go collect intel on an agressor.
SOLUTION: DO NOTHING but at the same time wonder out loud why the **** were game mecahnics in place that would allow these lazy asses to hold SOV for so long when it has become abundantly clear that they dont deserve their holdings ?
PROBLEM: Alliances want to work together in close knit cooperative groups again like the, 'Good Ol Days".
SOLUTION: Repeat oft used nullsec mantra frequently heard when highsec didnt want some change put into the game, adapt and HTFU !
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6877
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 07:50:56 -
[158] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:"A BLOO BLOO MY RENTAL INCOME!"
*snicker*
*snort*
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6878
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 08:43:16 -
[159] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:I don't care if you halve capital ship DPS and tank, give them a damn role already. Caps aren't in the world best position right now. I don't think anyone is disagreeing there. Exactly what role they should have, that's the interesting question. If you have any thoughts, I'd certainly like to hear them
Death Star is a good start for a role.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6734
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 08:54:59 -
[160] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:PROBLEM: Alliances want to work together in close knit cooperative groups again like the, 'Good Ol Days".
SOLUTION: Repeat oft used nullsec mantra frequently heard when highsec didnt want some change put into the game, adapt and HTFU ! No, working together in close knit cooperative groups is the solution.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
|
Ludi Burek
Combined Imperial Fleet Darwinism.
305
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 09:23:01 -
[161] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:PROBLEM: Alliances want to work together in close knit cooperative groups again like the, 'Good Ol Days".
SOLUTION: Repeat oft used nullsec mantra frequently heard when highsec didnt want some change put into the game, adapt and HTFU ! No, working together in close knit cooperative groups is the solution.
I dunno, it just doesn't have the same "righteous retribution for your high sec crimes" vibe which is needed. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1000
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 09:40:59 -
[162] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Emma Kado wrote:"It Is Not the Strongest of the Species that Survives But the Most Adaptable to change" - Charles Darwin.
Any change to any system within EVE will come with those who win from the changes and those who will lose from the changes. I would like to point out that all the signatories to this post are the powers of old, those who adapted to the dominion sov system and built their empires using the tactics and strategies that worked for that system and those times. They are obviously the ones losing out on the new system, but does that make fozziesov a bad system?
I would ike to offer a counter perspective as a new alliance taking sov in nullsec for the first time.
We (The CORVOS) were determined that we would not become a part of a coalition when we made the move to sov null. Many of our leadership had been involved in sov before but we wanted to own our space in our own right. Ours to hold or lose on our own merits. We made some allies, but no supercoalitions with blues for 30 jumps. So far we have been able to hold off much larger groups with better ship comps and numerical advantage by adapting to fozziesov. Small teams (2-3 pilots) have been able to effectivley stop the enemy gaining any control whatsoever. sure we havent won every fight but we have been able to maintain our sov without simply being forced to face the enemy head on. We can fight hit and run gurella style, deny the enemy pilots their F1 pressing sessions while giving our own pilots invaluable small gang experince as we destory entosis ships and their escorts. Fozziesov has allowed us, as well as many other smaller independant groups to compete in the sov game.
Of course it is no wonder the empires of olde are unhappy, they lose out on this. Their weaknesses of old are now gaping holes in their battle plans. Their pilots and FCs will need to change if their alliances are to be able to survive.
No longer are fights decided on one single massive engagement. Individual pilot skill matters. A small team of commited and experienced pilots can hold off or at least delay a larger force. Big F1 pressing fests are not what every player wants. I want to be able to, mid fight, take command of a small detachment of a larger fleet and hit enemy positions and eliminate enemy entosis ships and their escorts.
If you cannot adapt to the new system you will die. And those who can adapt and survive will take your place at the top of the food chain. You will not be able to have massive afk empires that noone can ever threaten.
Welcome to fozziesov boys.
This isnt to say its perfect. UAXDeath does make some good points, such as not having to clean up uncontested nodes. But with CCPs new release cycle they will be able to monitor and change the system as it needs. But the system as a whole is great, if the powers of old are complaining its an indication that fozziesov is working.
And to CCP: Keep up the good work. Well said and bravo to your alliance, good sir Keep on Doing It Right.
These guys are doing it right up until PL and the Imperium hell camp every single one of their systems and break them in one swift and brutal campaign, which will be made even more brutal when stations can be destroyed.
However I like what I am seeing so far and that people who control space without using it are complaining.
Many of the Russians alliances operating around Stain still have a ton of people doing missions in Stain, they should be kicking them to work on the ADM.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6734
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 10:24:00 -
[163] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Many of the Russians alliances operating around Stain still have a ton of people doing missions in Stain, they should be kicking them to work on the ADM. pvesov, the hero we deserve
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Coral Theisman
Space Ants Independent Operators Consortium
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 10:36:48 -
[164] - Quote
So guys, let's have 20-200 unoccupied systems we cannot realisticslly cover and let's moan when we have to do something to defend them.
Fozziesov is fundamentally right, it just needs some tweaks. Defend the systems where you live, don't care about the systems where you don't live. Seems like people tend to freak out when they cannot have millions of empty systems for renting.
I feel that only a couple of alliances actually bothered to think further than "muh rentals", really.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 10:52:09 -
[165] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Icycle wrote:
I beg to differ. Go into pure blind and see. You will be hard pressed to find many CFC's. Fade , Tribute has also alot of systems as well as space around Venal. A lot of unused systems or has very little people in system. The only real region that get alot of use is Deklein and Branch. Also its in the ratting statistics! Which also prove my point. I know where I live after all I kill in it every day and do several roams.
I too can cherry pick data points.... Let me see, Goonswarm: 13954/103 = 135.5 pilots/system FCON: 4896/80 = 61.2 pilots/system Co2: 2857/34 = 84 pilots/system Get Off My Lawn: = 2121/53 = 40 pilots/system EXE: 1221/14 = 87 pilots/system Compare this too Legion of Death, Shadow of Death, Brothers of Tangra and we see vastly smaller numbers as in the teens or even single digits for Shadow of Death. Does this mean that each and every system in Deklein will have 135.5 pilots in it? No, it's an average. Some will have more, some less. Keeping in mind that not all of them will be logged in at once either. So now we know why some alliances are struggling with Fozziesov. I'd say working as intended (note: I'm not saying it is good or bad here, but if the intent was to free up unused systems...well, sounds like it is going to happen one way or the other....). If you insist on remaining as an "elite and exclusive alliance" and also insist on holding a large number of systems....you are going to be very busy going forward in game. This information was presented earlier too.
you are repeating what i already mentioned abov about the drone region having the largest unoccupied space. CFC still has lot of space unoccupied and that forces them to do vast jumps. If it wasnt they will not be coming from declein+branch to pure blind. Wether the space is good or bad it does not make a difference. You do not live in pure blind so makes it useless having to defend it. If you want to keep them fine, more entosis for me, but dont whine then when you got to do a lot of jumps to defend. Make up your mind. You cant have everything favouring your side. You got to make a choice and select what space you want to keep. And if the space is too far, then it may not be to the best interest to protect specially if you dont live in it. Which is my point. I love gorrilla warfare and entosing is a really big plus for us. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16803
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 10:58:09 -
[166] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Malcanis wrote:Emma Kado wrote:"It Is Not the Strongest of the Species that Survives But the Most Adaptable to change" - Charles Darwin.
Any change to any system within EVE will come with those who win from the changes and those who will lose from the changes. I would like to point out that all the signatories to this post are the powers of old, those who adapted to the dominion sov system and built their empires using the tactics and strategies that worked for that system and those times. They are obviously the ones losing out on the new system, but does that make fozziesov a bad system?
I would ike to offer a counter perspective as a new alliance taking sov in nullsec for the first time.
We (The CORVOS) were determined that we would not become a part of a coalition when we made the move to sov null. Many of our leadership had been involved in sov before but we wanted to own our space in our own right. Ours to hold or lose on our own merits. We made some allies, but no supercoalitions with blues for 30 jumps. So far we have been able to hold off much larger groups with better ship comps and numerical advantage by adapting to fozziesov. Small teams (2-3 pilots) have been able to effectivley stop the enemy gaining any control whatsoever. sure we havent won every fight but we have been able to maintain our sov without simply being forced to face the enemy head on. We can fight hit and run gurella style, deny the enemy pilots their F1 pressing sessions while giving our own pilots invaluable small gang experince as we destory entosis ships and their escorts. Fozziesov has allowed us, as well as many other smaller independant groups to compete in the sov game.
Of course it is no wonder the empires of olde are unhappy, they lose out on this. Their weaknesses of old are now gaping holes in their battle plans. Their pilots and FCs will need to change if their alliances are to be able to survive.
No longer are fights decided on one single massive engagement. Individual pilot skill matters. A small team of commited and experienced pilots can hold off or at least delay a larger force. Big F1 pressing fests are not what every player wants. I want to be able to, mid fight, take command of a small detachment of a larger fleet and hit enemy positions and eliminate enemy entosis ships and their escorts.
If you cannot adapt to the new system you will die. And those who can adapt and survive will take your place at the top of the food chain. You will not be able to have massive afk empires that noone can ever threaten.
Welcome to fozziesov boys.
This isnt to say its perfect. UAXDeath does make some good points, such as not having to clean up uncontested nodes. But with CCPs new release cycle they will be able to monitor and change the system as it needs. But the system as a whole is great, if the powers of old are complaining its an indication that fozziesov is working.
And to CCP: Keep up the good work. Well said and bravo to your alliance, good sir Keep on Doing It Right. These guys are doing it right up until PL and the Imperium hell camp every single one of their systems and break them in one swift and brutal campaign, which will be made even more brutal when stations can be destroyed. However I like what I am seeing so far and that people who control space without using it are complaining. Many of the Russians alliances operating around Stain still have a ton of people doing missions in Stain, they should be kicking them to work on the ADM. EDIT: One thing I want to say on this is that a lot of those alliances need to create a buffer zone of systems and stations to get around the hell camp risk from one of the super powers, that is their additional cost so to speak. I am also interested to see just how far from the NPC areas PL will move for a campaign, will be interesting to see. And a final off topic comment, good catch to the Initiative on that NCDOT move, I have always had a certain level of respect for the Initiative.
But the point that is being so graphically, if unintentionally, illustrated by this thread is that sov space will now belong to the people who want it enough to keep fighting for it. PL may well come visit them, sure. How long will they stay and fight for it?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6735
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 11:26:04 -
[167] - Quote
Mordus' Ceptors, eh.
Make the most of trollsov.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 11:39:26 -
[168] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Mordus' Ceptors, eh.
Make the most of trollsov.
All the last 7 systems we entosed were corm fleet. Get it right . Its not troll sov its called guerilla tactics and not letting you breath. I entosed one in a cruiser the other day and attempted to get a second |
Tam Arai
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
33
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 11:47:04 -
[169] - Quote
has anyone lost a their capital yet?
or is just systems in the middle of nowhere that defenders have no presence? |
Commander Spurty
Dimension Door We need wards.
1534
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 11:49:10 -
[170] - Quote
Wouldn't passing Sov to another entity give a 7 day invulnerability boon?
If so, eek! How simple to make it impossible to take that space as 6 days and 23 hours after the first transfer, you just push it back to the original owners for another 7 days invulnerability?
I'd sooner there was zero ways to sneak that in.
There are good ships
And wood ships
And ships that sail the sea
But the best ships are
Spaceships
Built by CCP
|
|
Spurty
Dimension Door We need wards.
1534
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 11:49:10 -
[171] - Quote
Wouldn't passing Sov to another entity give a 7 day invulnerability boon?
If so, eek! How simple to make it impossible to take that space as 6 days and 23 hours after the first transfer, you just push it back to the original owners for another 7 days invulnerability?
I'd sooner there was zero ways to sneak that in.
There are good ships
And wood ships
And ships that sail the sea
But the best ships are
Spaceships
Built by CCP
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1001
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 12:09:49 -
[172] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:These guys are doing it right up until PL and the Imperium hell camp every single one of their systems and break them in one swift and brutal campaign, which will be made even more brutal when stations can be destroyed.
However I like what I am seeing so far and that people who control space without using it are complaining.
Many of the Russians alliances operating around Stain still have a ton of people doing missions in Stain, they should be kicking them to work on the ADM.
EDIT: One thing I want to say on this is that a lot of those alliances need to create a buffer zone of systems and stations to get around the hell camp risk from one of the super powers, that is their additional cost so to speak. I am also interested to see just how far from the NPC areas PL will move for a campaign, will be interesting to see.
And a final off topic comment, good catch to the Initiative on that NCDOT move, I have always had a certain level of respect for the Initiative. But the point that is being so graphically, if unintentionally, illustrated by this thread is that sov space will now belong to the people who want it enough to keep fighting for it. PL may well come visit them, sure. How long will they stay and fight for it?
Yes you are right I do not disagree, however those alliances have to have a strategy to deal with the two super powers coming for good fights which us lessor mortals know as being a total curb stomp, so do you set up to play smart or do you set yourself up to be a harvest of tears, being limited to only the systems you can defend makes the curb stomp so much more likely and I really wonder just how that will pan out with destructible stations. You know the answer because that is why you guys joined the Imperium, before Aegis Sov that is true, but you understood that!
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16805
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 12:11:16 -
[173] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Malcanis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:These guys are doing it right up until PL and the Imperium hell camp every single one of their systems and break them in one swift and brutal campaign, which will be made even more brutal when stations can be destroyed.
However I like what I am seeing so far and that people who control space without using it are complaining.
Many of the Russians alliances operating around Stain still have a ton of people doing missions in Stain, they should be kicking them to work on the ADM.
EDIT: One thing I want to say on this is that a lot of those alliances need to create a buffer zone of systems and stations to get around the hell camp risk from one of the super powers, that is their additional cost so to speak. I am also interested to see just how far from the NPC areas PL will move for a campaign, will be interesting to see.
And a final off topic comment, good catch to the Initiative on that NCDOT move, I have always had a certain level of respect for the Initiative. But the point that is being so graphically, if unintentionally, illustrated by this thread is that sov space will now belong to the people who want it enough to keep fighting for it. PL may well come visit them, sure. How long will they stay and fight for it? Yes you are right I do not disagree, however those alliances have to have a strategy to deal with the two super powers coming for good fights which us lessor mortals know as being a total curb stomp, so do you set up to play smart or do you set yourself up to be a harvest of tears, being limited to only the systems you can defend makes the curb stomp so much more likely and I really wonder just how that will pan out with destructible stations. You know the answer because that is why you guys joined the Imperium, before Aegis Sov that is true, but you understood that!
Well actually we keep our stuff in NPC 0.0 and pretty much always have done.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16805
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 12:12:58 -
[174] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Mordus' Ceptors, eh.
Make the most of trollsov. All the last 7 systems we entosed were corm fleet. Get it right . Its not troll sov its called guerilla tactics and not letting you breath. I entosed one in a cruiser the other day and attempted to get a second
If you want it more than them, you'll deserve it and you'll get it.
If they care enough about a system to put a couple of RLML Caracals and a damp Keres into it, then you won't.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2155
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 12:16:32 -
[175] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:So any way, now that the buggy whip manufacturers have vented their pwecious feewings about allowing those nasty horrible auto-mobiles on the roads... This is beneath you. Show us where you stand on the "merits" of Fozzie SOV that have not already been shot down.Malcanis wrote:If you want it more than them, you'll deserve it and you'll get it. If they care enough about a system to put a couple of RLML Caracals and a damp Keres into it, then you won't. In other words, "Can you grief a system until they give up defending it or can you ECM until they give up griefing?"
I think at this point, you are harping on about the story you bought when Fozzie's team conceived this abortion and now you can't let it go.
"HTFU" "We are hard and bored / not interested."
Dominion SOV took how long for half the player base to be bored of it? How many years? Fozzie SOV has hit that point in three weeks.
It is SOV dumbed down and less engaging.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 12:30:07 -
[176] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Tappits wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
What wars have any of these people done with the new sov system that lets them make informed ideas on how to fix a sov system thatGÇÖs just over two weeks old that will affect every single person in null sec? What has any one done in the new sov system other than get some unused systems attacked? None of these people speak for me. None whatsoever. Furthermore, Garst Tyrell has signed this RMT rental whine without any kind of mandate from the alliance, and he is acting here as a single player, and as such his personal opinions in no way represent the official stance of Triumvirate alliance.
Now, thats embarasing. It did not have approval of the alliance. |
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
984
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 12:51:13 -
[177] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:I too can cherry pick data points....
Let me see,
Goonswarm: 13954/103 = 135.5 pilots/system FCON: 4896/80 = 61.2 pilots/system Co2: 2857/34 = 84 pilots/system Get Off My Lawn: = 2121/53 = 40 pilots/system EXE: 1221/14 = 87 pilots/system
Compare this too Legion of Death, Shadow of Death, Brothers of Tangra and we see vastly smaller numbers as in the teens or even single digits for Shadow of Death. You should hang out with RU community sometimes. If someone thought that "textbook goon" has a low opinion on average "pubbie", he'll have a lot to re-evaluate after the experience.
And you guys are suggesting them to not just tolerate, but recruit such people. Jokes on you.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
429
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 13:09:09 -
[178] - Quote
EVE community is a strange. Saying "a peaceful mining barge of a new player must be immune to the attack of a T1 destroyer" is hilarious tears, and the reply is HTFU & L2P. Saying "the trillion ISK printing machine of the 1000+ strong empires ran by the oldest players must be immune to the attack of an entosis ship" is a serious suggestion and get +1s.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1001
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 13:36:45 -
[179] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:EVE community is a strange. Saying "a peaceful mining barge of a new player must be immune to the attack of a T1 destroyer" is hilarious tears, and the reply is HTFU & L2P. Saying "the trillion ISK printing machine of the 1000+ strong empires ran by the oldest players must be immune to the attack of an entosis ship" is a serious suggestion and get +1s.
And you just showed what a silly bean you are, the thing about mining barges and exhumers is that their tank should be able to tak a single T1 destroyer until Concord arrive in a 0.5 system, personally I would make it about 4 T1 destroyers in a 0.5 system. There you go requires a team approach which is what Eve is all about, those people can now go HTFU and play as a team..., wait that only applies to mission runners and the like as they keep sprouting on and on in the forums, facepalm and all that!
I agree with you on the second part of your post, these people deserve to lose their space, I was shocked at TRI signing on to that but found it to be an out of touch CEO, what ho and all that. I am in Stain at the moment and I see loads of these people running level 4 missions, including the mission alt of the leader of the Soviet-Union alliance, their crying is so funny when their leaders can't even do the grind...
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1001
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 13:41:12 -
[180] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Many of the Russians alliances operating around Stain still have a ton of people doing missions in Stain, they should be kicking them to work on the ADM. pvesov, the hero we deserve
What you mean strategic work to enable your PvP group to do their job easier, you should go speak to your alliance leader again, he certainly understands it!
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
|
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 13:48:04 -
[181] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:EVE community is a strange. Saying "a peaceful mining barge of a new player must be immune to the attack of a T1 destroyer" is hilarious tears, and the reply is HTFU & L2P. Saying "the trillion ISK printing machine of the 1000+ strong empires ran by the oldest players must be immune to the attack of an entosis ship" is a serious suggestion and get +1s.
we asked tweaks to make sov matters less frustrating and more managable by both attacker and defender and to eliminate trollceptors.
Does this make our empires immune? No
Does this makes Sov Warfare far better? Yes
Can you read what we wrote? No
Do you just want to random flame and feel considered? Yes
PS i agree CCP should help new players too btw |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
3166
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 13:56:34 -
[182] - Quote
High-sec miners are telling you to HTFU .. and to adapt or die.
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
2156
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:11:46 -
[183] - Quote
flakeys wrote:High-sec miners are telling you to HTFU .. and to adapt or die. Check my post history, I... - create threads to try give miners more "stand and fight" rather than "dock or die". - support further Walking in Stations development. - would like to see T1 industrials become less paper thin. - am a logi anchor and occasional fleet commander for a Null Sec alliance. - lead a group that raids worm holes mostly for loot but we fit to PVP if we run into someone.
and I say that this Fozzie SOV is a step backwards because it is making the SOV mechanics childish and slow. You can no longer make a composition and fits for damage to grind faster. You can no longer improve your repair ships to fix the structures faster.
Now all you do is wave a wand from pretty much any ship.
Utter garbage.
/ / / / (What ever the heck label suits you today.)
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Gen Eve
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:20:27 -
[184] - Quote
FUZZISOV JUST GOT ROLLED IN AND TEARS ARE FILLING THE BUCKETS!
Many big/massive alliances whining about new sov mechanics. They whining that they can't defend themselves from small groups of people. And their unused space gets attacked. They crying like babies instead of embracing the new system. FUZZ has just started and amount of fun and game content we have has simply skyrocketed 1000% for us.
All these cry-baby egoistic multi-region sov holders see is way to manage other peeps, to force them to pay rent, to make isk isk isk. They ARE the reason CCP changed this game so drastically. FUZZ SOV means who ever has sov, needs to live in it and protect it, as opposed to "safely hold" sov and whoever challenges it, to blob any challenger with blob of peeps and caps/supers.
STOP CRYING AND GET ON BOARD! CCP YOU DOING A GREAT JOB! NERF THE MOON MILK COWS NEXT AND FIX POSES.
LONG LIVE FUZZ SOV!
BEST THING THAT HAPPENED TO EVE IN 10 YEARS!!! |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
811
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:38:13 -
[185] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:EVE community is a strange. Saying "a peaceful mining barge of a new player must be immune to the attack of a T1 destroyer" is hilarious tears, and the reply is HTFU & L2P. Saying "the trillion ISK printing machine of the 1000+ strong empires ran by the oldest players must be immune to the attack of an entosis ship" is a serious suggestion and get +1s. Wow, I liked a Gevlon Goblin post. I guess I should go to the hospital and have my brain checked, because most of what he says is hilarious, somewhere on the autism spectrum, drivel.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Gott Lieb
SwEaTy ArMpIT RaIDeRs Mordus Angels
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:40:00 -
[186] - Quote
Awesome changes! CCP doing it right. It's game mechanics now, stop crying and conform. Sov holders will not be able to hold empty systems that cannot be defended from now. All your tears are about losing surplus profit. A lot of capsuleers now have more fun then ever. And guys, your whining is miserable. |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
811
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:54:20 -
[187] - Quote
Gott Lieb wrote:Awesome changes! CCP doing it right. It's game mechanics now, stop crying and conform. Sov holders will not be able to hold empty systems that cannot be defended from now. All your tears are about losing surplus profit. A lot of capsuleers now have more fun then ever. And guys, your whining is miserable. Are you going to go back to crying when we get the ADM up to max in Pure Blind so that you have to actually take almost an hour rather than the 10 to 20 minute trolling that your doing presently?
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:57:22 -
[188] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Gott Lieb wrote:Awesome changes! CCP doing it right. It's game mechanics now, stop crying and conform. Sov holders will not be able to hold empty systems that cannot be defended from now. All your tears are about losing surplus profit. A lot of capsuleers now have more fun then ever. And guys, your whining is miserable. Are you going to go back to crying when we get the ADM up to max in Pure Blind so that you have to actually take almost an hour rather than the 10 to 20 minute trolling that your doing presently?
Thats ok. I did one that was 40 + minutes long the othere day and reinforced it. =) If you think thats going to stop us from entosing it, well you are so wrong |
Itachi Uchonela
Extreme Overkill Inc. Mordus Angels
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:59:15 -
[189] - Quote
I personally think thar fuzzisov was a good idea for CCP to implement. It was a way for them to break up the complete strangleholds that the larger alliances such as Goonswarm have held on the their regions (such as pureblind, delkin, etc). But the way that CCP introduced the system was a little sloppy in the sense that it does allow things like the troll ceptor and the trolltron to be used by a single person to completely mess up an entire system. While i currently have no thoughts on how exactly this system can be fixed I do feel that possibly increasing the time of the entosis link cycle or maybe reducing the vulnerability time windows (forcing people that may want to take the system to actually form a somewhat sizeable fleet) may help reduce the tension and frustration that this new system has caused untill a somewhat agreeable fix has been decided upon. Remember guys the reason that CCP did this was to in a sense throw a monkey wrench of sorts in to the stagnated area of null sec so let try and respect their decision and not bash them for it but help them find the solution to make fuzzisov work. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
342
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 15:25:33 -
[190] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote:davet517 wrote:Problem: You're trying to hold more space than you can defend, and in some cases, rent it out, when the mechanics don't allow that anymore.
Solution: Stop that. There is no "stop" solution for this. Cause if you want to get a claim - bring your fleet. If your fleet wins - you ll get the claim. Right now it is more like OMFGLOLZ type attack on multiple systems with 1-2 interceptors or even t1 frigs. You want what was instead of what is the new reality of nullsec. If your species cannot adapt then like non-adaptive species before you-you will become extinct as you should and some new more adaptable species will take your space.
Working as intended....
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
342
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 15:48:39 -
[191] - Quote
Jabbrail wrote:davet517 wrote:Jabbrail wrote: There is no "stop" solution for this. Cause if you want to get a claim - bring your fleet. If your fleet wins - you ll get the claim. Right now it is more like OMFGLOLZ type attack on multiple systems with 1-2 interceptors or even t1 frigs.
There is. Here you go: 1. Claim only the space that you intend to live in. 2. Live in it. Your indexes will rise. 3. If someone comes during your prime time to troll space that you are actually living in, kill them. 4. Profit. Your days of being an absentee landlord are behind you. So are your days of holding an entire region of systems populated by one nullified tengu and a tower. Adapt. My point is, that I am absolutely for a Good Fight. Have your fleets ready and claim everything you can claim! I am not against the principles. But it looks crazy then you start a war with a country, gather your troops and next day 1 spy is putting enemy flag on central square and you lose your capital. WTF?!!!! I want a fight, not "hide and seek" game. I have them enough in a kindergarden.
Nullsec had years to fight and chose non-agression pacts instead making a change to nullsec mechanics a must.
One of the nullsecs mantras thrown at highsec for years, 'you have a choice', and in this case you have a choice, fight for your sov or lose it.
God i love using your own tired old mantras back at nullsec!
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6736
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 15:55:09 -
[192] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:You want what was instead of what is the new reality of nullsec. If your species cannot adapt then like non-adaptive species before you-you will become extinct as you should and some new more adaptable species will take your space. . No actually, the space could just be left empty, that's what you'd expect from trollsov after all.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Borascus
653
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 15:58:01 -
[193] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Your issue here is that you are equating sov with fights. The two are only tangentially related, not a direct correlation.
Try doing other things to get fights. Also, who cares if there are empty systems? That's systems you then don't have to waste time with if you are searching for a large scale fight against another null alliance. Just go direct to their active systems with a Battleship fleet, wait for them to escalate, then drop your own cyno's. Hey presto, massive fight. Or just jump a titan in with said BS fleet, and watch the server go crazy.
If you want a big cap fight, look at the actual reasons big cap fights have happened. Nothing to do with nibbling away at unimportant sov and troll roams. Those happened under the old sov mechanics as well, cloaky roams almost never escalated to titan fights. It was form ups over critical hub systems, or a tackled titan (who may have pressed jump not bridge) that made the big fights. So use those reasons, not sov for the sake of sov.
People make more ISK/hr running NPC L4's according to some accounts.
I'm worse on twitter, but to cover a few things;
I'm pointing at interceptors. I'm of the persuasion that holding Sov encourages group conflict as a conflict driver. I'm of the understanding that ISK generation is not the be all and end all of null-sec. I'm of the opinion that larger sov can be retained by having a Blops / recon (rapier, surprisingly) in each edge system with a fleet in the most populated system able to accept local bridging.
I'm also looking at this from a development perspective.
If I want an even chance for alliance members to utilise developed systems, I'll develop more systems than just leaving 100 alliance members to fight for the one developed system's catches.
I'm also looking at specific mineral requisition. I don't like the idea of leaving a system near my space untouched while I cope with ore distribution in my developed industry system and then long hauling any expedited mineral demands from those undeveloped systems nearby, unrefined. It doesn't leave any wiggle room for nerfs / strength increases as Fozzie further balances ships. Exposure is not a position players are forced into with the right planning.
This 'small is power' approach being put forward for defense would mean the same as a hi-sec to null invasion, eventually you run out of things you need to meet your own objectives, this for me was the reason larger fleets increased their efficiency using 1-time cost drones instead of running account ammo. |
Nevil Kincade
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:00:15 -
[194] - Quote
After 3 evenings of pvping in Fuzzysov i already realize that it is a huge content generator and for that i love it ! Thank you for the best patch i've seen in Eve CPP !
I do strongly disagree with the blobbers complaint about harassment by smaller entities. Due to the asymmetric mechanics the attackers/harassers have to put in a multitude of the manhours for entosising that the defenders have to commit. If the Defender is twice the size of the attackers and Needs only half the Manpower when playing it right and still cant hold his space then he doesn't ******* deserve it. Period. Get out of 0.0 blobber garbage. NOW !
Of course the Carebears are crying now who have been hiding behind millions of structure hitpoints for years reducing the game to a ******** boring blob fest with no skill required but social Networking. Of course they got bad at pvp over the years that way. It's only natural if you dont keep excercising. Sov space was always meant as something you had to earn by fighting for it and not as your birthright by inheritance. I see big alliances complaining here who outnumber us anywhere between 2:1 to 10:1 in daily Engagements. If they are not willing to split into smaller groups to contest the different aggressors because of being scared to bear the responsibility of loosing a fight against an entity that specializes into skirmishes IT IS THEIR OWN FAULT if they loose contests for timers.
If anything it is still WAY TO EASY for large alliances to defend sov after Aegis. The only way they can ever loose space is by not showing up for fights. All a numerically superior force would have to do is split up on the different command nodes. I hope that this TEAR FEST will not sway CCP to make any changes. After all this new sov System was proposed, supported and signed off by the leaders of the big alliances beforehand. And now they are crying ... |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
342
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:03:12 -
[195] - Quote
Sapporo Jones wrote:TEST, we held our breath and waited to see what CCP would deliver...
And when we discovered that we would actually have to use our sov AND DEAR GOD defend it against all agressors both large and small you used all that baited breath to wail like infants that defending your sov is something CCP should be doing for you.
Well done!
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:04:44 -
[196] - Quote
Gen Eve wrote:FUZZISOV JUST GOT ROLLED IN AND TEARS ARE FILLING THE BUCKETS!
Many big/massive alliances whining about new sov mechanics. They whining that they can't defend themselves from small groups of people. And their unused space gets attacked. They crying like babies instead of embracing the new system. FUZZ has just started and amount of fun and game content we have has simply skyrocketed 1000% for us.
All these cry-baby egoistic multi-region sov holders see is way to manage other peeps, to force them to pay rent, to make isk isk isk. They ARE the reason CCP changed this game so drastically. FUZZ SOV means who ever has sov, needs to live in it and protect it, as opposed to "safely hold" sov and whoever challenges it, to blob any challenger with blob of peeps and caps/supers.
STOP CRYING AND GET ON BOARD! CCP YOU DOING A GREAT JOB! NERF THE MOON MILK COWS NEXT AND FIX POSES.
LONG LIVE FUZZ SOV!
BEST THING THAT HAPPENED TO EVE IN 10 YEARS!!!
Reading your words, seems to me that you like to see an empty null sec space instead of a full one with many targets. Are you monitorizing the game? Are you aware that peolple are leaving null sec space? Do you think they will come back to take sov? No mate, they dont want the sov, they just want to live in null and they are half of the players, did you know that? Small corps cant just hold sov, they dont want to fight all day long, they dont care about cta-¦s (some of them are f... tired about that), they only want to play a few hours, if they cant do that in null, well, they will do it in hs or low sec, sometimes they go into a wh just for the fun and its done, can you just imagine who will going to lose in the end? Of course, null sec will lose in the end and pvpeers in null will get bored, this is what you are asking for, when you have no targets and nothing to do what are you going to do? Mine? Wait you are not going to mine, CCP are going to give one bot for that, so you have to rat, rat, rat and rat again, of course you can always come to hs kill miners (if there are any at that time) or kill some mission runners until the day you will have nothing to kill, then you will say to yourself that you have been wrong all the time and its time for you to leave the game. Even with dominion sov, people are not going to null just because they cant move their assets due the capital nerf... people want their assets there, not buying new ones, they have their assets.
You realized how many people have left the game since CCP have nerfed capitals and wh-¦s industry and mining? 2 years ago on Europe primetime we had about 54.000 players, now we have at the most 32.000, this sounds good to you? CCP are collecting what he have seeded.
|
Kayi Brixius
MASS A DEATH Mordus Angels
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:06:35 -
[197] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Gott Lieb wrote:Awesome changes! CCP doing it right. It's game mechanics now, stop crying and conform. Sov holders will not be able to hold empty systems that cannot be defended from now. All your tears are about losing surplus profit. A lot of capsuleers now have more fun then ever. And guys, your whining is miserable. Are you going to go back to crying when we get the ADM up to max in Pure Blind so that you have to actually take almost an hour rather than the 10 to 20 minute trolling that your doing presently?
To hold that up as some kind of threat means you're being mislead by the purpose of MOA or any other small alliance. It's never been about the value of that moon, pos, or station to us, it's been about the fight. It's been about undocking the ship and finding a way to make you win or lose something. If you're in MOA or any of other smaller groups, it's never been about how to get rich or to have a titan, if that was the case we would just join you. We are here to play the game and if that means spending 2 hours with an entosis link on an interceptor we will do it, and your friends whining about how easy it is for us to outrun you when you land on us with a Leviathan is fun and worth the effort. Bring us renters in Pure Blind, our new mission will be to send them running with their tails between their legs. We will show up in corms and blast their T2's out of space like we always have.
Welcome back to Null Sec.
"Keep them bubbled til they puke."-Gen Eve |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
342
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:15:48 -
[198] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Eli Stan wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
I'd like to propose some questions to the above alliances: What type of systems have you been defending? How many pilots are typically active in them, what do they do in those systems, and how far do they have to travel in order to mount a defense? Why do you want to retain those systems? What type of systems have you been attacking? What made you want to have Sov in those systems? Your goal should be preventing anything from being reinforced in the first place. If you cannot do that, you do not effectively hold Sov of that system and you deserve to lose it, or get burned out trying to win the capture events. You should stop fighting over those systems you can't hold on to. Getting burned out is your punishment for trying to operate in the Dominion Sov paradigm. Interceptors are perfectly suited for effecting Aegis Sov - because the only Sov they can challenge for is unoccupied Sov, and unoccupied Sov isn't sovereignty at all. If you want to hold on to a system but can't be bothered to have pilots in it during its vulnerability window, you don't deserve to hold Sov there. In NPC null, chasing off a lone Interceptor is incredibly easy. We simply undock. They never stay within 25km, the range of a T1 Entosis. If a hostile Interceptor is Entosing your Outpost, undock. Blap them if they stick around, enjoy the view of the stars for a little bit if fly off and ruin their Entosis cycle. If they're after a TCU or I-hub, simply warp a Navy Vex or Caracal or whatever to it. If this happens in an empty system four jumps away from anybody, you shouldn't have Sov there and it's your own fault you're burning yourself out. You need to adapt. That burnout is Aegis Sov working as intended. And if that Interceptor is bait for a 100-pilot T3 gang on the other side of a wormhole - there's your large fleet fight you're looking for. I do agree that there should be a sort of passive regen of defense index, so that simply going after hostile ships without bothering with your own Entosis ships is a valid defense tactic. That way defenders can put all their pilots into mobile offensive ships if they so desire. This passive regen should not happen if there is even a single node being Entosed by an attacker, so that it does not extend the time of an active attack effort. Yep... We are still cleaning up after domi sovGǪ thousands of unused systems all over eve that had sov the day fozisov kicked in that needs purging of sov as thereGÇÖs no other way of doing it now. People are trying to defend these unused systems for some random resign.. There are no real wars going on. No one is actively trying to take over some one elseGÇÖs space so they can live there. All thatGÇÖs going on at the moment is a clean-up of dead systems and trolling to try and make people fight.
From what im seeing in this whine thread it seems like war has broken out everywhere, you just dont like the style and someone elses fun shouldnt be nerfed just because you dont like it.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Ripblade Falconpunch
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
316
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:22:03 -
[199] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:After 3 evenings of pvping in Fuzzysov i already realize that it is a huge content generator and for that i love it ! Thank you for the best patch i've seen in Eve CPP !
I do strongly disagree with the blobbers complaint about harassment by smaller entities. Due to the asymmetric mechanics the attackers/harassers have to put in a multitude of the manhours for entosising that the defenders have to commit. If the Defender is twice the size of the attackers and Needs only half the Manpower when playing it right and still cant hold his space then he doesn't ******* deserve it. Period. Get out of 0.0 blobber garbage. NOW !
Of course the Carebears are crying now who have been hiding behind millions of structure hitpoints for years reducing the game to a ******** boring blob fest with no skill required but social Networking. Of course they got bad at pvp over the years that way. It's only natural if you dont keep excercising. Sov space was always meant as something you had to earn by fighting for it and not as your birthright by inheritance. I see big alliances complaining here who outnumber us anywhere between 2:1 to 10:1 in daily Engagements. If they are not willing to split into smaller groups to contest the different aggressors because of being scared to bear the responsibility of loosing a fight against an entity that specializes into skirmishes IT IS THEIR OWN FAULT if they loose contests for timers.
If anything it is still WAY TO EASY for large alliances to defend sov after Aegis. The only way they can ever loose space is by not showing up for fights. All a numerically superior force would have to do is split up on the different command nodes. I hope that this TEAR FEST will not sway CCP to make any changes. After all this new sov System was proposed, supported and signed off by the leaders of the big alliances beforehand. And now they are crying ...
Read until the part where someone from Mordus Angels accused somebody else of being bad at PVP. Was laughing to hard for further reading. |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
814
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:30:29 -
[200] - Quote
Kayi Brixius wrote:Falin Whalen wrote:Gott Lieb wrote:Awesome changes! CCP doing it right. It's game mechanics now, stop crying and conform. Sov holders will not be able to hold empty systems that cannot be defended from now. All your tears are about losing surplus profit. A lot of capsuleers now have more fun then ever. And guys, your whining is miserable. Are you going to go back to crying when we get the ADM up to max in Pure Blind so that you have to actually take almost an hour rather than the 10 to 20 minute trolling that your doing presently? To hold that up as some kind of threat means you're being mislead by the purpose of MOA or any other small alliance. It's never been about the value of that moon, pos, or station to us, it's been about the fight. It's been about undocking the ship and finding a way to make you win or lose something. If you're in MOA or any of other smaller groups, it's never been about how to get rich or to have a titan, if that was the case we would just join you. We are here to play the game and if that means spending 2 hours with an entosis link on an interceptor we will do it, and your friends whining about how easy it is for us to outrun you when you land on us with a Leviathan is fun and worth the effort. Bring us renters in Pure Blind, our new mission will be to send them running with their tails between their legs. We will show up in corms and blast their T2's out of space like we always have. Welcome back to Null Sec. "Keep them bubbled til they puke."-Gen Eve http://i.imgur.com/5s4kkZ1.gif
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
|
Viruk Johnny
Trans Secunda Nulli Secunda
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:33:19 -
[201] - Quote
Oh boy, I can't wait until CCP swaps the old POS / outpost structures for the new ones, where you'll be able to entosis your way right through someone's AFK moon mining enterprise. That's going to be some good show.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
344
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:34:38 -
[202] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote:The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game?
Does nullsec think that burn Jita is fun for those burnt to a crisp, does nullsec think miners enjoyed hulkageddon?
Dear God the meter that registers the hypocrisy flowing out of nullsec must be pegged at 100% and straining to go behind even that percentage.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
344
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:39:37 -
[203] - Quote
xxLATVIANxx wrote:I was looking forward to fozzie sov, but last 2 weeks been most boring in 7 years playing eve. Yeah, it ia a lot more fun holding sov you dont use, dont have to defend because of non-agression pacts and calling for highsec nerfs 23/7 because you had nothing better to do with your time, im sure you loved it.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
344
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:45:58 -
[204] - Quote
Johan Civire wrote:Redwyne Vyruk wrote:I, as BOT manager and XWX manager, completely agree on this thread and i hope CCP will hear our voice. You think CCP will listen? Think again. The have already change to game to iphone mode. That interface. Please do not let me started with the rest...
Players whining isnt justification for rolling back game changes and thankfully so.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
344
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:54:15 -
[205] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Kalen Pavle wrote:The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game? Isn't that what it already was? Previously through judicious use of capital ships you could reduce the boredom to mere minutes. Now the boredom is a predetermined amount of orbiting nodes playing world of warships.
Ill reword this so it is more clear:
1. we want old nullsec sov because we cant seem to fight frigates with titans.....to which i say, really, shocking!
2. I dont like actually fighting for my sov unless the fight is one im sure to win.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Crimson Draufgange
Extreme Overkill Inc. Mordus Angels
653
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:54:48 -
[206] - Quote
For all you whiners that don't like fozzie sov:
"HTFU" ~ CCP
I think fozzie sov is one of the best things that has happen'd to this game. ADAPT OR DIE!
|
NovaCat13
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 16:57:48 -
[207] - Quote
Crimson Draufgange wrote:For all you whiners that don't like fozzie sov:
"HTFU" ~ CCP
I think fozzie sov is one of the best things that has happen'd to this game. ADAPT OR DIE!
QFT |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
344
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:03:56 -
[208] - Quote
Nituspar wrote:As an FC that's currently abusing all of these mechanics to our advantage, I fully agree with the need for all these changes and points that Uaxdeath brings up.
Being able to set entire regions on fire and making defenders have to deal with thousands of nodes due to 20-50 trollceptors sent from several regions away, without any intention or commitment to taking the sov we're attacking, is horrible gameplay for everyone involved. It just happens to be 5-10 times more horrible for the defender than it is for the attacker.
The system is currently extremely broken, and the current consensus between a lot of groups seems to be that the best way to deal with Fozziesov in its current state is to not care about it at all.
You use the loaded word abusing when what is actually occurring is you are using fair game mechanics to make life uncomfortable for another sov. as you should.
You are not committed to taking their space and i believe you but your implication that all people using this system think as you do is fallacious since you do not know their designs.
The current consensus you are speaking of is coming from the very groups this system was intended to upset and the system is doing just that, thanks for pointing that out.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
814
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:04:58 -
[209] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:xxLATVIANxx wrote:I was looking forward to fozzie sov, but last 2 weeks been most boring in 7 years playing eve. Yeah, it ia a lot more fun holding sov you dont use, dont have to defend because of non-agression pacts and calling for highsec nerfs 23/7 because you had nothing better to do with your time, im sure you loved it. You find it sour, or bitter, I find it sweet.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Ninjafaq
MASS A DEATH Mordus Angels
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:06:07 -
[210] - Quote
Fozziesov is the best thing happened in Eve for a long time. Finally sov alliances get to really defend their space and mostly the space they don't use. |
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
349
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:07:13 -
[211] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote:Tappits wrote:Kalen Pavle wrote:The fundamental problem of fozziesov is as follows:
It's not fun. It's not fun to attack a 1x system. It's not fun to attack a 6x system. It's not fun to defend any system.
This is a game. It should be fun. Instead I spend my time doing sov related stuff playing other games. Do you really want a game where the primary nullsec experience is alt-tabbing and playing another game? that will not happen if you stop attacking empty space. even a 6x system is now quicker to take than in domi sov... its just your trying to use domi sov tactics and ships to do it. Except we're not. Orbiting nodes on alts is not fun. Orbiting them on mains is less fun. It's only quicker when you consider the additional timer. Actual time commitments are immensely longer than in dominion sov. So you are having to fight, sounds good keep up the good work!
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
349
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:12:26 -
[212] - Quote
Zappity wrote:It seems to be promoting skirmishes but not battles. I would be concerned about the missing half of the equation if I was CCP. What is keeping you from using fozziesov as a tool to engage sov holders in battle, nothing????
I think we have found the problem.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
353
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:27:09 -
[213] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:davet517 wrote:Things will be fine when people get used to the new sov equation. The essential problem is that people have delusions of old grandeur, when an entity that could ... ... have fleet battles, will now have silly little gang / solo spats that could be better done in Low Sec if that is your style of playing the game. Who said you have to idly sit back and do nothing with the new game mechanics, who insists you cannot attack your neighbor? You should have had to always defend what you have and steal your neighbors space.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
353
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:39:52 -
[214] - Quote
Nituspar wrote:Shonion wrote:Nituspar wrote:As an FC that's currently abusing all of these mechanics to our advantage, I fully agree with the need for all these changes and points that Uaxdeath brings up.
Being able to set entire regions on fire and making defenders have to deal with thousands of nodes due to 20-50 trollceptors sent from several regions away, without any intention or commitment to taking the sov we're attacking, is horrible gameplay for everyone involved. It just happens to be 5-10 times more horrible for the defender than it is for the attacker.
The system is currently extremely broken, and the current consensus between a lot of groups seems to be that the best way to deal with Fozziesov in its current state is to not care about it at all. You wouldn't be able to do that if they live there. Its works as intend. You can say its not sweet, but still work as planned from my view. Just try to entosis some CFC systems where ppl live around, you will see the difference comparing with the south rus empty space. Occupancy bonuses are something I've always been advocating for, just beacuse that's a facet of the current system doesn't mean the system as a whole isn't utterly flawed and designed for one side of any sov conflict to bore the other one to tears without any kind of meaningful fleet engagements ever happening, which is honestly the biggest problem with Fozziesov's design. There's also quite a difference between having decent defensive bonuses tied to occupancy and using your space, and any systems you don't mine or rat in for a few weeks to be able to be burned down by a handful of people in trollceptors at almost any given time. If you have not been there for a few weeks then it us time to get a group in there that will use it daily, working as intended.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
353
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:47:23 -
[215] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Throwing the gold apple in, "You don't use it for mining and ratting, so you are not using it and deserve to lose it. This makes it easy for small alliances to get some space," seems to be the general counter argument.
1) Said many times, there is more than those two ways to use systems. 2) Easy into space, easy out. These systems are honey traps and make delicious snacks for the huge estabilished alliances to farm and feed upon.
This is not some amazing equality mechanics, it is annoying for defenders who are griefed and it is devastatingly crushing for the naive. Since nullsec has used griefing as you call it in things like burn jita, that you now claim griefing is bad gaming would be hilarious if it werent so pathetic.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16808
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:53:59 -
[216] - Quote
Karer II wrote:So. I saw two of the most frequent opinions: 1) you crying about your rent/RMT empire 2) you doing it wrong, adapt.
Well, let's see in facts.
Fact #1. Only one who can say "they doing RMT". This is CCP. If it says someone else, it's just unsubstantiated allegations. As coCEO I spend for my alliance 200$ per month for characters, hosting, licences and other stuff. I have good job and I don't need RMT.
You forgot to address the point that you're largescale renters.
Here, I gave you anoher chance to do so.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2311
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 17:58:02 -
[217] - Quote
Ninjafaq wrote:Fozziesov is the best thing happened in Eve for a long time. Finally sov alliances get to really defend their space and mostly the space they don't use.
Yeah, troll ceptors avoiding trollceptors while trollceptors avoid trollceptors and oops, it's over already! Let's wait for the next vulnerability window.
It's not fun, not for the attacker and not for the defender.
I remember someone saying that trollceptors were not going to be a thing and here we are, trollceptoring the **** and will to log in out of each other :D |
Oreiuus
Dead's Prostitutes The Bastion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 18:08:53 -
[218] - Quote
well...
I want the command node number decreased and/or you want an automatic win on uncontested timers. |
Ninjafaq
MASS A DEATH Mordus Angels
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 18:12:59 -
[219] - Quote
Kiandoshia wrote:Ninjafaq wrote:Fozziesov is the best thing happened in Eve for a long time. Finally sov alliances get to really defend their space and mostly the space they don't use. Yeah, troll ceptors avoiding trollceptors while trollceptors avoid trollceptors and oops, it's over already! Let's wait for the next vulnerability window. It's not fun, not for the attacker and not for the defender. I remember someone saying that trollceptors were not going to be a thing and here we are, trollceptoring the **** and will to log in out of each other :D
if you ever participated in fozziesov ops you'd know that cepters used only for scouting... https://securecdn.disqus.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/552/2435/original.jpg |
Karer II
Legion of xXDEATHXx Support Legion of xXDEATHXx
348
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 18:35:55 -
[220] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Karer II wrote:So. I saw two of the most frequent opinions: 1) you crying about your rent/RMT empire 2) you doing it wrong, adapt.
Well, let's see in facts.
Fact #1. Only one who can say "they doing RMT". This is CCP. If it says someone else, it's just unsubstantiated allegations. As coCEO I spend for my alliance 200$ per month for characters, hosting, licences and other stuff. I have good job and I don't need RMT.
You forgot to address the point that you're largescale renters. Here, I gave you anoher chance to do so.
Give yourself chance to read whole post. |
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 18:58:46 -
[221] - Quote
Kalen Pavle wrote: Except we're not. Orbiting nodes on alts is not fun. Orbiting them on mains is less fun. It's only quicker when you consider the additional timer. Actual time commitments are immensely longer than in dominion sov.
Then don't live in space you actually have to defend if you don't want to...defend it...
There are places called low sec and high sec where you don't need to commit resources to defend space. Moving to null should be a conscious choice to put in effort to defend space.
How hard is it to orbit a node with an alt, and send out the call if someone shows up? Or better, use it as a recruiting effort, using rookies as scouts/defenders.
Don't whine when mechanics change, get creative and adapt to it. That's what EVE is about at the heart of it. Just because this is disrupting the massively safe blue doughnut doesn't mean you shouldn't adapt. |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2311
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 19:01:49 -
[222] - Quote
Ninjafaq wrote:Kiandoshia wrote:Ninjafaq wrote:Fozziesov is the best thing happened in Eve for a long time. Finally sov alliances get to really defend their space and mostly the space they don't use. Yeah, troll ceptors avoiding trollceptors while trollceptors avoid trollceptors and oops, it's over already! Let's wait for the next vulnerability window. It's not fun, not for the attacker and not for the defender. I remember someone saying that trollceptors were not going to be a thing and here we are, trollceptoring the **** and will to log in out of each other :D if you ever participated in fozziesov ops you'd know that cepters used only for scouting... https://securecdn.disqus.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/552/2435/original.jpg
I have and they weren't =( |
Feris
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 19:53:41 -
[223] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Introduction We are the people of nullsec! Living for years in this epic and massively rich in conflict environment, we set aside our differences to join forces against destructive actions from CCP against sovereignty mechanics. The new game mechanics, called by many fozziesov, turned out to be the greatest discrimination against nullsec dwellers in all of EVE Online history. This untested release shouldnGÇÖt build the platform for life in 0.0 for the most organized, united and active part of New Eden. Alliance leaders, who signed this statement, have collected enormous amount of proof that confirms this statement. We, like no one else, can see that this release leads to stagnation in 0.0 and death to nullsec. Only in a short while since the release, we have collected a record amount of negative opinions about the new sov. We combined our strengths and analyzed, what does it mean to live in fozziesov for the nullsec people. Our opinion is - this game mechanics needs to be tweaked and the shortest time possible. Problems and suggestions Problem: fozziesov in its current state critically reduces chances for large scale fights, fights that significantly separate EVE Online from its competitors. Large amount of spawned beacons, motivates sides to not engage, but to hunt down ships fitted with entosis link. In one of those cases, to defend off 2 structures players spent 6 hours of game time, most of which was spent jumping through gates and warping around in systems. Pilots who took part in all of this were rewarded with exhaustion and emptiness, instead of glory from being victorious and enjoyment from the overall process. Besides that, fleet commanding and fleet bonus structure took a hit as well. We want massive fights, not cockroach races. Solution: reduction of beacons (nodes) , to about 1-3 per system, which are located next to a contested structure. Problem: low skill requirement practically affirms harassment towards any sov owner. While new player harassment is subject to a support ticket. Roaming fleets or interceptors shouldnGÇÖt be able to affect sovereignty. The game mechanics shouldn't be a tool to force exhausting actions upon players - a single ship can force entire alliance of players to take part in tiresome and hollow defence. Currently the entosis link module is a tool for trolls, not a key to sovereignty contest. Solution: reduce the amount of tactics that create invulnerable situations, which are currently based on shipGÇÖs speed. Entosis module should reduce speed dramatically, up to 0 m/s. Problem: CCP didnGÇÖt give the right interface tools for players to engage in sov-wars, every aspect of ever changing situation has to be memorized, written down somewhere and kept up to date. This results in quick exhaustion and aggravation towards the game instead of enjoyment. Solution: introduction of a new sov window, similar to watchlist, that displays information about structures/nodes that are being defended or attacked using entosis module, with pilot's nickname, solar system, structure id and progress. Problem: fozziesov has a potential exploit in relation to Entosis Link II - using this module allows attackers to do a quick 2 minute cycle, which sets structure vulnerable, regardless of vulnerability period or until the status of vulnerable structure becomes known to its owner. Vulnerable structure can be noticed after a close inspection. This aspect of game mechanics negates vulnerability period. Solution: remove vulnerability from such structures at the the end of the vulnerability period, but allow owners to entosis structure back up. If structure was partially attacked, it should be clearly visible. Problem: structure that exits reinforce timer, doesnGÇÖt regenerate back, which in the old game mechanics served as a defensive mechanism against sov trolling. Attacked systems spam node beacons, which can last forever, which is discrimination against sovereignty owners - they must defend their space despite the fact that no one will show up to contest it. Solution: a new type of status - defended. If the nodes are not being captured by any attackers during contested campaign for a period of time dependent of defence index, then structures change from contested to defended. Problem: notifications about attack contain no useful information except the fact of aggression (and system). Solution to this should be inclusion of information about the system, structures and nicknames of attackers. Command node names are too long, which obstructs quick overview of the system nodes and forces to expand overview window to 1/4 of the screen, just to see the full list of nodes. Solution: to use abbreviations TCU, iHUB, Station and remove "command" from the name. Problem: in Dominion sov, alliances had means to transfer sov between them, however long and inconvenient it was. In the new sov, this ability was removed, which is ridiculous for a sci-fi game. Solution: allow executor corporations to transfer remotely structures via listed sov structures context menu, similar in the way it is now with the customs offices. Conclusion Fozziesov is currently a long, exhausting and inconvenient sovereignty warfare model. Sovereignty is absolutely unprotected against sov trolling. This game mechanics stimulates unintended usage. This situation can no longer exist in its current state. We are highly determined and if all our demands and solutions are not addressed in a week's time, we reserve the right to fight back for our game time and fun, which we were stripped off by the new game mechanics.
OMG, Fozziesov is realy working. Bring some mops for all these tears. |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1027
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 00:45:57 -
[224] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Or better, use it as a recruiting effort, using rookies as scouts/defenders.
Did you really just suggest we stick new players in ships orbiting laser nodes?
What the hell is wrong with you?
Do you actually want to keep new players in this game? |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2311
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 01:20:48 -
[225] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Sonya Corvinus wrote:Or better, use it as a recruiting effort, using rookies as scouts/defenders.
Did you really just suggest we stick new players in ships orbiting laser nodes? What the hell is wrong with you? Do you actually want to keep new players in this game?
A lot of new players do this kind of thing on their own and a frightening number of them stick with it and end up bitter and annoyed with making ISKies ^^ |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3144
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 02:17:42 -
[226] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Icycle wrote:
I beg to differ. Go into pure blind and see. You will be hard pressed to find many CFC's. Fade , Tribute has also alot of systems as well as space around Venal. A lot of unused systems or has very little people in system. The only real region that get alot of use is Deklein and Branch. Also its in the ratting statistics! Which also prove my point. I know where I live after all I kill in it every day and do several roams.
I too can cherry pick data points.... Let me see, Goonswarm: 13954/103 = 135.5 pilots/system FCON: 4896/80 = 61.2 pilots/system Co2: 2857/34 = 84 pilots/system Get Off My Lawn: = 2121/53 = 40 pilots/system EXE: 1221/14 = 87 pilots/system Compare this too Legion of Death, Shadow of Death, Brothers of Tangra and we see vastly smaller numbers as in the teens or even single digits for Shadow of Death. Does this mean that each and every system in Deklein will have 135.5 pilots in it? No, it's an average. Some will have more, some less. Keeping in mind that not all of them will be logged in at once either. So now we know why some alliances are struggling with Fozziesov. I'd say working as intended (note: I'm not saying it is good or bad here, but if the intent was to free up unused systems...well, sounds like it is going to happen one way or the other....). If you insist on remaining as an "elite and exclusive alliance" and also insist on holding a large number of systems....you are going to be very busy going forward in game. This information was presented earlier too. you are repeating what i already mentioned abov about the drone region having the largest unoccupied space. CFC still has lot of space unoccupied and that forces them to do vast jumps. If it wasnt they will not be coming from declein+branch to pure blind. Wether the space is good or bad it does not make a difference. You do not live in pure blind so makes it useless having to defend it. If you want to keep them fine, more entosis for me, but dont whine then when you got to do a lot of jumps to defend. Make up your mind. You cant have everything favouring your side. You got to make a choice and select what space you want to keep. And if the space is too far, then it may not be to the best interest to protect specially if you dont live in it. Which is my point. I love gorrilla warfare and entosing is a really big plus for us. Entosis has really given birth to gorrilla warfare, which i think its fantastic. I feel like we are going back to the old days of small numbers war which is very opposite to the piling up in a system of as many people as possible to make sure they have loaded the grid first and obtain the advantage that way and win. Large battle will happen no matter what.
The problem is the numbers don't match your claims. Goons rank 35th out of all sov holding alliances in terms of pilots/system. The top 10 are decent sized alliances many of us know who hold just a few systems (1-4) in NS like Pandemic Legion, Nulli Secunda, and NC.
If you were to, you know, actually look at the data, you'd see that those alliances that have a high number of pilots/system seem to be weathering the initial phases of Fozziesov reasonably well. Those who do not post threadnaughts on the forums.
Edit: Also, the CFC/Imperium was one of the few coalitions to actually try and adapt Fozziesov prior to Fozziesov hitting the game. They dropped quite a bit of sov and reshuffled things around. The signatories of this petition on the other hand sat on their hands and did nothing.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3144
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 02:21:45 -
[227] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:I too can cherry pick data points....
Let me see,
Goonswarm: 13954/103 = 135.5 pilots/system FCON: 4896/80 = 61.2 pilots/system Co2: 2857/34 = 84 pilots/system Get Off My Lawn: = 2121/53 = 40 pilots/system EXE: 1221/14 = 87 pilots/system
Compare this too Legion of Death, Shadow of Death, Brothers of Tangra and we see vastly smaller numbers as in the teens or even single digits for Shadow of Death. You should hang out with RU community sometimes. If someone thought that "textbook goon" had a low opinion on average "pubbie", he'd have a lot to re-evaluate after the experience. And you guys are suggesting them to not just tolerate, but recruit such people. Jokes on you.
Adapt or die...guess we know what will happen to the Russians then.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
356
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 03:29:07 -
[228] - Quote
Kiandoshia wrote:Ninjafaq wrote:Fozziesov is the best thing happened in Eve for a long time. Finally sov alliances get to really defend their space and mostly the space they don't use. Yeah, troll ceptors avoiding trollceptors while trollceptors avoid trollceptors and oops, it's over already! Let's wait for the next vulnerability window. It's not fun, not for the attacker and not for the defender. I remember someone saying that trollceptors were not going to be a thing and here we are, trollceptoring the **** and will to log in out of each other :D
So you are claiming that the people attacking arent having fun, come on they wouldnt do it if they didnt.
The person not having fun is the person being agressed but that is the case in about 99% of all combat in EVE, so suck it up and either do or dont, your CHOICE, word emphasized because that is what EVE is about.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6736
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 04:05:18 -
[229] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Barrogh Habalu wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:I too can cherry pick data points....
Let me see,
Goonswarm: 13954/103 = 135.5 pilots/system FCON: 4896/80 = 61.2 pilots/system Co2: 2857/34 = 84 pilots/system Get Off My Lawn: = 2121/53 = 40 pilots/system EXE: 1221/14 = 87 pilots/system
Compare this too Legion of Death, Shadow of Death, Brothers of Tangra and we see vastly smaller numbers as in the teens or even single digits for Shadow of Death. You should hang out with RU community sometimes. If someone thought that "textbook goon" had a low opinion on average "pubbie", he'd have a lot to re-evaluate after the experience. And you guys are suggesting them to not just tolerate, but recruit such people. Jokes on you. Adapt or die...guess we know what will happen to the Russians then. They'll be fine because the hordes from highsec only care to gun for us
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
356
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 05:22:21 -
[230] - Quote
Silvia Heart wrote:Shonion wrote:It is working as intend.
There are no sov wars ongoing in EVE or just some small scale local fights for not much important systems or taking space undefended. Almost 3 weeks spent in the new system, and its visilbe, that if you not live in your space, your defense multiplier will be close to 1 and you can easily lost the system. You shouldn't own regions without manpower and ppl living out there. Thats the point.
As someone already mentioned earlier, the new system prefer the preventing defense, so if you live there, your defens multiplier is high then troll ceptors will need 60 mins for reinforce anything in a 3 hour window and your primary interest to defend yous space preventively, so kill that damn ceptor.
Well if you not live there, you deserve to lose that space... the old style renter empires are over. Goons already adapting instead of typing wall of text on forum. This is funny coming from someone who has no sov and does nothing but fly troll ceptors. We've tried fighting nulli, all we've found is they run away even faster then darkeshi. I have nothing really against the idea of fozzie sov but its just so broken and lopsided. My suggestions for fixing it (everyone who has sov has some). -Hard cap the speed of etosis ships, T1 1000m/s T2 1500m/s -If no nodes are being attacked the defender gets 5% back ever hour. Done fixed, maybe then we'll get some fights out of this joke instead of experiencing world of cowards.
I read this as: I want CCP to nerf legitimate fighting tactics because im grossly incompetent and cant kill anything moving faster than 1500m/s.
Did i get that right?
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
359
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 05:40:51 -
[231] - Quote
Gimme Sake wrote: Games should be fun, not a love hate relationship. If games stop being fun they become something we try to get detached from and relax: REALITY. Reality with the daily mundane grind and eventual cubicle romance decorated with post-it sentimental reminders to buy toilet paper on the way back home. And so it goes Eve online seems more and more like a failing marriage. A lot of effort put into it but... ya know. Yeah I know Eve is real but... ya know. Alt tabbing to play another game while playing a game is... ya know... adultery. CCP better not ask what other people are playing while alt tabbing, might find out they're being cheated with Farmville... ya know...
HI !
Im EVE i guess we never met before, well things are going to be tough for you if you keep clinging to your current belief about how i intend to treat you !
*punches you in the crotch*
Is it clearer now?
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
555
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 07:20:26 -
[232] - Quote
CCP has gone and pissed off the Russians. They'll have only themselves to blame when they start receiving packages laced with rare radioactive isotopes. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
1366
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 07:36:42 -
[233] - Quote
Feris wrote:OMG, Fozziesov is realy working. Bring some mops for all these tears. pretty much, although it does seem to me a few bits could use some polish. Some parts that shouldn't be annoying are way too annoying. And other aspects are no where near annoying enough. Troll ceptors are boring, troll devs are better
@ChainsawPlankto
|
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
3170
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 07:40:43 -
[234] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:CCP has gone and pissed off the Russians. They'll have only themselves to blame when they start receiving packages laced with rare radioactive isotopes.
So what?No more free wodka at CCP office ?
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
The Scope Gallente Federation
1889
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 07:55:37 -
[235] - Quote
Can we hold the tears until phase three launches guys?
Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
23
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 08:42:05 -
[236] - Quote
Release the space you dont live in Pure Blind. Dont and suffer the consequences coming to protect them. And stop whining for trying to protect space you dont live in. Its your fault! |
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1322
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 08:56:41 -
[237] - Quote
Sapporo Jones wrote:We tend to see one or two people in interceptors or frigs/dessies who run the second you form to defend. There are times when you see 4 person omen navy fleets and you fight them, there are no real skirmishes anymore over sov as far as I can tell. Gone are the large fleet battles that we came to nullsec for in the first place.
thats because you tend to just blob anything that comes to fight to hell and back
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
149
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 09:57:56 -
[238] - Quote
So yesterday someone tried to entosis a PL TCU in a 1x system. I was able to burn to the system in a inti get on grid to see itGÇÖs a 4k/s vaga 200km off.. I burn at him and he burns awayGǪ he then left and never came back. Someone un-entisised the tcu and we went home.
Op success, thatGÇÖs how you defend in fozzie sov boys and girls.
|
Nituspar
Shiva Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 10:16:26 -
[239] - Quote
Tappits wrote:So yesterday someone tried to entosis a PL TCU in a 1x system. I was able to burn to the system in a inti get on grid to see itGÇÖs a 4k/s vaga 200km off.. I burn at him and he burns awayGǪ he then left and never came back. Someone un-entisised the tcu and we went home.
Op success, thatGÇÖs how you defend in fozzie sov boys and girls.
Now if you could just repeat this 50-1000 times, and write the next post accurately describing the amount of fun you had doing this from op 35 onwards. I think we'd all be a bit more enlightened on why a system that seems to promote sovlasering structures without any conflict being necessary, or fights occurring possibly being a bit flawed.
Bonus points for alarmclocking for a chase or two, since most reinforces will usually be done at the worst possible timezone for you the second you let your indexes slip. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
149
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 10:31:19 -
[240] - Quote
Nituspar wrote:Tappits wrote:So yesterday someone tried to entosis a PL TCU in a 1x system. I was able to burn to the system in a inti get on grid to see itGÇÖs a 4k/s vaga 200km off.. I burn at him and he burns awayGǪ he then left and never came back. Someone un-entisised the tcu and we went home.
Op success, thatGÇÖs how you defend in fozzie sov boys and girls.
Now if you could just repeat this 50-1000 times, and write the next post accurately describing the amount of fun you had doing this from op 35 onwards. I think we'd all be a bit more enlightened on why a system that seems to promote sovlasering structures without any conflict being necessary, or fights occurring possibly being a bit flawed. Bonus points for alarmclocking for a chase or two, since most reinforces will usually be done at the worst possible timezone for you the second you let your indexes slip.
Or we could just let the guy entosis it and then never bother going to the system because the lone guy will never come back to do 2-3h of work on something in a system no one cares about all while us not loosing the benefit of the sov in the 1st place.
Yep yep i think we will do that. I was just pointing out its super easy to get to a system and stop some one entosising and if some one was actively ratting or mining in there it would be even easier. |
|
Silvia Heart
Black Aces I N F A M O U S
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 11:16:23 -
[241] - Quote
Nituspar wrote:Tappits wrote:So yesterday someone tried to entosis a PL TCU in a 1x system. I was able to burn to the system in a inti get on grid to see itGÇÖs a 4k/s vaga 200km off.. I burn at him and he burns awayGǪ he then left and never came back. Someone un-entisised the tcu and we went home.
Op success, thatGÇÖs how you defend in fozzie sov boys and girls.
Now if you could just repeat this 50-1000 times, and write the next post accurately describing the amount of fun you had doing this from op 35 onwards. I think we'd all be a bit more enlightened on why a system that seems to promote sovlasering structures without any conflict being necessary, or fights occurring possibly being a bit flawed. Bonus points for alarmclocking for a chase or two, since most reinforces will usually be done at the worst possible timezone for you the second you let your indexes slip.
This guys speaks the truth, there's a massive difference between scaring away one random etosis troll and trying to fend of a persistent group of them that keep on coming back at the worst times.
We both know this because he's the troll and i am on the receiving end. Its not fun, its extremely frustrating and again we get almost no fights. He has gotten a few good kills but considering everything i wouldn't say its worth doing for the occasional kill and getting kills because your enemies are falling asleep and be driven mad by all the RNG timers and massively time consuming nodes is not good for the game in the long term. |
Crystalline Entity
Outdated Host Productions Mortum Ravagers
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 12:22:06 -
[242] - Quote
As corporation recruiter for Mortum Ravagers I have to say.
lol nerds.. come to lowsec and fight like real men. |
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1322
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 12:24:17 -
[243] - Quote
Crystalline Entity wrote:As corporation recruiter for Mortum Ravagers I have to say.
lol nerds.. come to lowsec and fight like real men.
your killboard says you have been fighting in null....
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Crystalline Entity
Outdated Host Productions Mortum Ravagers
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 12:36:54 -
[244] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Crystalline Entity wrote:As corporation recruiter for Mortum Ravagers I have to say.
lol nerds.. come to lowsec and fight like real men. your killboard says you have been fighting in null....
yeah we roam there occasionally tbh, merlin roams ftw!
|
Billy Bojangle
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 12:38:00 -
[245] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:They'll be fine because the hordes from highsec only care to gun for us
How unfortunate. |
Malus Maricadie
Ultimatum. The Bastion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 12:51:51 -
[246] - Quote
they need to **** can fozzie, what fun is a game that you don't have to earn your accomplishments. So now for all of us that put the time and work into grinding standings, Sov and training cap lvl ships turns out to be just a waste of time. Sadly world of ships is more like eve was in the good old days before fozzie screwed it up!!!! |
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 12:55:55 -
[247] - Quote
Malus Maricadie wrote:they need to **** can fozzie, what fun is a game that you don't have to earn your accomplishments. So now for all of us that put the time and work into grinding standings, Sov and training cap lvl ships turns out to be just a waste of time. Sadly world of ships is more like eve was in the good old days before fozzie screwed it up!!!! You've only yourself to blame for not using Capital ships you've trained for. Nobody forces you to stay docked.
|
Nashall Khan
Dead's Prostitutes The Bastion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 13:38:04 -
[248] - Quote
well...
I want the command node number decreased and/or want an automatic win on uncontested timers. |
BrundleMeth
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
453
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 14:24:03 -
[249] - Quote
1). CCP obviously doesn't care. Or they wouldn't have done it.
2). I have no doubt they will not fix this.
3). I've been watching all my favorite ships get nerfed into junk for 2 years now. Complain and people call you names and tell you to adapt.
I still like EVE...but am well past the point of caring now if it simply dies off. I've gone from 9 accounts down to 2 all were paid for with cash. I laugh at the emails I get asking me to come back with these old accounts. 2 accounts are ok for me for now. Maybe some day, things will go back the other way. I really hope so.... |
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
22
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 14:27:48 -
[250] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote: Did you really just suggest we stick new players in ships orbiting laser nodes?
What the hell is wrong with you?
Do you actually want to keep new players in this game?
Yes. yes I did. I did nothing but scout trading routes for a null alliance after two weeks from starting. The excitement of being part of something that massive was the only thing that kept me in the game.
What would you rather them do? Get 50 mil in thank you ISK for doing that (a stupidly big amount for a week old player), while chatting with experienced vets learning about the game, or AFK mine in a venture while watching netflix and end up quitting?
Have you played EVE before?
Also, what's keeping you from having an alt orbit that node while alt-tabbed? I have two alts doing similar things 100% of the time I'm playing. |
|
UAxDEATH
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
802
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 14:37:27 -
[251] - Quote
More alliance leaders signed off on that petition Those who sign it, and I expect more will sign it. Thank you for your support. |
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 14:41:05 -
[252] - Quote
If people really care about what they are saying, is to easy to show them that they are wrong and the players dosent want:
1 - This new sov 2 - Capital nerfs 3 - Ship rebalance all the time 4 - Skins and clothes
For that you can just simply make 2 things. 1 - Retreat to low sec and disconnect all the toons and dont pay the subscription or dont buy the plex. 2 - Create new toons for free until they give players what players want.
Its very simple indeed. with new toons you can always make some rookie pvp in low and get some fun.
Dont bother with the systems that you are lefting behind, you can always back there, whoever take sov there, cant hold the sov for too long or if they are atacked. I assume i will do it with you despite i-¦m in hs and low if you all choose to do it.
|
Billy Bojangle
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 14:57:47 -
[253] - Quote
Yes, the real "protest," here would be throwing one's sov in the dumpster and doing something else until such time as CCP took notice, but you will observe that none of the whinging chaps here are interested in that. They've invested much time and effort into sov ala dominion, so I can't say that I blame them; however, nobody is going to take notice of the forum petition when nullsec looks almost identical to the empires that existed prior to it's rollout.
Also, "I don't like it, because it's not fun," is a really ironic argument coming from coalitions of English and Russian speakers who literally carved their empires out by making the game as unfun as possible for their enemies. That's always been a key factor in sov warfare and always will be. The only major difference now is who has the upper hand.
I don't know what's more amusing here: The fact that the game's largest coalitions feel the need to bleet about how un-fun it is to retain control over vast swathes of space or the fact that not terribly many years ago those in control of said coalitions would have been thrilled at this chance to troll the **** out of their larger enemies. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
196
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:02:47 -
[254] - Quote
I don't generally fly in nullsec but it does still seem like the null-sec community are still bored ****less and are using a campaign of 'harassment' (Note this is the OPs description of the activity.) on the high sec freight routes. When this will end I have no idea. It doesn't personally affect me either but it does, like 'FozzieSov', apparently **** off a lot of people as well.
Pot calling the kettle black is the shortened version of the above comment.
There seems to be a fascination with increased ship speed as well for quite a while. Some of the incursion communities have embraced this fully forsaking tank for vastly increased warp speed. The mind boggles......... . I get the lore implication in that we are heading to an end game where, probably alliances, in null-sec will be able to build there own jump gates to explore new regions of space. But it does seem like the speed thing has gone a little to far now.
I remember a long time ago there were ideas thrown about to encourage more pilots to populate null-sec via systems with special environmental effects to give them a boost or some kind of protection from just having their skulls smashed against a brick wall. I'm not sure if the new system will enable this to happen or not ?
|
Altaen
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
125
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:12:30 -
[255] - Quote
Active PVP Pilots Per System Report for those that signed this petition
HARD Alliance - 2.5 Brothers of Tangra - 0.45 Synergy of Steel - 5.5 Triumvirate. - 6.2 SOLAR Fleet - 0.97 Dream Fleet - 0.66 Soviet-Union - 1.8 Infinity Space. - 17 Advent of Fate - 12.4 Legion of xXDEATHXx - 2.6 The Afterlife. - 5.8 Shadow of xXDEATHXx - 0.5 Gentlemen's.Club - 3.4 The Blood Covenant - 3.9 RAZOR - 10.5
For comparison sake, GSF, by all accounts one of the most organized and efficient alliances in EVE, has 14.5 (Was 17 a few days ago, either they picked up sov or lost some active PVP pilots).
Infinity Space. is a huge outlier here. A quick review suggests that they are closely tied to xXDEATGXx and likely felt some pressure to add a number to the list for their masters. Other than them, these numbers are pathetic, and it's no wonder you don't like the new system, it was designed for you.
This is occupancy-based sov. Occupy or let it fall.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1727
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:16:19 -
[256] - Quote
Altaen wrote:Active PVP Pilots Per System Report for those that signed this petition
HARD Alliance - 2.5 Brothers of Tangra - 0.45 Synergy of Steel - 5.5 Triumvirate. - 6.2 SOLAR Fleet - 0.97 Dream Fleet - 0.66 Soviet-Union - 1.8 Infinity Space. - 17 Advent of Fate - 12.4 Legion of xXDEATHXx - 2.6 The Afterlife. - 5.8 Shadow of xXDEATHXx - 0.5 Gentlemen's.Club - 3.4 The Blood Covenant - 3.9 RAZOR - 10.5
For comparison sake, GSF, by all accounts one of the most organized and efficient alliances in EVE, has 14.5 (Was 17 a few days ago, either they picked up sov or lost some active PVP pilots).
Infinity Space. is a huge outlier here. A quick review suggests that they are closely tied to xXDEATHXx and likely felt some pressure to add a number to the list for their masters. Other than them, these numbers are pathetic, and it's no wonder you don't like the new system, it was designed for you.
This is occupancy-based sov. Occupy or let it fall.
Totally not empty quoting.
Nosir.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3162
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:29:29 -
[257] - Quote
Billy Bojangle wrote:Yes, the real "protest," here would be throwing one's sov in the dumpster and doing something else until such time as CCP took notice, but you will observe that none of the whinging chaps here are interested in that. They've invested much time and effort into sov ala dominion, so I can't say that I blame them; however, nobody is going to take notice of the forum petition when nullsec looks almost identical to the empires that existed prior to it's rollout.
Also, "I don't like it, because it's not fun," is a really ironic argument coming from coalitions of English and Russian speakers who literally carved their empires out by making the game as unfun as possible for their enemies. That's always been a key factor in sov warfare and always will be. The only major difference now is who has the upper hand.
I don't know what's more amusing here: The fact that the game's largest coalitions feel the need to bleet about how un-fun it is to retain control over vast swathes of space or the fact that not terribly many years ago those in control of said coalitions would have been thrilled at this chance to troll the **** out of their larger enemies.
There is a difference between when players make decisions (tactical and strategic) to try an bore their enemy to death vs. CCP making the gaming deathly boring....
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:32:28 -
[258] - Quote
I agree with the broad sentiments outlined by UAxDeath here.
On twitter @siggonK
|
Billy Bojangle
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:42:20 -
[259] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote: There is a difference between when players make decisions (tactical and strategic) to try an bore their enemy to death vs. CCP making the gaming deathly boring....
Watching a sov structure melt under the combined firepower of a well-endowed super fleet is objectively less involved, by number of players sat at the keyboard doing something, than chasing troll ceptors. It's the slug matches that occur in between that we log in for. There's really no way to make provoking a sov. battle "fun, " because it's always going to be about setting up a timer and waiting for the actual fun bit later.
This whole argument around how fun entosis jazz isn't does not hold water. The lack of fun comes from the unwillingness of players to fight and that doesn't come from their space being alight 23/7, it comes from the entrenched entitlement of bloc leadership who don't want people having fun, they just want to retain or expand their space holdings. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:03:37 -
[260] - Quote
I dont see the problem with what you call a "troll ceptor" I mean you cant fit a Tech II entosis on a ceptor. So this is out of the question.
You can however fit a Tech I into a ceptor. But ceptor can only entosis within 25km. So its really easy to deal what you call a "troll ceptor". 1- You can damp them and they will have to start the process again from scratch. Very easy. 2- ECM them and they will have to start the process again from scratch. Very easy. 3- Kill it. Get a fast ship and scram. The end. Easy. 4- You can scram it with an arazu. The end. Very Easy. 5- Also it cannot warp so all it can do is try and out run you. Get a fast ship and hunt it down. Easy.
This does not have to be as hard as quantum mechanics. Dont over think it. Or are you asking for it to be sitting still so that you can always kill it just like you would with a cheap cyno? If so, you are not suppose to be able to kill everything you happen to see. The target is suppose to have a chance of getting out. |
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
368
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:37:20 -
[261] - Quote
Nituspar wrote: ....the second you let your indexes slip.
So, you are not utilizing the system and in fozziesov when you dont use a system it becomes difficult to hold.
Thank you for the eloquent definition of, "working as intended".
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Fatal pewpew
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:39:11 -
[262] - Quote
I think we need to see further balance changes.
Entities like MOA still cant take sov and that makes me sad. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
291
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:45:56 -
[263] - Quote
Fatal pewpew wrote:I think we need to see further balance changes.
Entities like MOA still cant take sov and that makes me sad.
Are we sure that MOA wants to take - and hold on to - sov? Or are the mostly interested in punishing alliances still trying to use Dominion Sov tactics?
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
368
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:47:57 -
[264] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:More alliance leaders signed off on that petition Those who sign it, and I expect more will sign it. Thank you for your support.
But an even bigger thank you goes out to those members of large corps and alliances from nullsec that came here and decried this hypcritical piece of trash for what it really is.
They rest of EVE appreciates that you stand by your core values even when game changes go against what is probably your best interests.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:50:23 -
[265] - Quote
I see a lot complaining that entosis is not fun. and you dont get the "big fights". Currently we are the only game in town in the north besides OSS in Venal. Black Legion is in Fountain at the momment doing their thing. We will not fight battles vs 200 sub cap, + cap fleets + super + titans. You must have figger that out by now....
So if CFC really wants to get all their big slug fest with supers and titans all that, then why dont you go and attack Black Legion in Fountain? What are you waiting for? You can grind all structures that you want and POS's. Maybe even reset some of your allies/blues to neutral? Or even better why dont you deploy and attack Fountain? Deploy to Fountain, put a few poses log supers and titans and get your butts there. Hell Camp their station like you guys do to us. Why is this not happening? The CFC has over 50000 people in their coalition. Surelly you can do that? Can you? |
Papa Django
Evolution Paradox
117
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:52:25 -
[266] - Quote
It's delicious to read that people who can't handle a few frigs wanna a rollback to get more fight and in the mean time, we all know that the previous system equal 1 or 2 tidi fights per year.
Some people have a seriously broken logic. |
Lan Wang
V I R I I Ineluctable.
1324
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:54:42 -
[267] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:It's delicious to read that people who can't handle a few frigs wanna a rollback to get more fight and in the mean time, we all know that the previous system equal 1 or 2 tidi fights per year.
Some people have a seriously broken logic.
in all fairness when i lived in sov null it was tidi nearly every night
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 16:56:45 -
[268] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Papa Django wrote:It's delicious to read that people who can't handle a few frigs wanna a rollback to get more fight and in the mean time, we all know that the previous system equal 1 or 2 tidi fights per year.
Some people have a seriously broken logic. in all fairness when i lived in sov null it was tidi nearly every night
Yeah man tidi is terrible. And you are lucky if you are the first to load grid. If not then, you are going to lose probably badly. Half your fleet will be dead before you know what happened. |
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1613
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 17:06:00 -
[269] - Quote
Altaen wrote:Active PVP Pilots Per System Report for those that signed this petition
HARD Alliance - 2.5 Brothers of Tangra - 0.45 Synergy of Steel - 5.5 Triumvirate. - 6.2 SOLAR Fleet - 0.97 Dream Fleet - 0.66 Soviet-Union - 1.8 Infinity Space. - 17 Advent of Fate - 12.4 Legion of xXDEATHXx - 2.6 The Afterlife. - 5.8 Shadow of xXDEATHXx - 0.5 Gentlemen's.Club - 3.4 The Blood Covenant - 3.9 RAZOR - 10.5
For comparison sake, GSF, by all accounts one of the most organized and efficient alliances in EVE, has 14.5 (Was 17 a few days ago, either they picked up sov or lost some active PVP pilots).
Infinity Space. is a huge outlier here. A quick review suggests that they are closely tied to xXDEATHXx and likely felt some pressure to add a number to the list for their masters. Other than them, these numbers are pathetic, and it's no wonder you don't like the new system, it was designed for you.
This is occupancy-based sov. Occupy or let it fall.
+1
Let's take time to remember this gem as well.
https://www.themittani.com/news/null-deal-statement-sovereign-00
Quote:THE NULL DEAL: A STATEMENT FROM SOVEREIGN 0.0
OCCUPANCY-BASED SOVEREIGNTY
We believe that ownership of territory should be reflected by alliance occupancy. Players should live in and utilize their space, and player infrastructure and activity should be reflected in an occupancy index. We believe this will significantly shrink the footprints of the current absentee empires, free up large sections of sov 0.0 for smaller entities, and remove the current need for vast coalitions.
INCREASED PLAYER DENSITY
We believe that vast swathes of conquerable nullsec are essentially worthless to our line members and can only support the activity of a handful of players in each system. We would like to see the value of individual systems increased to support a dense ecosystem of players undocked and interacting within single system.
Let's look who signed it.
Oh.
Quote:UAxDeath (CSM), Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
370
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 17:35:11 -
[270] - Quote
Silvia Heart wrote:Nituspar wrote:Tappits wrote:So yesterday someone tried to entosis a PL TCU in a 1x system. I was able to burn to the system in a inti get on grid to see itGÇÖs a 4k/s vaga 200km off.. I burn at him and he burns awayGǪ he then left and never came back. Someone un-entisised the tcu and we went home.
Op success, thatGÇÖs how you defend in fozzie sov boys and girls.
Now if you could just repeat this 50-1000 times, and write the next post accurately describing the amount of fun you had doing this from op 35 onwards. I think we'd all be a bit more enlightened on why a system that seems to promote sovlasering structures without any conflict being necessary, or fights occurring possibly being a bit flawed. Bonus points for alarmclocking for a chase or two, since most reinforces will usually be done at the worst possible timezone for you the second you let your indexes slip. This guys speaks the truth, there's a massive difference between scaring away one random etosis troll and trying to fend of a persistent group of them that keep on coming back at the worst times. We both know this because he's the troll and i am on the receiving end. Its not fun, its extremely frustrating and again we get almost no fights. He has gotten a few good kills but considering everything i wouldn't say its worth doing for the occasional kill and getting kills because your enemies are falling asleep and be driven mad by all the RNG timers and massively time consuming nodes is not good for the game in the long term.
Frustrating people you dont want in an area is a speciality of a certain group of players that have been doing it for more than a decade and laughing at the people they frustrate.
Since im not one for naming names, illl just call them by a code word: SOVHOLDERS.
Since this same group will repeat this nuisance behavior repeatedly even when they know no large scale battle will ever come from frustrating a lone explorer in a frigate i will use your term and call them 'trolls' and while im at it since that explorer will meet this same problem from this same group no matter how many times he returns to exploring in his frigate i will also call for CCP to make game mechanic changes so that that explorer can explore nulllsec without further trolling from, 'SOVHOLDERS'.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6465
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 17:59:34 -
[271] - Quote
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:The only thing I can think to explain this is, either they were just saying the word "occupancy" because it sounded nice but with zero thought about what it would actually entail in game terms, or they simply didn't understand the dictionary definition of the word. Or maybe they just like signing names on things to feel important. I imagine that the problem has less to do with it requiring occupancy, and more to do with it requiring massive amounts of structure lasering to fend off people who have no interest in taking the space anyway, but can contest it with relative ease. Fozziesov is boring as sin. That's the problem with it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
295
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 18:20:13 -
[272] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Seven Koskanaiken wrote:The only thing I can think to explain this is, either they were just saying the word "occupancy" because it sounded nice but with zero thought about what it would actually entail in game terms, or they simply didn't understand the dictionary definition of the word. Or maybe they just like signing names on things to feel important. I imagine that the problem has less to do with it requiring occupancy, and more to do with it requiring massive amounts of structure lasering to fend off people who have no interest in taking the space anyway, but can contest it with relative ease. Fozziesov is boring as sin. That's the problem with it.
Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.
If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.
The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
371
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 18:34:04 -
[273] - Quote
Malus Maricadie wrote:they need to **** can fozzie, what fun is a game that you don't have to earn your accomplishments. So now for all of us that put the time and work into grinding standings, Sov and training cap lvl ships turns out to be just a waste of time. Sadly world of ships is more like eve was in the good old days before fozzie screwed it up!!!! There is nothing in the old sov or the new that keeps you from busting out your big ships and blasting your neighbor. In fact only one word has ever stood between quite boring nullsec and total space carnage and that word is CHOICE. Since game mechanics new or old cannot force you occupants of nullsec to fight and becauae you chose and still apparently still choose to not fight the only problem standing between you and large scale engagements is your own decision not to.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6465
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 18:35:28 -
[274] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.
If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.
The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it. It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.
The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
371
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 18:37:59 -
[275] - Quote
BrundleMeth wrote:1). CCP obviously doesn't care. Or they wouldn't have done it.
2). I have no doubt they will not fix this.
3). I've been watching all my favorite ships get nerfed into junk for 2 years now. Complain and people call you names and tell you to adapt.
I still like EVE...but am well past the point of caring now if it simply dies off. I've gone from 9 accounts down to 2 all were paid for with cash. I laugh at the emails I get asking me to come back with these old accounts. 2 accounts are ok for me for now. Maybe some day, things will go back the other way. I really hope so....
On the 7 accounts you closed.....
Can i haz your stuffs ?
I like to use phrases nullsec is familiar with so im sure we are clearly communicating.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
371
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 19:01:51 -
[276] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.
If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.
The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it. It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning. The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.
So in a post that goes into detail how you are fighting throughout your sov to maintain your sov holdings you conclude that no conflict is occurring?
To you i introduce the term, "non sequitor" or as it is sometimes referred to as, "it does not follow". Meaning Your statements of fact dont support your conclusion and in fact in this case your facts actually refute your own conclusion which is even worse.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Dark Reignz
Four-Q
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 19:03:59 -
[277] - Quote
Wow don't people get it yet ? You're not supposed to be able to keep half off null sec with small / renter alliances. The whole point of the Sov update was to stop alliances from claiming much more space than a) they need and b) they are able to protect.
This is just another cry for nullbear easymode status.
Troll Mode - ON
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2072
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 19:29:07 -
[278] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.
It currently promote conflict. Just not conflict with explosions. We are continuously fighting over those systems to take/hold them. People's chase for the most efficient way of doing it is what cause trollceptor to be what we see so often. Fight denial was used in EVE since forever. Being irritated that it get used in a new way under a new system is just plain stupid. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
297
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 19:38:51 -
[279] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.
The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.
Oh my! I just realized I was gravely mistaken about something - I had been thinking that it was MOA who reinforced a big chunk of BL's Fountain, but now I know that it was actually your own alliance, SMA. Were you part of that op? What did you think of it? I've read you guys lost 40 Interceptors in the effort. Did you kill anything? What do you plan on doing with the nodes once they spawn?
The Last Game of Sov Updates " Rabbits in the Headlights " + bonus Update http://updates.eve-volt.net/game-of-sov/rabbits-in-the-headlights/
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6737
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 20:34:49 -
[280] - Quote
Why would moa be entosising BL anyway
Everyone knows massadeath only gets it on for the Imperium
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 21:06:41 -
[281] - Quote
So it seems some organizations are having issues realizing what "occupancy" based sov really means.
Hint: If you are finding it too hard to defend your currently claimed systems, you should consider recalculating what systems you want to hold.
Having a beautiful Sov Map isn't everything. (Yes, the sov map has influenced what some want to claim)
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6467
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 21:54:55 -
[282] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.
If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.
The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it. It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning. The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that. So in a post that goes into detail how you are fighting throughout your sov to maintain your sov holdings you conclude that no conflict is occurring? To you i introduce the term, "non sequitor" or as it is sometimes referred to as, "it does not follow". Meaning Your statements of fact dont support your conclusion and in fact in this case your facts actually refute your own conclusion which is even worse. I think what you and I define as "fighting" are disturbingly different. Chasing disposable ships around is not a fight.
Since you're determined to avoid the point (or too simple to see it), I'll put it in the most basic language I can: I want to see ships of at least moderate value on both sides going boom. I want to see people trying to take sov, not just slapping a timer then running away to waste the defenders time. The system as it stands does nothing to promote these things.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6467
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:06:31 -
[283] - Quote
Dark Reignz wrote:Wow don't people get it yet ? You're not supposed to be able to keep half off null sec with small / renter alliances. The whole point of the Sov update was to stop alliances from claiming much more space than a) they need and b) they are able to protect.
This is just another cry for nullbear easymode status. How is it? We're not losing space. It's easymode as it is, it's just boring as sin. Nearly nobody wants to take the space and nobody that does wants to commit the resources to taking the space. Because you can just throw a handful of disposable ships around and watch the defenders running around defending, that's all that gets done. Once the novelty wears off, even that will become boring and there will be even less conflict in null. Excuse me for thinking the idea of this change was to make people actually fight each other. I guess it was really because people love chasing cheap ships designed not to be caught. That's why the ACU is soaring, right?
Frostys Virpio wrote:It currently promote conflict. Just not conflict with explosions. We are continuously fighting over those systems to take/hold them. People's chase for the most efficient way of doing it is what cause trollceptor to be what we see so often. Fight denial was used in EVE since forever. Being irritated that it get used in a new way under a new system is just plain stupid. It used to be mixed in with actually fights. Of course people will run from fights they won't win, but fights use to occur. Now an all out battle is like ooh, 2b killed. The vast majority of people contesting the sov don't even have interest in actually taking it. Sorry mate, but going from 4k player battles to this crazy "whack a mole with disposable ships" is not an improvement.
Watching all these "grr goons" types crawling out of the woodwork fapping and saying "yeah CCP make null more boring" is quite hilarious though, so I guess there's that.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
d0cTeR9
Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance
207
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:16:01 -
[284] - Quote
OP makes sense, for CCP to not have thought and done something about those problems shows that CCP disregards it's sov-base players.
Fozzie sov, the way it is now, basically say's 'go troll sov space'. In no regards does it invite small or large scale wars for sov space, but hit & run tactics which is flooding the game ever since interceptors became the most OP ships in the game.
It's a big **** you to sov owners.
Been around since the beginning.
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5175
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:18:46 -
[285] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.
The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that. There is no mandatory chasing involved. Structures don't move.
If there are command nodes, then you already screwed-up by not preventing reinforcement.
Entosis links are far better for getting fights than SBUs. |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
4039
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:19:23 -
[286] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Because you can just throw a handful of disposable ships around and watch the defenders running around defending, that's all that gets done. Why would you do that if you want fights?
On the other hand, if you do not want to fight, what difference do the sov mechanics make?
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
303
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:26:54 -
[287] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: Since you're determined to avoid the point (or too simple to see it), I'll put it in the most basic language I can: I want to see ships of at least moderate value on both sides going boom. I want to see people trying to take sov, not just slapping a timer then running away to waste the defenders time. The system as it stands does nothing to promote these things.
Everybody wants that. But new groups were not able to move into Dominion Sov and take anything due to the mechanics that allowed for passive in absentia defense via huge HP numbers. What the Aegis Sov system is designed to do is give more groups room to expand into null and take that sov. It does this by deliberately making it a complete pain in the ass for anybody to defend a system displaced from where they spend their time, in the hopes that they stop trying to defend it, making it available for somebody else to live in it. Wasting your time defending a system you don't have anybody in is a deliberate aspect of making you consolidate into space you actually use, making your unused space available to be taken by somebody else.
We are less than three weeks into Aegis. Some people are just having fun with it by trolling. Others are having trouble adjusting. It will take some time for the borders and tactics of alliances to adjust to what their pain threshold can withstand for defending. Yes, it is possible for an alliance to play whack-a-mole and rush around chasing Interceptors and keep a tentative grasp on their Dominion Sov. That is hindering the movement of new groups into sov null. It will take time for groups historically shut out of sov to make their way in. Hopefully some are looking at the map and planning just that, and will be able to once some of the established alliances realize they need to let go of some of their systems due to the pain of holding them.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6467
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:30:23 -
[288] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.
The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that. There is no mandatory chasing involved. Structures don't move. If there are command nodes, then you already screwed-up by not preventing reinforcement. Entosis links are far better for getting fights than SBUs. Except there is, since little entosis ships pop up all over the place and are designed to be as evasive as possible, because they are designed to not fight. I'm all for the system for people to more easily contest sov, but they have to actually commit to it to doing so. The idea this was pitched as was "help smaller groups get into sov", not "make sov holders chase frigates".
And so far that's proving to be wrong. Entosis links are getting tiny little skirmishes from time to time while SBUs used to get big fights quite frequently.
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Because you can just throw a handful of disposable ships around and watch the defenders running around defending, that's all that gets done. Why would you do that if you want fights? On the other hand, if you do not want to fight, what difference do the sov mechanics make? That's my point, they don't want fights. They want to contest sov and run away, knowing that the defenders have to run around unlasering everything. It's the space equivalent of going to somebodies early organise game shelf and swapping all the dics over and scattering them around the room then running away with your pants on your head. You've achieved nothing except the knowledge that the owner of the game collection has to put them all back. As a gameplay mechanic it sucks.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6467
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:37:13 -
[289] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Everybody wants that. But new groups were not able to move into Dominion Sov and take anything due to the mechanics that allowed for passive in absentia defense via huge HP numbers. What the Aegis Sov system is designed to do is give more groups room to expand into null and take that sov. It does this by deliberately making it a complete pain in the ass for anybody to defend a system displaced from where they spend their time, in the hopes that they stop trying to defend it, making it available for somebody else to live in it. Wasting your time defending a system you don't have anybody in is a deliberate aspect of making you consolidate into space you actually use, making your unused space available to be taken by somebody else.
We are less than three weeks into Aegis. Some people are just having fun with it by trolling. Others are having trouble adjusting. It will take some time for the borders and tactics of alliances to adjust to what their pain threshold can withstand for defending. Yes, it is possible for an alliance to play whack-a-mole and rush around chasing Interceptors and keep a tentative grasp on their Dominion Sov. That is hindering the movement of new groups into sov null. It will take time for groups historically shut out of sov to make their way in. Hopefully some are looking at the map and planning just that, and will be able to once some of the established alliances realize they need to let go of some of their systems due to the pain of holding them. But that's not what's happening, is it? People are just running around firing entosis lasers at absolutely everything they can, whether defenders are using the space or not, an the defenders have to run around wasting their time undoing that. The people contesting sov have absolutely no intention of taking it.
I have to ask, have you actually played with the new mechanic? Because it sounds like you haven't really used it. It's boring. Insanely boring. It's much simpler to just go blow up noobs in Niarja since at least there you get to see something explode. To be honest, the idea was flawed from the getgo. They effectively took structure bashing which nobody liked then thought "wouldn't this be better if it was like mining". Turns out it's not better, surprise surprise. Considering the CSM have sat up pretty sharply, I'm hoping CCP have realised that from the incredibly lack of player surge following the release.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
4039
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:41:08 -
[290] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:They want to contest sov and run away, knowing that the defenders have to run around unlasering everything. Ah yes, this unlasering part seems a bit strange to me. Are the defenders forced to do it? Or would the structures de-entosis themselves anyway after a certain period of time?
If the attackers were chased off and don't come back in a reasonable period of time (1 hour?), seems to me that the attack was clearly unsuccesful and the mop-up is just a boring chore indeed...
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5175
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:41:51 -
[291] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Excuse me for thinking the idea of this change was to make people actually fight each other. I guess it was really because people love chasing cheap ships designed not to be caught. That's why the ACU is soaring, right? The stated goals are:
CCP Fozzie wrote:Goal #1: As much as possible, ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved
Goal #2: Clarify the process of taking, holding and fighting over star systems
Goal #3: Minimize the systemic pressure to bring more people or larger ships than would be required to simply defeat your enemies on the field of battle.
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.
Goal #5: Provide significant strategic benefits from living in your space.
Goal #6: Spread the largest Sovereignty battles over multiple star systems to take advantage of New EdenGÇÖs varied geography and to better manage server load.
Goal #7: Any new Sovereignty system should be adaptable enough to be rapidly updated and to incorporate future changes to EVE. You could argue goal #1, but it seems to me at least that you have chosen to be on the defensive rather than the offensive, and possibly not properly defend. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
303
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:45:28 -
[292] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Except there is, since little entosis ships pop up all over the place and are designed to be as evasive as possible, because they are designed to not fight. I'm all for the system for people to more easily contest sov, but they have to actually commit to it to doing so. The idea this was pitched as was "help smaller groups get into sov", not "make sov holders chase frigates".
And so far that's proving to be wrong. Entosis links are getting tiny little skirmishes from time to time while SBUs used to get big fights quite frequently. Aegis Sov isn't meant to allow smaller groups get into sov by fighting the big groups for systems - Aegis Sov is meant to allow smaller groups to get into sov by causing larger groups to stop trying to defend those systems in the first place. Then once done, different groups move into sov null (attracted, hopefully, by the anom changes) and there will be more inter-alliance conflict. We're at the very beginning of the first phase of sov null movement. This is not end-game sov state.
Quote:They want to contest sov and run away, knowing that the defenders have to run around unlasering everything. If you have to run around your sov to protect it, you're doing it wrong. The game owner should be holding their discs in their hands at all times, not allowing the pants-on-head kid anywhere near them. If your reach is too short to hold on to your discs, you need to evaluate which discs are truly important. |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2313
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 22:54:32 -
[293] - Quote
Goal #1: As much as possible, ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved
Nope, not seeing any of this.
Goal #2: Clarify the process of taking, holding and fighting over star systems
I guess, yes, it's simple enough to understand, so yeah, well done.
Goal #3: Minimize the systemic pressure to bring more people or larger ships than would be required to simply defeat your enemies on the field of battle.
Number + organisation will always win and it's probably a good thing.
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.
I don't know, it take more or less the same amount of time, requires a lot fewer people to initiate and is still just as boring as shooting 40m HP structures.
Goal #5: Provide significant strategic benefits from living in your space.
Longer timers are a significant strategic benefit, I assume.
Goal #6: Spread the largest Sovereignty battles over multiple star systems to take advantage of New EdenGÇÖs varied geography and to better manage server load.
It's not working but that isn't the fault of the system. Players and organisations are just painfully slow at figuring that out effective ways to effectively sovlaser while everyone else is dicking around in trollceptors.
Goal #7: Any new Sovereignty system should be adaptable enough to be rapidly updated and to incorporate future changes to EVE.
Whatever.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6469
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 23:11:20 -
[294] - Quote
1. It's not enjoyable 2. The system is more obscure than the last one, and most info isn't readily available in game. 3. By "more people" they mean "more than one" and by "larger ships" they mean "anything bigger than a frigate". Might have gone too far there. If people do choose to bring more ships, you're still SOL if you don't bring more. 4. That was successful 5. That's yet to be seen, since the timer is still short enough that you have to drop everything you are doing to rush over and shoot troll ships whenever they turn up. I guess the main issue here is that nothing makes the attackers have to actually commit more to attacking. 6. Again, this one is sort of done, but it's only because there are no large sov battles. Why that's considered a good thing, I have no idea. Maybe international press wasn't something CCP enjoyed. 7. Any system can be tweaked over time, even the old sov system.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6469
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 23:21:45 -
[295] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:[Aegis Sov isn't meant to allow smaller groups get into sov by fighting the big groups for systems - Aegis Sov is meant to allow smaller groups to get into sov by causing larger groups to stop trying to defend those systems in the first place. Then once done, different groups move into sov null (attracted, hopefully, by the anom changes) and there will be more inter-alliance conflict. We're at the very beginning of the first phase of sov null movement. This is not end-game sov state. The small groups don;t want the sov. They've made that painfully clear by not bothering to show up for timers. And even if by some miracle a big group gets bored of defending and gives up the system, the new guys still can;t move in because the big group will just show up and repeatedly gank them until they stop trying to live there.
Eli Stan wrote:Quote:They want to contest sov and run away, knowing that the defenders have to run around unlasering everything. If you have to run around your sov to protect it, you're doing it wrong. The game owner should be holding their discs in their hands at all times, not allowing the pants-on-head kid anywhere near them. If your reach is too short to hold on to your discs, you need to evaluate which discs are truly important. Yeah, must be doing it wrong. I forgot that to hold sov we're supposed to stand guard on the TCU and IHUB and station constantly in every single system we own so that if someone shows up we don't have to switch ships and fly around after them.
I have a feeling you don't know what games are for. They are not career choices. The idea that an attacker should be able to just show up in a cheap disposable ship and start lasering while a defender needs to constantly stand guard is moronic. I don't care if it ends up that we can only hold half the space we do, but defending shouldn't be more of a chore than attacking, shouldn't require more committed resources than attacking, and both sides of the mechanic should be entertaining and promote meaningful conflict.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Spectre80
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
82
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 00:21:26 -
[296] - Quote
Lots of tears means all is well in eve universe. |
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 01:11:34 -
[297] - Quote
1 - Not really, nobody are fighting for star systems, they-¦re just trolling star systems, nobody cares about null sec anymore unless for trolling, so this point is a big fail.
2 - As stated and CCP can see that, theres no new alliances contesting systems, just some alliances that are already in null sec are spreading a create new alliances, so nothing changes, hs people are not going there once again, so we have another big fail.
3 - Well this one is a GO, not much people fighting neither big ships, thats the way to an very nice empty null space.
4 - Conquer what? I dont see any conquered space, just new alliances coming from old ones, they stay where they are.
5 - Strategic benefits? What strategic benefits? Being disrupted is a benefit? Maybe they are talking about from ihub and upgrades sales, that is benefit for those who are manufacturing it in hs.
6 - Sov Battles? I havent see any since this new sov mechanics, just troll, nothin more but trolling.
7 - Well maybe the future changes are bots and more bots providing by CCP due the lack of null sec players and players in game, they are decreasing intead of increasing.
Players who have left are not turning back until they have what they want and part of them are not going back anymore, they are felling defrauded by CCP so I cant blame them since the last 4 years we get all in one way or another being defrauded due the systemic nerfs, changes on the way we play the game and CCP words are adpat. So for at least 20.000 palyers they have adapted themselves once and for all, they leave the game and I belive much more will leave the game soon enough. New players dont count on that, when they reach the game, they leave in a week or two, too complex, too many changes all the time, scaming and harassment to new players who dosent know what to do, so their best way is to move to another game without all of this...
|
Billy Bojangle
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 01:16:18 -
[298] - Quote
Pah Cova wrote: Players who have left are not turning back until they have what they want and part of them are not going back anymore, they are felling defrauded by CCP so I cant blame them since the last 4 years we get all in one way or another being defrauded due the systemic nerfs, changes on the way we play the game and CCP words are adpat. So for at least 20.000 palyers they have adapted themselves once and for all, they leave the game and I belive much more will leave the game soon enough. New players dont count on that, when they reach the game, they leave in a week or two, too complex, too many changes all the time, scaming and harassment to new players who dosent know what to do, so their best way is to move to another game without all of this...
Can I have your stuff? |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
375
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 01:57:01 -
[299] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.
If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.
The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it. It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning. The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that. So in a post that goes into detail how you are fighting throughout your sov to maintain your sov holdings you conclude that no conflict is occurring? To you i introduce the term, "non sequitor" or as it is sometimes referred to as, "it does not follow". Meaning Your statements of fact dont support your conclusion and in fact in this case your facts actually refute your own conclusion which is even worse. I think what you and I define as "fighting" are disturbingly different. Chasing disposable ships around is not a fight. Since you're determined to avoid the point (or too simple to see it), I'll put it in the most basic language I can: I want to see ships of at least moderate value on both sides going boom. I want to see people trying to take sov, not just slapping a timer then running away to waste the defenders time. The system as it stands does nothing to promote these things.
Let me assure you the simpleton is on your side the this issue. When someone makes a poor decision and pays a price and whines to CCP that some change needs to be made, you nullsec types tell them that, 'decisions in EVE have consequences" and that they should stop whining to CCP for changes when they only have themselves to blame.
Let me state that I agree with this statement, it is absolutely the right one to hold for this game.
Now we come to the part where apparently you are a bit thick-headed.
YOU (nullsec) chose non-aggression pacts, YOU chose not to fight your neighbors, YOU knew that your CHOICE was counter to the very fundamentals upon which this game stands.
You made bad CHOICES, now deal with the unpleasant consequences and stop whining to CCP !
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
310
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 02:07:13 -
[300] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:The small groups don;t want the sov. Keep in mind that currently, they can't have sov. Regardless of how painful to the established alliances the tactics are, they nevertheless are effective tactics. Small groups get denied sov, get kicked out of sov, because of groups operating under the Dominion paradigm of keeping everything they can capture.
Quote:And even if by some miracle a big group gets bored of defending and gives up the system, the new guys still can;t move in because the big group will just show up and repeatedly gank them until they stop trying to live there. Indeed, larger groups can harass and evict smaller groups. Just like groups can get evicted out of wormholes. Just like GROON or BOS or NOC could hellcamp CAS and if not in reality at least in effect erase us from Syndicate. And yet meaningful and exciting and significant conflict happen in wormholes and NPC null.
Quote:I forgot that to hold sov we're supposed to stand guard on the TCU and IHUB and station constantly in every single system we own so that if someone shows up we don't have to switch ships and fly around after them. Well, yes! That's exactly it! You're starting to see! That's the very definition of occupancy sov. I think you still have the cause and effect backwards, however. You don't live in a system because you want to defend it - you defend a system because you want to live in it.
Quote:I don't care if it ends up that we can only hold half the space we do, but defending shouldn't be more of a chore than attacking, shouldn't require more committed resources than attacking, and both sides of the mechanic should be entertaining and promote meaningful conflict. Defending a system you live in from a trollceptor is not a chore and does not require committing significant resources.
|
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
377
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 02:22:13 -
[301] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.
The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that. There is no mandatory chasing involved. Structures don't move. If there are command nodes, then you already screwed-up by not preventing reinforcement. Entosis links are far better for getting fights than SBUs. Except there is, since little entosis ships pop up all over the place and are designed to be as evasive as possible, because they are designed to not fight. I'm all for the system for people to more easily contest sov, but they have to actually commit to it to doing so. The idea this was pitched as was "help smaller groups get into sov", not "make sov holders chase frigates". And so far that's proving to be wrong. Entosis links are getting tiny little skirmishes from time to time while SBUs used to get big fights quite frequently. Gully Alex Foyle wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Because you can just throw a handful of disposable ships around and watch the defenders running around defending, that's all that gets done. Why would you do that if you want fights? On the other hand, if you do not want to fight, what difference do the sov mechanics make? That's my point, they don't want fights. They want to contest sov and run away, knowing that the defenders have to run around unlasering everything. It's the space equivalent of going to somebodies early organise game shelf and swapping all the dics over and scattering them around the room then running away with your pants on your head. You've achieved nothing except the knowledge that the owner of the game collection has to put them all back. As a gameplay mechanic it sucks.
Destroying the will of an enemy to fight is a core combat technique even in the real world, certainly it has applications in a video game.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
378
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 02:26:54 -
[302] - Quote
Concerning CCP Fozzies goals for the new mechanics.
1. you could consolidate your holdings to places you occupy and use thus reducing your exposure to being entossed, you could entoss your neighbor alliances, you could show up when said entossed alliance must defend its space giving you the big fight you claim to want. This would be using fozziesov rather than whining about it. in short, you are not having fun because you are chosing not to not because the game mechanics are wrong only your approach to them is wrong and your approach is now outdated.
2-7 working as intended....
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
12032
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 03:34:27 -
[303] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:
We are less than three weeks into Aegis. Some people are just having fun with it by trolling. Others are having trouble adjusting. It will take some time for the borders and tactics of alliances to adjust to what their pain threshold can withstand for defending.
Ok lets get this part straight. You think that in a game called EVE Online, people are going to somehow eventually get tired of trolling.......
Are you new here? |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
312
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 03:40:52 -
[304] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Eli Stan wrote:
We are less than three weeks into Aegis. Some people are just having fun with it by trolling. Others are having trouble adjusting. It will take some time for the borders and tactics of alliances to adjust to what their pain threshold can withstand for defending.
Ok lets get this part straight. You think that in a game called EVE Online, people are going to somehow eventually get tired of trolling....... Are you new here?
Where did I say trolling would stop? Note that I only mentioned changes on the sov holder's part. I think - no, I hope - that the people being trolled will figure out how to deal with it easily. But maybe salty posts by sov holders getting trolled will become as common as salty posts by haulers getting ganked. -shrug-
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
822
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 03:46:03 -
[305] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I forgot that to hold sov we're supposed to stand guard on the TCU and IHUB and station constantly in every single system we own so that if someone shows up we don't have to switch ships and fly around after them. Well, yes! That's exactly it! You're starting to see! That's the very definition of occupancy sov. I think you still have the cause and effect backwards, however. You don't live in a system because you want to defend it - you defend a system because you want to live in it.Quote:I don't care if it ends up that we can only hold half the space we do, but defending shouldn't be more of a chore than attacking, shouldn't require more committed resources than attacking, and both sides of the mechanic should be entertaining and promote meaningful conflict. Defending a system you live in from a trollceptor is not a chore and does not require committing significant resources. Waking up every morning and having to clean up the mess made while you were asleep is boring. Yay now you have to stand guard to prevent someone making a mess, who doesn't even want your sov. Hey a solution that is even more boring than watching pant dry. No fun allowed, you got guard duty for X hours. Exciting gameplay there I tell you what. This is supposed to be a God damned game, not a second job, but hey, I guess CCP is taking EVE is real to a whole new level.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3165
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 04:23:06 -
[306] - Quote
I'm giving 7-to-1 odds that Lucas wears you all out...he is a tireless poster and is worse than the energizer bunny.
You have been warned.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5179
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 04:23:43 -
[307] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Waking up every morning and having to clean up the mess made while you were asleep is boring[/url]. Yay now you have to stand guard to prevent someone making a mess, who doesn't even want your sov. Hey a solution that is even more boring than watching pant dry. No fun allowed, you got guard duty for X hours. If your alliance is asleep during your vulnerability period, whomever chose that period is stupid.
CCP Fozzie wrote:A system with Military and Industrial each at 1 would already have shrunk its vulnerability window all the way to 8.18 hours. A system with Military 5 and Strategic 5 (quite common) would have a vulnerability window of 4 hours. So for 4 hours a day you are incapable of having at least one person per structure in system to stop capture?
Miners, ratters, or alts... it doesn't take much. Oh, and you have 50 minutes to respond at ADM 5. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3165
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 04:28:59 -
[308] - Quote
To be fair, Goonswarm is a BIGGäó Alliance, so it it is almost surely the case that for many in the alliance that they are asleep when the systems are vulnerable.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1007
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 05:41:03 -
[309] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Eli Stan wrote:
We are less than three weeks into Aegis. Some people are just having fun with it by trolling. Others are having trouble adjusting. It will take some time for the borders and tactics of alliances to adjust to what their pain threshold can withstand for defending.
Ok lets get this part straight. You think that in a game called EVE Online, people are going to somehow eventually get tired of trolling....... Are you new here? Where did I say trolling would stop? Note that I only mentioned changes on the sov holder's part. I think - no, I hope - that the people being trolled will figure out how to deal with it easily. But maybe salty posts by sov holders getting trolled will become as common as salty posts by haulers getting ganked. -shrug-
Jenn only reads what she thinks you said then decides to go all superior on it, gives me hours of fun when I am AFK cloaky camped, especially when she throws in just how good at PvE she is, just you wait, you will get that soon if you continue to post, she has her PvE eye on you... You quite rightly pointed out that people would either sort themselves out to deal with it or decide to walk away, and the trolls would have to up their game.
On another note I am still laughing at the people complaining about trolling interceptors, they are so easy to stop its laughable, its the Arazu's and Loki's with oversized MWD's and 250 km locking range that are the real troll ships at least on sov that has no tender loving care, which as far as I am concerned is working as intended.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Fatal pewpew
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 06:24:48 -
[310] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: Jenn only reads what she thinks you said then decides to go all superior on it, gives me hours of fun when I am AFK cloaky camped, especially when she throws in just how good at PvE she is, just you wait, you will get that soon if you continue to post, she has her PvE eye on you... You quite rightly pointed out that people would either sort themselves out to deal with it or decide to walk away, and the trolls would have to up their game.
On another note I am still laughing at the people complaining about trolling interceptors, they are so easy to stop its laughable, its the Arazu's and Loki's with oversized MWD's and 250 km locking range that are the real troll ships at least on sov that has no tender loving care, which as far as I am concerned is working as intended.
im fine with people bringing lokis and arazus because at least its the opportunity to kill something a bit more expensive if done correctly. |
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6474
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 06:52:33 -
[311] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Let me assure you the simpleton is on your side the this issue. When someone makes a poor decision and pays a price and whines to CCP that some change needs to be made, you nullsec types tell them that, 'decisions in EVE have consequences" and that they should stop whining to CCP for changes when they only have themselves to blame.
Let me state that I agree with this statement, it is absolutely the right one to hold for this game.
Now we come to the part where apparently you are a bit thick-headed.
YOU (nullsec) chose non-aggression pacts, YOU chose not to fight your neighbors, YOU knew that your CHOICE was counter to the very fundamentals upon which this game stands.
You made bad CHOICES, now deal with the unpleasant consequences and stop whining to CCP ! "grr nullsec"
Working with others is not "counter to the very fundamentals upon which this game stands" and no matter what gets done, that's always going to exist. Being in a bigger, better organised group will always have an advantage. The idea of fozziesov was to compact the space us big groups took while encouraging people to take sov. What it's done instead is just encourage people to troll wit disposable ships to waste defenders time.
What's happening to this game has nothing to do with choices we've made. It's to do with CCP being unable to develop an entertaining system for dealing with system ownership and asshats like you cheering them on making the game as boring as possible out of some hatred for groups who work well together.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6474
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 07:04:50 -
[312] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Keep in mind that currently, they can't have sov. Regardless of how painful to the established alliances the tactics are, they nevertheless are effective tactics. Small groups get denied sov, get kicked out of sov, because of groups operating under the Dominion paradigm of keeping everything they can capture. Yes they can. There's loads of places going spare at the moment. What they can't do is expect to snatch up sov on the border of one of the biggest coalitions and hold it without a fight. What they want is some system where a 100 man alliance can hold their space against a 30k member coalition without having to put in substantial effort. No matter what (reasonable) system they put in place that's never going to happen in a sandbox game. Don't get me wrong though, the systems as it stands encourages trolling over real attempts to take sov.
Eli Stan wrote:Indeed, larger groups can harass and evict smaller groups. Just like groups can get evicted out of wormholes. Just like GROON or BOS or NOC could hellcamp CAS and if not in reality at least in effect erase us from Syndicate. And yet meaningful and exciting and significant conflict happen in wormholes and NPC null. And yet it doesn't happen in sov null, because the system actively discourages meaningful conflict. Thanks for proving the point that it's the mechanics, not the players.
Eli Stan wrote:Well, yes! That's exactly it! You're starting to see! That's the very definition of occupancy sov. I think you still have the cause and effect backwards, however. You don't live in a system because you want to defend it - you defend a system because you want to live in it. LOL no it's not. The purpose of occupancy sov is for people to LIVE in their space, not stand idly in their space at all times just in case people come to get it. Games are for entertainment an the current system does nothing to promote that. Having to constantly reship and run around chasing cheap ships designed to be uncatchable is not entertaining. Seriously, I think you need to actually try the system out so you understand the level of boring involved in actively guarding sov.
Eli Stan wrote:Defending a system you live in from a trollceptor is not a chore and does not require committing significant resources. See, you keep underselling it. If the problem was defending one system from one trollceptor, then yeah, there'd be no problem. The problem with disposable ships is that what you end up defending against is constant trollceptors. Just look at the timerboards for how many timers are going. Those are just the ones that slipped through, and I guarantee that only a tiny minority are from people actually interested in taking space.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6474
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 07:08:50 -
[313] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Destroying the will of an enemy to fight is a core combat technique even in the real world, certainly it has applications in a video game. Destroying the will of people to actually play the game isn't such a good idea in a video game though. That's why people like you encouraging CCP to make EVE as boring as possible are doing it a disservice.
Teckos Pech wrote:I'm giving 7-to-1 odds that Lucas wears you all out...he is a tireless poster and is worse than the energizer bunny. You have been warned. I haven't checked, but I bet he is still posting in the thread about broadcating/multiplexing...even if nobody else is. Hah, I was right although he is not the only one still posting to that thread. I'm a goddamn hero is what I am.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
TrickyBlackSteel
Russia Caldari RUCA Emperor
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 07:10:42 -
[314] - Quote
As a leader of Ruca Emperor Alliance i am agree, i sign this petition! |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5181
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 07:25:59 -
[315] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:If your alliance is asleep during your vulnerability period, whomever chose that period is stupid.
So for 4 hours a day you are incapable of having at least one person per structure in system to stop capture? To be fair, Goonswarm is a BIGGäó Alliance, so it it is almost surely the case that for many in the alliance that they are asleep when the systems are vulnerable. The entire alliance is asleep? Really? You are gonna go with that argument?
If so, again that would also be an example of setting a stupid vulnerability window. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1007
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 07:36:14 -
[316] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Destroying the will of an enemy to fight is a core combat technique even in the real world, certainly it has applications in a video game. Destroying the will of people to actually play the game isn't such a good idea in a video game though. That's why people like you encouraging CCP to make EVE as boring as possible are doing it a disservice.
If I was in an alliance that was interested in taking space, I would attack multiple systems to mask my real target, I would also use this to break the will to defend. The troll interceptors are easy to kill however I can understand that being a chore if its against people who are just doing it to cause hassle. I am looking forward to the first major Imperium campaign, should be amusing to see just how many people flood into Imperium space for pay back time.
But I get your point about Eve being a game where the main strategy is to bore your enemy out of the game, AFK cloaky camping is one such strategy used to move towards Eve's extinction.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1492
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 08:02:29 -
[317] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote: Destroying the will of an enemy to fight is a core combat technique even in the real world, certainly it has applications in a video game.
In the real world, people also actuallydie. Destroying your opponent's morale is effective, but it is not particularly fun for either side. Eve is supposed to be a game. Games are supposed to be fun.
Believe me, I lived through years of Dominion Sov. I do not want it back. It was not a good system. I feel qualified to say that having ground hundreds of structures in stealth bomber fleets in order to deny an enemy a fight.
Quote:Here is Dominion Sov:
Reinforce structure in ships that can easily evade any response. Wait for timer... Form up... If they form up, then blue-ball them...
Repeat as needed...
Reinforce same structure again... Wait for timer... If they do not form up, kill the structure...
That is why Dominion Sov was terrible. Replacing Dominion Sov with an equivalent system is just bone-headed.
Quote:Here is Aegis Sov:
Entosis structure in ships that can easily evade any response. See if they respond... If they respond, run away...
Repeat as needed...
Entosis same structure again... If they do not respond, structure is destroyed...
Are we noticing a pattern here?
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3166
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 08:15:29 -
[318] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:If your alliance is asleep during your vulnerability period, whomever chose that period is stupid.
So for 4 hours a day you are incapable of having at least one person per structure in system to stop capture? To be fair, Goonswarm is a BIGGäó Alliance, so it it is almost surely the case that for many in the alliance that they are asleep when the systems are vulnerable. The entire alliance is asleep? Really? You are gonna go with that argument? If so, again that would also be an example of setting a stupid vulnerability window.
Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with the definition of many.
If I had meant the entire alliance, I'd have written, "the entire alliance". The person you were responding too noted they often have to go and deal with the mess made while he was asleep...not that the entire alliance was asleep.
Reading...its fundamental.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Anslo
Scope Works
32090
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 08:24:49 -
[319] - Quote
Isn't there a rule against multi posting? I thought there was.
[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3166
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 08:31:55 -
[320] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: I am looking forward to the first major Imperium campaign, should be amusing to see just how many people flood into Imperium space for pay back time.
Why I never would have thought of that possibility at all!
You sir are a tactician without peer. Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, and Dracvlad.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
990
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 08:53:51 -
[321] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Working with others is not "counter to the very fundamentals upon which this game stands" and no matter what gets done, that's always going to exist. Being in a bigger, better organised group will always have an advantage. Yes, this is correct. I suppose this is why no timers appear in territories occupied by really big and organized groups.
Lucas Kell wrote:The idea of fozziesov was to compact the space us big groups took while encouraging people to take sov. What it's done instead is just encourage people to troll wit disposable ships to waste defenders time. If some groups could not directly contest others for sov during Dominion, they won't be able now, and that wasn't going to change. Assuming that they want that sov, I suppose their goal is not to entertain people currently having their flag there, quite the opposite. You've said that one of the goals was to compact existing holders, and "sov trolling" is the best average can do to make it happen, do it until another guy says "no, f*** you and your strategic value, I'm not unwanding this s**t system we don't have anything in anyway". That's how you "compact" existing groups.
Or a holder can go painless route, pack up and move to nice system you are going to fully upgrade, and max indexes there, while knowing that maybe another "Hub Zero #whatever" comes to your former system so you could actually extract some content as opposed to only seeing entosis frigs. Does it make sense from "srs business" perspective? Hell no. But here we come to the main part:
Lucas Kell wrote:What's happening to this game has nothing to do with choices we've made. It's to do with CCP being unable to develop an entertaining system...
FT Diomedes wrote:In the real world, people also actuallydie. Destroying your opponent's morale is effective, but it is not particularly fun for either side. Eve is supposed to be a game. Games are supposed to be fun. Sandbox or CCP-designed systems being the source of entertainmant, pick one. What I mean is...
One and almost the only thing going for EVE is that resources for individuals are hard to come by by video game standards and nobody wants to lose them, making it feel like conflict matters. It's core design that you pay for your fun here with hours of soul sucking (again, by VG standards) "work". You can't have it both "fun" and "meaningful and engaging" - anything being fun to acquire means a lot of people will do that, making this resource in question worthless.
Right now though, in a sense, you must choose to do stupid things here in order for fun to happen. NPSI fleets are utterly pointless and are waste of resources... Or they would be if not for the fact that they are supposed to bring action and nothing more. Same goes for every roam ever, it's losing ships for no gain - except to have a good time.
It's time to understand that same will eventually be applied to such assets as extra territories. I say "extra" because people still want their base of operation, something to rely on when they want to make some "ISK" in any form and use them to make fun happen again. And then there are people like manufacturers, miners and other groups that rely on stable places to have their gameplay and fun at all.
Everything beyond that is a welp for giggles material.
Lucas Kell wrote:...making the game as boring as possible out of some hatred for groups who work well together. I think his point is that if those groups were working well together on generating conflict, CCP wouldn't be so pressed to screw around with sov null. But that doesn't fall under normal, "srs business" definition of "working well together" ofc.
What happened to WHs is a good illustration. When wormholers were killing and evicting each other, CCP wasn't doing anything. When high-class community entrenched themselves and started to only care about occasional semi-staged (if "semi") fights and dunking nullsec ratters out of boredom, nerfs and tweaks started to happen (such as: hole rolling nerf, C4 connectivity fix, so-called "Sort Dragon nerf").
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
990
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 08:55:43 -
[322] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:If I had meant the entire alliance, I'd have written, "the entire alliance". The person you were responding too noted they often have to go and deal with the mess made while he was asleep...not that the entire alliance was asleep.
Reading...its fundamental. And what was the rest of alliance doing if they have to mop up after them? I suppose that sleeping describes that fairly well, if not in a literal sense.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6737
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 09:26:42 -
[323] - Quote
Yeah, there's a sort of minimum needed to hold sov.
But one person can make a corp, make an alliance, get some intercceptors (or such, take your pick) and sov lasers and go troll them some sov in them there hills (hells)
If you're small, know where to aim, stick to trolling those big enough to hold sov. Remember, Unclaimed is your victory cry!!
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 09:37:40 -
[324] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Yeah, there's a sort of minimum needed to hold sov.
But one person can make a corp, make an alliance, get some intercceptors (or such, take your pick) and sov lasers and go troll them some sov in them there hills (hells)
If you're small, know where to aim, stick to trolling those big enough to hold sov. Remember, Unclaimed is your victory cry!!
well if its one person then its very easy to deal with them. After all you got 50000 poeple in your coalition. or are you trying to tell me you cant fend off a small gang? OR you dont want to? If you dont want to then that means you probably dont really want to bother to jump far away where your alliance dont live. Why defend a system you dont live in? I wouldnt too. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6477
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 09:47:59 -
[325] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Yeah, there's a sort of minimum needed to hold sov.
But one person can make a corp, make an alliance, get some intercceptors (or such, take your pick) and sov lasers and go troll them some sov in them there hills (hells)
If you're small, know where to aim, stick to trolling those big enough to hold sov. Remember, Unclaimed is your victory cry!! well if its one person then its very easy to deal with them. After all you got 50000 poeple in your coalition. or are you trying to tell me you cant fend off a small gang? OR you dont want to? If you dont want to then that means you probably dont really want to bother to jump far away where your alliance dont live. Why defend a system you dont live in? I wouldnt too. It's not that it's hard to deal with them, it's that it's boring as sin. This is why people aren't rushing back to play with the sov system, because it's ****. What should have been a reason for mass resubs has just reaffirmed why a lot of people left in the first place.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1007
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 09:49:59 -
[326] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote: I am looking forward to the first major Imperium campaign, should be amusing to see just how many people flood into Imperium space for pay back time.
Why I never would have thought of that possibility at all! You sir are a tactician without peer. Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, and Dracvlad.
No its just blindingly obvious, my comment was more aimed at the numbers who decide to try it, but if you want to make a very lame fuss out of it feel free, but you need to improve your reading comprehension skill a bit mate.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 10:28:28 -
[327] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Yeah, there's a sort of minimum needed to hold sov.
But one person can make a corp, make an alliance, get some intercceptors (or such, take your pick) and sov lasers and go troll them some sov in them there hills (hells)
If you're small, know where to aim, stick to trolling those big enough to hold sov. Remember, Unclaimed is your victory cry!! well if its one person then its very easy to deal with them. After all you got 50000 poeple in your coalition. or are you trying to tell me you cant fend off a small gang? OR you dont want to? If you dont want to then that means you probably dont really want to bother to jump far away where your alliance dont live. Why defend a system you dont live in? I wouldnt too. It's not that it's hard to deal with them, it's that it's boring as sin. This is why people aren't rushing back to play with the sov system, because it's ****. What should have been a reason for mass resubs has just reaffirmed why a lot of people left in the first place.
OK so if its boring for you (defenetly not for me), then why defend it? Why defend a system you are not interested in? To alot of other people getting blobbed is not exactly fun. I know you guys like it but some others dont and you can not have always your way.
Or even better, why not wait for it to get reinforced and deal with it when it comes out of reinforcement. I mean if there is going to be a battle there will be just like in previous sov...
You have to concider. ATM we are the only game in town in the north besides OOS. So its not like you are going to get a super or capital fight from us =). We will deny you the good fight as much as you guys also deny us the good fights. |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
3178
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 10:56:55 -
[328] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Yeah, there's a sort of minimum needed to hold sov.
But one person can make a corp, make an alliance, get some intercceptors (or such, take your pick) and sov lasers and go troll them some sov in them there hills (hells)
If you're small, know where to aim, stick to trolling those big enough to hold sov. Remember, Unclaimed is your victory cry!! well if its one person then its very easy to deal with them. After all you got 50000 poeple in your coalition. or are you trying to tell me you cant fend off a small gang? OR you dont want to? If you dont want to then that means you probably dont really want to bother to jump far away where your alliance dont live. Why defend a system you dont live in? I wouldnt too. It's not that it's hard to deal with them, it's that it's boring as sin. This is why people aren't rushing back to play with the sov system, because it's ****. What should have been a reason for mass resubs has just reaffirmed why a lot of people left in the first place.
''Out to ruin YOUR game'' ...
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6737
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 10:58:09 -
[329] - Quote
Icycle wrote:OK so if its boring for you (defenetly not for me), then why defend it? Why defend a system you are not interested in? To alot of other people getting blobbed is not exactly fun. I know you guys like it but some others dont and you can not have always your way. Massadeath told us this time would be different and the evil empire would fall
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6477
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 11:01:53 -
[330] - Quote
Icycle wrote:OK so if its boring for you (defenetly not for me), then why defend it? Why defend a system you are not interested in? To alot of other people getting blobbed is not exactly fun. I know you guys like it but some others dont and you can not have always your way.
Or even better, why not wait for it to get reinforced and deal with it when it comes out of reinforcement. I mean if there is going to be a battle there will be just like in previous sov...
You have to concider. ATM we are the only game in town in the north besides OOS. So its not like you are going to get a super or capital fight from us =). We will deny you the good fight as much as you guys also deny us the good fights. But you're not finding the mechanics fun, you're finding it fun because you can use disposable ships to troll huge alliances with ease. You can't tell me that you enjoy firing what is effectively a mining laser at a structure.
And we defend if because we want the space, so we're forced to take part in terrible mechanics to maintain what we have. The idea of this change was to create conflict, but it's not doing that. The thing is, you guys have been CTAd to this thread by your leadership to support bad mechanics purely because they get kicks out of watching goons have to repeatedly respond to sov trolling. We all know the mechanics are bad, but your leadership is happy to watch CCP develop bad mechanics because of their "grr goons" mentality.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
990
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 11:13:35 -
[331] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:But you're not finding the mechanics fun, you're finding it fun because you can use disposable ships to troll huge alliances with ease. You can't tell me that you enjoy firing what is effectively a mining laser at a structure. Mechanics itself isn't going to be fun, that would imply some sort of PvE minigame or something, I dunno. It's all about sorting out who will get to use it at all, this is where it should be anyway.
I mean, flag carrying in UT is literally just touching two points on the map consequently, but who cares, it's about shooting players, right?
Lucas Kell wrote:And we defend if because we want the space, so we're forced to take part in terrible mechanics to maintain what we have. The idea of this change was to create conflict, but it's not doing that. The thing is, you guys have been CTAd to this thread by your leadership to support bad mechanics purely because they get kicks out of watching goons have to repeatedly respond to sov trolling. We all know the mechanics are bad, but your leadership is happy to watch CCP develop bad mechanics because of their "grr goons" mentality. grr "grr goons mentality" much?
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6738
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 11:17:50 -
[332] - Quote
One could say similar things about what happens whenever we go to war~
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 11:31:49 -
[333] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:OK so if its boring for you (defenetly not for me), then why defend it? Why defend a system you are not interested in? To alot of other people getting blobbed is not exactly fun. I know you guys like it but some others dont and you can not have always your way.
Or even better, why not wait for it to get reinforced and deal with it when it comes out of reinforcement. I mean if there is going to be a battle there will be just like in previous sov...
You have to concider. ATM we are the only game in town in the north besides OOS. So its not like you are going to get a super or capital fight from us =). We will deny you the good fight as much as you guys also deny us the good fights. But you're not finding the mechanics fun, you're finding it fun because you can use disposable ships to troll huge alliances with ease. You can't tell me that you enjoy firing what is effectively a mining laser at a structure. And we defend if because we want the space, so we're forced to take part in terrible mechanics to maintain what we have. The idea of this change was to create conflict, but it's not doing that. The thing is, you guys have been CTAd to this thread by your leadership to support bad mechanics purely because they get kicks out of watching goons have to repeatedly respond to sov trolling. We all know the mechanics are bad, but your leadership is happy to watch CCP develop bad mechanics because of their "grr goons" mentality.
When i am entosing, to me its exactly the same.The laser effect may look similar to mining but I dont look at it this way. I look at it as if I am shooting lasers at it cos the effect in the end is exactly the same. I reinforce it and the structure does blow up in the end exactly as before. Thats the truth. The why we use small ships its easy. We cannot afford it and why should we when we get blobbed every time ;) Ok so you want to keep space that you dont live in. Fair enough. Well suffer the consequences. The new expansion is suppose to help smaller entities take space or at least rattle the current space and disrupting a bit the blue balling in eve. We are creating conflict. Otherwise you will not be complaining in here! Actually it was me who told our leaders that about the new threads. It was me that initiated the post. I do what I want to do. If I dont like it, I leave. Nobody tell me what to do. Leaders dont have to tell me anything. I like this out of my choice nothign to do with leaders. I always wanted to poke at CFC and always wished for a day gorrilla warfare will be a valid game in eve. Well its finally here and I just cant get enough.
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1030
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 12:03:52 -
[334] - Quote
Guerrilla warfare always has been viable. The problem is that Gen and Massa aren't exactly on par with wheniaminspace and ammzi in the tactics department. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2075
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 12:16:43 -
[335] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Guerrilla warfare always has been viable. The problem is that Gen and Massa aren't exactly on par with wheniaminspace and ammzi in the tactics department.
There is also the problem of currently defending space with relatively low usage case. I know there are plans for PB but currently, it's a shitshow mostly because anyone can freely entosis there. I don't recall any systems where people actually live getting trolled yet. I'm not sure about our allies' space but I'd guess they get the same stuff. The space they are active in never get reinforced because it's easy to prevent and any system where there isn't ever anyone doing anything are the systems trolls keep reinforcing because it's easy.
Holding space because you WANT that space just won't work long term. People's will is bound tu burn down from defending the same system over and over again. The space you NEED on the other hand won't get trolled because nobody will be able to troll entosis a system where you have some ratters in around the clock as long as those ratters put in the :effort: to prevent reinforcements. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 12:17:59 -
[336] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Guerrilla warfare always has been viable. The problem is that Gen and Massa aren't exactly on par with wheniaminspace and ammzi in the tactics department. Well entosis is not the whole package. Entosis give a real capability for herassment. The realisty is that guerilla warfare before was only about spies, stealing, gate camps and cyno jumping someone. Paying off people, treason etc. But it lacked the serious ability to engage where it hurts and disapear into the forest quickly. Now this is viable. The most important thing about this that this is only realy feasible in systems you dont live cos you cant really entosis a system where you live it unless you bring everything. So yes, its refreshing and very fun to do this. |
|
CCP Falcon
12273
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 12:18:15 -
[337] - Quote
Moving this to the Assembly Hall
CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 12:22:54 -
[338] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Guerrilla warfare always has been viable. The problem is that Gen and Massa aren't exactly on par with wheniaminspace and ammzi in the tactics department. There is also the problem of currently defending space with relatively low usage case. I know there are plans for PB but currently, it's a shitshow mostly because anyone can freely entosis there. I don't recall any systems where people actually live getting trolled yet. I'm not sure about our allies' space but I'd guess they get the same stuff. The space they are active in never get reinforced because it's easy to prevent and any system where there isn't ever anyone doing anything are the systems trolls keep reinforcing because it's easy. Holding space because you WANT that space just won't work long term. People's will is bound tu burn down from defending the same system over and over again. The space you NEED on the other hand won't get trolled because nobody will be able to troll entosis a system where you have some ratters in around the clock as long as those ratters put in the :effort: to prevent reinforcements.
If you NEED it, you live in it! If you WANT it you live in it! You dont live in it in either case. Easy solution. You dont want it entosied, start living in it. You dont live in it, it will get entosied.
|
Jang Ezhdeha
20th Legion Mordus Angels
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 12:26:17 -
[339] - Quote
Fozzie Sov is great! The big complaint I see is that these big Alliances cant hold what they have because they have overreached and have more space than they should. If your 1000+ member alliance cant hold off a small gang then you have two choices, get more members to actually fill the space you have claimed or reduce the sovereignty that you hold so your current numbers can defend it. Stop crying to CCP because you actually have to work to keep what you have. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6478
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 13:55:56 -
[340] - Quote
Icycle wrote:The why we use small ships its easy. See! It's easy! You want to maintain your easy gameplay.
Icycle wrote:Ok so you want to keep space that you dont live in. No. If we don't live in it, it should be easy. The problem is that even space people are living in is easy and requires no real commitment. I'd be happy to see active systems need battleship links and inactive systems need rookie ships.
Icycle wrote: I do what I want to do. If I dont like it, I leave. Nobody tell me what to do. Leaders dont have to tell me anything. I like this out of my choice nothing to do with leaders. Lol, bull. You're pretty much echoing gen eve, just with slightly better grammar.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 14:00:01 -
[341] - Quote
Billy Bojangle wrote:Pah Cova wrote: Players who have left are not turning back until they have what they want and part of them are not going back anymore, they are felling defrauded by CCP so I cant blame them since the last 4 years we get all in one way or another being defrauded due the systemic nerfs, changes on the way we play the game and CCP words are adpat. So for at least 20.000 palyers they have adapted themselves once and for all, they leave the game and I belive much more will leave the game soon enough. New players dont count on that, when they reach the game, they leave in a week or two, too complex, too many changes all the time, scaming and harassment to new players who dosent know what to do, so their best way is to move to another game without all of this...
Can I have your stuff?
Sure you cant, that-¦s why its MY STUFF, better to burn them if i leave then give it to someone else, you want stuff? Work as I did.
Backing to the point of this thread, even if there are half of null sec to claim sov, people arent going there to claim it, theres too many people (like me I assume that) that dosent want to be in huge or bigger corps they prefer small corps. CCP are trying to force hs people to go into null to big or huge corps, thats not going to happen never, that people dont want big corps and specially pvp 23/7, they want to do what they want and what they like, not what others want them to do. Then and again the lack of mobility to move their stuff into null are not helping at all, if CCP thinks that they are gonna sell their stuff to buy new ones in null, forget, thats not going to happen, maybe a few dozens do it, but thats all.
In Dominion people are going on null just because they have mobility, they enjoy for some safety and everybody has what are looking for, I assume that shooting structures for hours is not fun too, however that provides pvp if the intention are to defend that particular system. Now with the all power in only one side, of course, nobody shows up to defend anything, they just dont care, they loose it defend it or not, you can call them chickens, I call them smarts.
The real problem in this game are the tremendous power in just one side vs the all other sides, its not proportional, that is the main problem that CCP must look into first before develop something that can punish once again the same guys. But i guess why they dont look into that way, its no convenient...
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2075
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 14:23:19 -
[342] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: No. If we don't live in it, it should be easy. The problem is that even space people are living in is easy and requires no real commitment. I'd be happy to see active systems need battleship links and inactive systems need rookie ships.
What system with people living into it got reinforced? What were the index on it when it got reinforced and why did nobody manage to just prevent the reinforce in the first place? |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 14:24:08 -
[343] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:The why we use small ships its easy. See! It's easy! You want to maintain your easy gameplay. Icycle wrote:Ok so you want to keep space that you dont live in. No. If we don't live in it, it should be easy. The problem is that even space people are living in is easy and requires no real commitment. I'd be happy to see active systems need battleship links and inactive systems need rookie ships. Icycle wrote: I do what I want to do. If I dont like it, I leave. Nobody tell me what to do. Leaders dont have to tell me anything. I like this out of my choice nothing to do with leaders. Lol, bull. You're pretty much echoing gen eve, just with slightly better grammar.
Dont quote me out of context. Context is as important as the point. When I said "its easy", I dont meant its literally easy, otherwise we already own half of CFC space. What I meant its easy to decide why we use corm fleet and not carriers. You would be stupid to do so. After all you guys have a habit of droping supers and titans on top of us all the time. I am sure if the tables were turned you would not drop a carrier vs troll titans and supers ;).
lol no, I am not gen. I am well know for how I speak in TS. Thats me. Take it or leave it. I tell you the way it is and thats it. I wont bs you around unless I am trolling you ofcource. I also like a good joke and a laugh. Is there anything else you want to know about me? Or are you done with the personal attacks?
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 14:49:19 -
[344] - Quote
Pah Cova wrote:Billy Bojangle wrote:Pah Cova wrote: Players who have left are not turning back until they have what they want and part of them are not going back anymore, they are felling defrauded by CCP so I cant blame them since the last 4 years we get all in one way or another being defrauded due the systemic nerfs, changes on the way we play the game and CCP words are adpat. So for at least 20.000 palyers they have adapted themselves once and for all, they leave the game and I belive much more will leave the game soon enough. New players dont count on that, when they reach the game, they leave in a week or two, too complex, too many changes all the time, scaming and harassment to new players who dosent know what to do, so their best way is to move to another game without all of this...
Can I have your stuff? Sure you cant, that-¦s why its MY STUFF, better to burn them if i leave then give it to someone else, you want stuff? Work as I did. Backing to the point of this thread, even if there are half of null sec to claim sov, people arent going there to claim it, theres too many people (like me I assume that) that dosent want to be in huge or bigger corps they prefer small corps. CCP are trying to force hs people to go into null to big or huge corps, thats not going to happen never, that people dont want big corps and specially pvp 23/7, they want to do what they want and what they like, not what others want them to do. Then and again the lack of mobility to move their stuff into null are not helping at all, if CCP thinks that they are gonna sell their stuff to buy new ones in null, forget, thats not going to happen, maybe a few dozens do it, but thats all. In Dominion people are going on null just because they have mobility, they enjoy for some safety and everybody has what are looking for, I assume that shooting structures for hours is not fun too, however that provides pvp if the intention are to defend that particular system. Now with the all power in only one side, of course, nobody shows up to defend anything, they just dont care, they loose it defend it or not, you can call them chickens, I call them smarts. The real problem in this game are the tremendous power in just one side vs the all other sides, its not proportional, that is the main problem that CCP must look into first before develop something that can punish once again the same guys. But i guess why they dont look into that way, its no convenient...
People moved to dominion cos of isk. Sites used to give double the isk or more. People had more alts. It really rewarded having many alts. Things got so bad the hisec wardeckers were complaining they did not have no one to war dec . I remember laughing at that. Then it got nerfed and went down after that. Also the new limitations on multi boxing software has reduced this also. The sites got nerfed big since then. The isk per hour has dropped to half since then. |
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 15:39:09 -
[345] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Pah Cova wrote:Billy Bojangle wrote:Pah Cova wrote: Players who have left are not turning back until they have what they want and part of them are not going back anymore, they are felling defrauded by CCP so I cant blame them since the last 4 years we get all in one way or another being defrauded due the systemic nerfs, changes on the way we play the game and CCP words are adpat. So for at least 20.000 palyers they have adapted themselves once and for all, they leave the game and I belive much more will leave the game soon enough. New players dont count on that, when they reach the game, they leave in a week or two, too complex, too many changes all the time, scaming and harassment to new players who dosent know what to do, so their best way is to move to another game without all of this...
Can I have your stuff? Sure you cant, that-¦s why its MY STUFF, better to burn them if i leave then give it to someone else, you want stuff? Work as I did. Backing to the point of this thread, even if there are half of null sec to claim sov, people arent going there to claim it, theres too many people (like me I assume that) that dosent want to be in huge or bigger corps they prefer small corps. CCP are trying to force hs people to go into null to big or huge corps, thats not going to happen never, that people dont want big corps and specially pvp 23/7, they want to do what they want and what they like, not what others want them to do. Then and again the lack of mobility to move their stuff into null are not helping at all, if CCP thinks that they are gonna sell their stuff to buy new ones in null, forget, thats not going to happen, maybe a few dozens do it, but thats all. In Dominion people are going on null just because they have mobility, they enjoy for some safety and everybody has what are looking for, I assume that shooting structures for hours is not fun too, however that provides pvp if the intention are to defend that particular system. Now with the all power in only one side, of course, nobody shows up to defend anything, they just dont care, they loose it defend it or not, you can call them chickens, I call them smarts. The real problem in this game are the tremendous power in just one side vs the all other sides, its not proportional, that is the main problem that CCP must look into first before develop something that can punish once again the same guys. But i guess why they dont look into that way, its no convenient... People moved to dominion cos of isk. Sites used to give double the isk or more. People had more alts. It really rewarded having many alts. Things got so bad the hisec wardeckers were complaining they did not have no one to war dec . I remember laughing at that. Then it got nerfed and went down after that. Also the new limitations on multi boxing software has reduced this also. The sites got nerfed big since then. The isk per hour has dropped to half since then.
So? Whats the point? Are multiboxing bad? It means more accounts on game which is more incoming money to CCP and you are saying that is bad? If people are making money in null sec, it means that they are working to do so, or are you talking about bots? Bots are used in null sec first and almost of the players that have complain about that have used them, personally I never used them, but if you have big rich alliances, better to start thinking what they have done before for they have all that money. you have guys in game that uses multiboxing for pvp, are that bad? Not for me, If they have a pc that can runs all the accounts, why not? Its their ships and its their problem. Wardecs always have, if that mechanics are good, i dont think so, to me tha small the corp is, bigger the payment should be. If one part dosent desire to pvp, theres no point to wardec them, they can always bypass the system and not fight, wardecs should be made to those who desire to engage in combat and never to those who never engages in combat, its very simple. But people tend to force others to do what they dont desire to do, then here comes the complains about they not fight etc etc, its like in real life, some fight, others makes the logistics, others manufacture weapeons food etc, and the big guys (the money guys or the parasites if you prefer) dont do any ****, just sit on they chair making enemies and friends for its convenience and profit with the work and effort of everybody else. I will never shipping on that, I like small corps, small roams and a place where I can call home, if its hs, low sec, null sec or wh its not relevant, for now null sec to me its not worth, i dont care about get sov and hold it, I dont want CTA-¦s all the time, I dont want everyday to be 4 or more hours sit on my system waiting for the timers end or chasing ceptors preventing my ihub to be blowned up, sorry, thats not an option to me. Engage in combat yes, but when I want and when I can, not when others want just beacause they want...
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 15:48:05 -
[346] - Quote
Pah Cova wrote: So? Whats the point? Are multiboxing bad? It means more accounts on game which is more incoming money to CCP and you are saying that is bad? If people are making money in null sec, it means that they are working to do so, or are you talking about bots? Bots are used in null sec first and almost of the players that have complain about that have used them, personally I never used them, but if you have big rich alliances, better to start thinking what they have done before for they have all that money. you have guys in game that uses multiboxing for pvp, are that bad? Not for me, If they have a pc that can runs all the accounts, why not? Its their ships and its their problem. Wardecs always have, if that mechanics are good, i dont think so, to me tha small the corp is, bigger the payment should be. If one part dosent desire to pvp, theres no point to wardec them, they can always bypass the system and not fight, wardecs should be made to those who desire to engage in combat and never to those who never engages in combat, its very simple. But people tend to force others to do what they dont desire to do, then here comes the complains about they not fight etc etc, its like in real life, some fight, others makes the logistics, others manufacture weapeons food etc, and the big guys (the money guys or the parasites if you prefer) dont do any ****, just sit on they chair making enemies and friends for its convenience and profit with the work and effort of everybody else. I will never shipping on that, I like small corps, small roams and a place where I can call home, if its hs, low sec, null sec or wh its not relevant, for now null sec to me its not worth, i dont care about get sov and hold it, I dont want CTA-¦s all the time, I dont want everyday to be 4 or more hours sit on my system waiting for the timers end or chasing ceptors preventing my ihub to be blowned up, sorry, thats not an option to me. Engage in combat yes, but when I want and when I can, not when others want just beacause they want...
I personally think mutiboxing software is the worst thing that could eve happen to eve specially in pvp. I will not go into it cos the topic is not multi boxing!
|
Gerad Aihaken
Keepers of Balance Legion of xXDEATHXx
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 16:35:48 -
[347] - Quote
Let me speak from my heart in English try to add an opinion from a Russian pilot, as there are not much of us who bother themselves to write in English :)
I would suggest to start with a smaller change, which I've found somewhere on reddit: make an attacker pay, I would say, 300mil to get the structure reinforced. The reinforcement start time should calculate from the actual payment. The payment should be done before the next invulnerability window of the structure. Time mechanic here does not matter much. It should be only done in a way, that does not allow abuse, like get immediate nodes spawn after payment. The pluses are: - easily implemented - will decrease trolling, which, in my opinion is the number 1 problem now, that makes SOV boring - will still allow small alliances to venture in a 0.0 space, as it should not be a problem to chip in 50mil/pilot for a 20 man fleet to take over a system (TCU, iHub, station) if they really want to. For those who say it is a lot of money: get real, they will most probably use ships more expensive then that to actually make it happen
I also agree on the statements of a tool for SOV-war and SOV transfer from the petition. All the other stuff I would not rush to implement: we had one big change done recently, so I would better avoid doing more noticeable immediate changes :)
The prove, that changes to current mechanics are required, is that as far, as I've seen, the only people who think that current mechanics is working as intended are either those who does not live in null sec or don't get trolled a lot, because live 20 jumps away from low-sec. All those who trolled and got trolled (trolled is the key word here, not take over the space for themselves) are saying that some changes are required. Changes and tweaks, I mind you, not reverting back to dominion!
I guess the reason for this, is that people who didn't participate in trolling don't really understand how annoying that is. To make them understand better, I would suggest the following joke change: - a person can entos NPC station to get it into reinforce with all the mechanics like SOV structures and second reinforce - the result of 'taking over' the NPC station will be taking away an equal amount from wallets of pilots, who has assets in that station, with a total sum equal to a cost of a TCU or an iHub
Whatever ridiculous that change may sound, I can give you some plus points for it! - will encourage fights! (we have seen this plus point somewhere, didn't we?.. :) - will make people to only occupy stations that they really need (aha, seems to be a duplicate again! :) - will free some DB memory, as people will trash stuff that they don't really need (we always should take care of the servers, aren't we? :)
I guess, that will swap the opinions, and all the 0.0 pilots will say 'a great change, +1', while all the empire/low-sec would say "if I didn't notice that there is a rookie ship there -- why should I lose money? why should I stop doing what I wanted to do and run 20 jumps to take care of my assets?". And that is the case of a null-sec right now, which people, who don't live there, do not understand. It is not that "why don't you drop SOV where you don't use it?", it is "why would we drop SOV where nobody is going to use it?"
Personally, I would be happy to see some empty space getting occupied. But browsing through the comments here and in reddit I've seen the only alliance that actually tries to take over the space: the CORVOS and I really admire them for doing that. Which makes it somewhat 50/1 trolling/real null-sec venturing ratio. And trolling would not get any empty space occupied.
There is also one more problem with the current trolling possibility which I haven't seen to be discussed: it actually encourages blue-balling and no-atack agreements between large alliances. How is that, you would say? The point is that as a big alliance you would not start a war against another big alliance, that is capable to bring 10 waves of 1000+ troll-ceptors to reinforce the hell out of your entire SOV within one vulnerability window. And it is not really hard, will only make each pilot pay 500mil in case he lose all 10 ceptors. This even I, after a year of play, can handle. Not speaking of those, who play EVE for years. One might argue: they can easily defend by splitting over their space and bla-bla whatever.. First, easy to say, hard to do. Second, it will work only until the point, where those 1000+ ceptor pilots will reform as one fleet and drop the hammer on one strategic and really important system. And here will be the deal then: will those who split make it in time to reform as one fleet to defend their assets? May be they will, but what if they won't? So, in my opinion, current SOV system increases risks of a large-scale war between SOV holding alliances, making them raise a question: why would you start it in the first place?
And I've got an example, where it worked out exactly as I think: we stopped our war with TRI and SOLAR and plussed each other. If you don't agree with that -- please give me an example of any descent scale war that is happening nowadays. I agree, that it is summer right now, everybody is new to the system and bla-bla whatever. Let's see then, if that will change in autumn or not. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
314
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 17:09:33 -
[348] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Yes they can. True, I shouldn't have spoken so categorically. I keep watching the Yrton constellation, which now has it's seventh different alliance deploy a TCU. And you're right, a smaller alliance, no matter how big, won't be able to hold system next to an larger alliance unless the larger alliance allows them to live there, even if the larger alliance never uses those systems despite having a TCU in them. That does not mean, however, that the larger alliance should concern itself with contesting timers in those systems every time one pops up. A TCU gets reinforced? Pfft. Doesn't matter. Command nodes spawn and sit around for days? Again, doesn't matter. Hostiles capture the command nodes which pops the TCU, but don't put down their own TCU? Doesn't matter. Some other random group stops by and onlines a TCU? Doesn't matter. If an alliance doesn't care about a system, doesn't have pilots living in a system, by definition the system does matter, and therefore TCU's don't matter. Roam into it for fights. Rat/mine in it. (Although you won't get the benefit of an Ihub of course.) But get out of the Dominion Sov mindset that TCUs matter for systems you don't live in. After so long playing that way, I do realize how difficult it can be to let something go that was previously held so tightly, but for the alliance's sanity it's necessary now.
Quote:And yet it doesn't happen in sov null, because the system actively discourages meaningful conflict. Thanks for proving the point that it's the mechanics, not the players. The system is three weeks old. We have lots of people playing it as if Dominion Sov were still the applicable paradigm. It's the players, not the system, preventing meaningful conflict right now.
Quote:LOL no it's not. The purpose of occupancy sov is for people to LIVE in their space, not stand idly in their space at all times just in case people come to get it. Games are for entertainment an the current system does nothing to promote that. Having to constantly reship and run around chasing cheap ships designed to be uncatchable is not entertaining. Seriously, I think you need to actually try the system out so you understand the level of boring involved in actively guarding sov. Perhaps you and I have different ideas of what it means to live in a system? Living in a system means availability to defend it by definition, and there's no idle standby required. It does not mean constantly orbiting an Outpost, TCU or Ihub. You can be in station chatting on comms. You can be in space mining. You can be in space ratting. You have no less than 15 minutes to respond to an Interceptor entering system. In our null system, my fleet is constantly, 23x7, on the lookout for Interceptors and other hostiles. We have pilots spread out across up to six systems. We have advance warning. It doesn't interfere with our living within our home system. It's a natural part of our life there. We welcome the activity, even if it's an Interceptor we can't catch but can only chase off.
Quote:See, you keep underselling it. If the problem was defending one system from one trollceptor, then yeah, there'd be no problem. The problem with disposable ships is that what you end up defending against is constant trollceptors. Just look at the timerboards for how many timers are going. Those are just the ones that slipped through, and I guarantee that only a tiny minority are from people actually interested in taking space. Indeed, for example I do see quite a few of BL's Fountain systems marked red on DotLAN due to SMA activity. No idea if SMA wants any of those systems. But BL shouldn't have let those systems get reinforced in the first place. They have too many systems for their membership levels. Trollceptors can't "slip through" if there are pilots in every system you want to hang on to. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 17:26:39 -
[349] - Quote
Gerad Aihaken wrote: .....sorry too long.....
I would agree on the initial statement that CCP forgot to include tool like who and where been attacked beside the alliance mail. I think most reasonable people would agree on that.
I do however disagree on paying 300m to attack something. Thats just ridiculous. If you think losing enotosis ships, plus the rest of your fleet it cheap then good for you! Only large alliances can afford 300m and god help you if you are going vs a monstruosity that is CFC. I can only think that unless you are planning a miraclous return of White Noise and the DRF, I dont see how someone can afford that .
People complain about not getting enough action and then people blaim it on sov. Where in reality everyone knows that the new sov has nothing to do with it. War creates content and entosis does that exactly. You have someone that does not like you and is willing to herass you to death and possibly take sov for themselves.
I think taking a station is more that enough punishment for someone not to be able to redock. Not to mention if you decide to destroy the local eco with alts in it. In the future maybe there will be stations that will blow up and you lose everything. That we will see. Another topic for the future
The whole point is if you dont live in that space, then it wont get entosed. So why not allow to entosis a system you dont live? Forgive me for what i say here but we were roaming in your space using a wormhole several times. My god you got so much empty space its crazy. I dont know how or why you would put yourself in that pain. But I can tell you is that all that space should be used by someone. Why should you get to keep all that empty space esclusivelly? If you want to get more people there and blue ball them fine, thats your choice. You can always pay them to go away like CFC has done in the past. I think Fozzy sov its a brilliant idea and CCP should have done this 5 years ago. Whats wrong is that alliances keep it and then complain about not wanting to defend it. That is wrong. Its the front lines in null sec. It must be very dangerous.
You guys have been in war for the last two years. I am sorry to say this but you guys did not prep for it and example CFC did. CFC was very close like your space before. Lots and lots of empty space. Now they still have much but no where near you guys. You guys failed at prep and were too busy shooting each other. I dont want to be rude or harsh but is the truth.
Some people are obsessed with this "trolling". I would say this. If you think you are been trolled is cos you have casted a wider net that you cant control. Adapt. Its been always the modo in eve. Those that adapt do better than those that do not. |
Papa Django
Evolution Paradox
124
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 17:43:14 -
[350] - Quote
Gerad Aihaken wrote:Let me speak from my heart in English try to add an opinion from a Russian pilot, as there are not much of us who bother themselves to write in English :)
I would suggest to start with a smaller change, which I've found somewhere on reddit: make an attacker pay, I would say, 300mil to get the structure reinforced.
[...]
- will decrease trolling, which, in my opinion is the number 1 problem now, that makes SOV boring
Trolling is not an issue. If you cant handle a few frig why could you hold your territory ?
All your argumentation is founded on trolling is an issue. Trolling is not an issue so your wall of text is irrelevant.
The issue is not trolling, your issue is : You have a bigger territory then you can handle.
The proof is : You can't handle a single frigsize fleet |
|
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
3181
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 17:48:16 -
[351] - Quote
Well OP made it to CSM now it seems , so the ball's completely in his court now.
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 17:55:58 -
[352] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:Gerad Aihaken wrote:Let me speak from my heart in English try to add an opinion from a Russian pilot, as there are not much of us who bother themselves to write in English :)
I would suggest to start with a smaller change, which I've found somewhere on reddit: make an attacker pay, I would say, 300mil to get the structure reinforced.
[...]
- will decrease trolling, which, in my opinion is the number 1 problem now, that makes SOV boring
Trolling is not an issue. If you cant handle a few frig why could you hold your territory ? All your argumentation is founded on trolling is an issue. Trolling is not an issue so your wall of text is irrelevant. The issue is not trolling, your issue is : You have a bigger territory then you can handle. The proof is : You can't handle a single frigsize fleet
I could not agree more. Just a thought, what would happen to a city if there was no police any more? Or what would happen to high sec if concord was removed. All the criminals will move in and chaos descends upon it. Which is exactly whats going on here. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6480
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 18:27:26 -
[353] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:What system with people living into it got reinforced? What were the index on it when it got reinforced and why did nobody manage to just prevent the reinforce in the first place? And if you only had to respond to reinforced systems you'd have a point.
Icycle wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:No. If we don't live in it, it should be easy. The problem is that even space people are living in is easy and requires no real commitment. I'd be happy to see active systems need battleship links and inactive systems need rookie ships.
I think you personally just destoyer your chances here. So you want null sec space without needed to be protected/easy? WOW. Really? Do you know that null sec space is suppose to be unsafe right? Besides all the systems that are getting entosied, you dont live in it! Easy as in easy to take, genius. Read the rest of my quoted post there. I'd be happy to see people take inactive sov with rookie ships but require battleships to contest occupied sov.
Icycle wrote:lol no, I am not gen. I know you're not, you're one of his lackeys.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6480
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 18:32:39 -
[354] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Quote:And yet it doesn't happen in sov null, because the system actively discourages meaningful conflict. Thanks for proving the point that it's the mechanics, not the players. The system is three weeks old. We have lots of people playing it as if Dominion Sov were still the applicable paradigm. It's the players, not the system, preventing meaningful conflict right now. I honestly believe it's the lack of required commitment to contest sov. We've been saying all along that entosis links should be what make battleships relevant again. If you had to drop a battleship to contest sov you'd really only do it if you wanted to take the sov, not for a troll - at least not too frequently.
Eli Stan wrote:Perhaps you and I have different ideas of what it means to live in a system? Living in a system means availability to defend it by definition, and there's no idle standby required. It does not mean constantly orbiting an Outpost, TCU or Ihub. You can be in station chatting on comms. You can be in space mining. You can be in space ratting. You have no less than 15 minutes to respond to an Interceptor entering system. In our null system, my fleet is constantly, 23x7, on the lookout for Interceptors and other hostiles. We have pilots spread out across up to six systems. We have advance warning. It doesn't interfere with our living within our home system. It's a natural part of our life there. We welcome the activity, even if it's an Interceptor we can't catch but can only chase off. And I get that, but why bother mining or ratting if you're constantly having to reship and chase around a ship designed not to be caught? A lot of people seem to want sov to be a career choice not an entertaining game mechanic. If that's how CCP want to take it, fair enough, but it won't bring in more players.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Trii Seo
Executive Outcomes
828
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 18:55:40 -
[355] - Quote
My biggest gripe with the current system is that one no longer needs to commit to an attack. Previously, attacking sovereignity required placing SBUs and actually putting some effort into your conquest.
While tedious, it usually meant that someone who went through the logistical and strategic effort of doing so had an intent of claiming sov. Currently, it means that anyone can harass a sov holding entity. Now, there isn't anything inherently bad about it.
You can easily imagine - and I suspect the developers imagined it that way when it was first conceived - a situation where a hostile gang rolls in, tries to harass a system, a local fleet deploys to go and fight them. Battle ensues, one side gets shot at - fun, nice, 'content' as people are fond of calling it.
However, this is not how it usually goes. We all know how risk-averse players are, and said hostile gang will be of no exception. When a response fleet rolls in and the attackers don't have the guarantee of victory, they'll simply bail. No content will be provided.
Rinse and repeat.
The stance on large battles I agree with whole-heartedly. The best fights I've been in never began as a consensual "Hail, mighty space foe! Let us meet here at this node, ignore the objective and instead let us joust!". No, they were fights when both sides rammed it down and fought no holds barred.
Those were the battles that mattered, they left the memories of frantic scrambling, pings of "GETIN!" bombarding you through comms, hundreds of pilots bridging into a fight, reinforcement fleets getting pipebombed by RnK.
And finally, the issue of scalability.
Now, don't get me wrong, it should take effort to capture or reinforce a system. The opposing force should be given time to field a defensive fleet.
However, a situation of "We control the grid, control pretty much everything and the entosis link is running on the structure. Now what?" "Now the entire fleet sits and holds their dicks in hands for an hour." somehow manages to achieve a level of boredom higher than POS/structure bashes.
In short, in pre-arranged lab conditions that don't factor in player behavior this system is good. That said, we're not in pre-arranged lab conditions.
The king is dead, long live the king!
Glory to Maximilian Singularity the Sixth, First of his Name!
Proud pilot of the Imperium
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
315
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 19:18:51 -
[356] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:I honestly believe it's the lack of required commitment to contest sov. We've been saying all along that entosis links should be what make battleships relevant again. If you had to drop a battleship to contest sov you'd really only do it if you wanted to take the sov, not for a troll - at least not too frequently. I think allowing Entosis links on only battleship hulls and larger would be even worse for sov holders. Just like in Dominion Sov where sov structures were reinforced but then no attackers showed up to contest the timer - that is, the blueball tactic we heard about a lot - you'll still have instances of systems getting reinforced yet nobody showing up for the timer... and the defenders will then have to jump around a constellation in battleships and capture ten nodes! That'd be so much worse for defending your sov than being able to use interceptors yourself!
Also, one of the expliccit goals of Aegis Sov was to make it easy to take unclaimed space. Allowing interceptors to claim sov when nobody around is a good thing. As preventing an interceptor from taking sov is easy when the space is occupied.
Quote:And I get that, but why bother mining or ratting if you're constantly having to reship and chase around a ship designed not to be caught? A lot of people seem to want sov to be a career choice not an entertaining game mechanic. If that's how CCP want to take it, fair enough, but it won't bring in more players. See, some people are the opposite of you on this, I think. Some feel that ratting and mining are the dull career choices of EVE, while chasing interceptors is the entertaining game mechanic. We have quite a fair number of kills where a Skiff is the top damage dealer. We almost always have people docked in station being social who enjoy flying out to an ice belt or wherever and engaging a hostile who has come into system. It breaks up the monotony. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
67
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 19:40:48 -
[357] - Quote
Trii Seo wrote: too long...
Correction....
In previous they did not have to comit. They attacked and could leave or stay if they wanted. CFC is well know for troll sov aka "I did not wanted that sov anyway" or "was looking for content not sov". The same thing is happening here.
The bigest battles in eve for the most part have been escalations. One brings something, the other brigs something bigger and more and more etc. This in no doubt will happen sooner or later. If you guys did not blue ball each other it would happen more oftern but here we are...Stop blaiming CCP for your policies! You want content of massive scale fine, set a few of your blues to neut and let the slugfest begin. Dont then wait for it to happen or deploy to an enemies territory just like Razor and Init are doing.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3176
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 19:47:03 -
[358] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I honestly believe it's the lack of required commitment to contest sov. We've been saying all along that entosis links should be what make battleships relevant again. If you had to drop a battleship to contest sov you'd really only do it if you wanted to take the sov, not for a troll - at least not too frequently. I think allowing Entosis links on only battleship hulls and larger would be even worse for sov holders. Just like in Dominion Sov where sov structures were reinforced but then no attackers showed up to contest the timer - that is, the blueball tactic we heard about a lot - you'll still have instances of systems getting reinforced yet nobody showing up for the timer... and the defenders will then have to jump around a constellation in battleships and capture ten nodes! That'd be so much worse for defending your sov than being able to use interceptors yourself!
I think the objection is that with letting interceptors and other fast moving ships use the entosis link is that we are still getting the blueball tactic. Now instead of not showing for the fight, the attacker runs from it.
Granted, I agree that if nobody shows up and reinforcement happens and nodes spawnGǪthe alliance holding that system screwed up. They deserve what they get. Granted if nobody shows up ever and they lose the systemGǪokay, again they deserve it.
I think what people would like is for there to be some chance of shots being fired vs. just getting the warning, burning to the system under attack, damp/jam/whatever the ship with the entosis link, that then fucks off to another system to entosis the relevant structure thereGǪuntil somebody shows up and damps/jams/whatever again.
Maybe things will change on their own. Defenders will get better at stopping the single frigate/ceptor etc. from doing the entosis thing. The attackers might bring more people, and fights will start occurring. But if not, my guess is that the current version of Fozziesov will be changed.
Edit: Typo
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
315
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 19:56:52 -
[359] - Quote
Trii Seo wrote:My biggest gripe with the current system is that one no longer needs to commit to an attack. Previously, attacking sovereignity required placing SBUs and actually putting some effort into your conquest. With Dominion Sov, the effort to attack sov was proportional to the massive HP buffer of sov structures, which was present whether or not the owners of that sov were present. With Aegis Sov, the effort to attack sov is proportional to the effort being put in to active defense. Is there no defense? Then there should be no effort required to attack. Got Titans, supers and a subcap support fleet sitting next to your TCU? The effort required to attack it will be extreme. No little interceptor will stand a chance if they make an attempt.
Quote:You can easily imagine - and I suspect the developers imagined it that way when it was first conceived - a situation where a hostile gang rolls in, tries to harass a system, a local fleet deploys to go and fight them. Battle ensues, one side gets shot at - fun, nice, 'content' as people are fond of calling it.
However, this is not how it usually goes. We all know how risk-averse players are, and said hostile gang will be of no exception. When a response fleet rolls in and the attackers don't have the guarantee of victory, they'll simply bail. No content will be provided.
Rinse and repeat. Actually, I believe what the developers actually imagined isn't that a defense fleet "rolls in," rather they imagined the fleet is already there in system, making it exceedingly easy to chase off or kill a trollceptor, or dissuading a trollceptor from trying in the first place.
Quote:The stance on large battles I agree with whole-heartedly. The best fights I've been in never began as a consensual "Hail, mighty space foe! Let us meet here at this node, ignore the objective and instead let us joust!". No, they were fights when both sides rammed it down and fought no holds barred.
Those were the battles that mattered, they left the memories of frantic scrambling, pings of "GETIN!" bombarding you through comms, hundreds of pilots bridging into a fight, reinforcement fleets getting pipebombed by RnK. Those battles aren't gone. If somebody truly wants somebody else's sov, and the defender truly wants to keep their sov, you will get your large, pinged fights. (Except that the fights will be spread out, across multiple systems and multiple grids of a constellation, hopefully with no sustained TiDi. This is another explicitly stated design goal of CCP's new sov system.)
Quote:And finally, the issue of scalability.
Now, don't get me wrong, it should take effort to capture or reinforce a system. The opposing force should be given time to field a defensive fleet.
However, a situation of "We control the grid, control pretty much everything and the entosis link is running on the structure. Now what?" "Now the entire fleet sits and holds their dicks in hands for an hour." somehow manages to achieve a level of boredom higher than POS/structure bashes.
In short, in pre-arranged lab conditions that don't factor in player behavior this system is good. That said, we're not in pre-arranged lab conditions.
I honestly don't see how shooting a TCU with guns for an hour is any more exciting than shooting a TCU with an Entosis Link. I've helped take down a few POSes and POCOs. It's very dull.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6480
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 19:57:31 -
[360] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I honestly believe it's the lack of required commitment to contest sov. We've been saying all along that entosis links should be what make battleships relevant again. If you had to drop a battleship to contest sov you'd really only do it if you wanted to take the sov, not for a troll - at least not too frequently. I think allowing Entosis links on only battleship hulls and larger would be even worse for sov holders. Just like in Dominion Sov where sov structures were reinforced but then no attackers showed up to contest the timer - that is, the blueball tactic we heard about a lot - you'll still have instances of systems getting reinforced yet nobody showing up for the timer... and the defenders will then have to jump around a constellation in battleships and capture ten nodes! That'd be so much worse for defending your sov than being able to use interceptors yourself! Sure you might get that, but you'd get considerably less people trolling to contest sov, so you woundn't be chasing trollceptors about all day.
Eli Stan wrote:Also, one of the expliccit goals of Aegis Sov was to make it easy to take unclaimed space. Allowing interceptors to claim sov when nobody around is a good thing. As preventing an interceptor from taking sov is easy when the space is occupied. Easier than dominion, which battleships would be. If you cant field a battleship to your target system, you probably shouldn't be trying to take sov.
Eli Stan wrote:See, some people are the opposite of you on this, I think. Some feel that ratting and mining are the dull career choices of EVE, while chasing interceptors is the entertaining game mechanic. We have quite a fair number of kills where a Skiff is the top damage dealer. We almost always have people docked in station being social who enjoy flying out to an ice belt or wherever and engaging a hostile who has come into system. It breaks up the monotony. They may enjoy it now, but after they've chased their 100th disposable interceptor, they're gonna get bored.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 20:01:58 -
[361] - Quote
It seems this has become Eve's version of Asymmetric warfare, where the defender would prefer symmetric warfare. The fact that it is so annoying to major Sov holders, is the point. , they have to address it.
Its a kind of balance to Sov Sprawl. Eventually they will get annoyed enough to only hold Sov where they "have" to, not every where ever they can.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 20:06:10 -
[362] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Also, one of the expliccit goals of Aegis Sov was to make it easy to take unclaimed space. Allowing interceptors to claim sov when nobody around is a good thing. As preventing an interceptor from taking sov is easy when the space is occupied. Easier than dominion, which battleships would be. If you cant field a battleship to your target system, you probably shouldn't be trying to take sov.
I think if you can not fend off what you call a "troll ceptor" that has only 25km to entosis then you should not hold sov. At least in that system anyways!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 20:08:07 -
[363] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:It seems this has become Eve's version of Asymmetric warfare, where the defender would prefer symmetric warfare. The fact that it is so annoying to major Sov holders, is the point. , they have to address it. Its a kind of balance to Sov Sprawl. Eventually they will get annoyed enough to only hold Sov where they "have" to, not every where ever they can.
Yep, I cant wait for the mittani to spin this one |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2078
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 20:55:14 -
[364] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:What system with people living into it got reinforced? What were the index on it when it got reinforced and why did nobody manage to just prevent the reinforce in the first place? And if you only had to respond to reinforced systems you'd have a point.
The system is designed so that you HAVE to respond on attacked before it gets reinforced. Your indice give you buffer time to form up IF NEEDED. If it's 1 troll, only one dude from teh group living in that system need to push him off. If you have people living in that system, it should not take 40 mins to push off 1 dude. If you have enough people living in all your systems, that 1 dude con't reinforce any system as he will always get pushed off. If you have system where you have nobody living, then those will get reinforced because you obviously don't defend them with actual presence.
This is what the fozzie sov system is about. Presence in your own systems. If you can't push off a guy in 40 mins, you obviously don't have a presence in that system.
If your indices are up, you can even let him get a few minutes of burning stront on cycle and then push him off and entosis it back faster that he did. He will dry out his cargo of stront and you can keep doing what you were doing before pushing him. It's a occupancy system. If you occupy your systems, it will be easy to handle. If you are an absentee landlord, you have to deal with not playing the game how it's currently designed.
Anyone who though an occupancy SOV system would not require you to be in your systems missed the point IMO. If you have 50 systems and can't keep them, maybe you should try to let one fall and see if you can correctly occupy 49 or even less until you hit a threshold where your space is occupied enough that trollceptors can't create such wildfire in your backyard unchecked.
Can stuff be made better about the system? Yes. Is the system complete trash? Not if you actually believe occupancy sov mean occupancy sov. The name of the game is to be in the systems you hold. Not put a flag in them and the dock in your staging for a ping. It's a rather large difference between the previous SOV system and holding SOV in unoccupied system is a PITA but i'd be willing to guess this is working as intended.
CCP Fozzie on behalf of Team Five 0 wrote:
The first significant update to the design is a 50% increase in the maximum activity defense multiplier, from 4x to 6x.
This change allows for much stronger defense of actively used systems, while still ensuring that defenders must undock and actively fight for their space when threatened.
I wonder if you are supposed to use the timer to actively defend the space you live in. Maybe team Five 0 don't know what the goal of those index are...
Quote is from http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/summer-2015-nullsec-and-sov-status-report/ |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6480
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 21:30:52 -
[365] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Also, one of the expliccit goals of Aegis Sov was to make it easy to take unclaimed space. Allowing interceptors to claim sov when nobody around is a good thing. As preventing an interceptor from taking sov is easy when the space is occupied. Easier than dominion, which battleships would be. If you cant field a battleship to your target system, you probably shouldn't be trying to take sov. I think if you can not fend off what you call a "troll ceptor" that has only 25km to entosis then you should not hold sov. At least in that system anyways! And once again, it's not that it can;t be done, it's that it's boring. A game that is boring is destined to die. Just look at it mate. A new sov system and the player count hardly blips.
Frostys Virpio wrote:*Stuff* It call comes down to commitment though. An attacker is committing a trollceptor because they choose to, while the defenders are forced to commit considerable time sending each one on their way. It's like sitting around highsec shooting gank ships. The attackers don't care that they are losing them and keep sending them laughing while you waste your time. If you can't see how a system that allows people in a shitfit interceptor to be a threat to contest space that actually requires a response is a bad idea, there's no hope for you. I imagine they will make serious changes to it since it's clear that most people find it insanely boring.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2079
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 21:38:13 -
[366] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Also, one of the expliccit goals of Aegis Sov was to make it easy to take unclaimed space. Allowing interceptors to claim sov when nobody around is a good thing. As preventing an interceptor from taking sov is easy when the space is occupied. Easier than dominion, which battleships would be. If you cant field a battleship to your target system, you probably shouldn't be trying to take sov. I think if you can not fend off what you call a "troll ceptor" that has only 25km to entosis then you should not hold sov. At least in that system anyways! And once again, it's not that it can;t be done, it's that it's boring. A game that is boring is destined to die. Just look at it mate. A new sov system and the player count hardly blips. Frostys Virpio wrote:*Stuff* It call comes down to commitment though. An attacker is committing a trollceptor because they choose to, while the defenders are forced to commit considerable time sending each one on their way. It's like sitting around highsec shooting gank ships. The attackers don't care that they are losing them and keep sending them laughing while you waste your time. If you can't see how a system that allows people in a shitfit interceptor to be a threat to contest space that actually requires a response is a bad idea, there's no hope for you. I imagine they will make serious changes to it since it's clear that most people find it insanely boring.
I know the trolling is stupid but that does not mean you can't flat out prevent the node contest from happening. I want the devs to make a statement on the trolling tbh so we know if they really want it to stay like that or not. I think it's stupid but my only idea to really make it less of a PITA is to put the same added mass on both entosis link mod so the inty is actaully really burdened if it fit one.
In the meantime, occupancy is the name of the game if you don't want to deal with orbiting nodes. Someone has to waste 10-15 minutes every ~40 mins to push the troll and entosis the structure back to normal if someone came. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
317
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 21:52:39 -
[367] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:I think the objection is that with letting interceptors and other fast moving ships use the entosis link is that we are still getting the blueball tactic. Now instead of not showing for the fight, the attacker runs from it.
Granted, I agree that if nobody shows up and reinforcement happens and nodes spawnGǪthe alliance holding that system screwed up. They deserve what they get. Granted if nobody shows up ever and they lose the systemGǪokay, again they deserve it.
I think what people would like is for there to be some chance of shots being fired vs. just getting the warning, burning to the system under attack, damp/jam/whatever the ship with the entosis link, that then fucks off to another system to entosis the relevant structure thereGǪuntil somebody shows up and damps/jams/whatever again.
Maybe things will change on their own. Defenders will get better at stopping the single frigate/ceptor etc. from doing the entosis thing. The attackers might bring more people, and fights will start occurring. But if not, my guess is that the current version of Fozziesov will be changed.
Edit: Typo
Yeah, I'm thinking that it could be good if, when an attacker activates an Entosis Link, it must be subject to engagement by whatever the defenders decide to bring until the node is captured... CCP has already taken a step in that direction by preventing warp while an Entosis is active. But something fast can burn away in a straight line, and I don't like restricting speed artificially. What about restricting how from from the node the Entosis ship can travel? Like, the range of the Entosis? So an interceptor orbiting a node at 7 km/s can continue to do so while using a T1 Entosis - but could never get further than 25km away from the node? Similarly for T2, with a 250 km limit. That gives the Entosing ship the space to operate within its limits and use its appropriate tactics in combat - but for the duration of the capture, it's subject to remaining on grid and cannot simply burn away in a straight line. And to be clear, I'm talking about the capture of the node, not just an Entosis cycle. In other words, like a reverse POS shield, anybody can land on-grid with a contested node, but any ship with an Entosis Link mod fitted cannot leave grid until the node is either fully capture of defended. Shenanigans with mobile depots would, of course, be possible. But preventing an Entosis ship from leaving I think can provide for some interesting tactics... including traps!
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
317
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 21:56:40 -
[368] - Quote
Icycle wrote:The bigest battles in eve for the most part have been escalations. One brings something, the other brigs something bigger and more and more etc. This in no doubt will happen sooner or later. If you guys did not blue ball each other it would happen more oftern but here we are...Stop blaiming CCP for your policies! You want content of massive scale fine, set a few of your blues to neut and let the slugfest begin. Dont then wait for it to happen or deploy to an enemies territory just like Razor and Init are doing.
Yep! Three Hels were destroyed in Syndicate for just such a reason. That being, no reason at all other than two sides wanting to out-escalate their opponents. (Which is why we lost badly the one time we tried to out-escalate some of our Syndicate neighbors. It was, I think, the first time any of us had been subject to being doomsdayed. Instead, we'll take fights with what we've brought, with the understanding we could lose it all. We can often get good fights that way. But we don't escalate.)
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 22:46:59 -
[369] - Quote
One modification I might agree with - ships with entosis mods fitted lose their nullification ability so trollceptors can be bubbled.
Wouldn't really change much for us though because we send our entosis ships with small gang protection looking for a skirmish. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
2163
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 00:50:54 -
[370] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:...The system is designed so that you HAVE to respond on attacked before it gets reinforced. ... Annoying hassle. In most low threat cases, let them RF it then see if they actually show up. If they do not then set the miners on the nodes, they love that boring stuff. If the reds show up then N+1 and wreck their ships.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3178
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 04:00:05 -
[371] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:One modification I might agree with - ships with entosis mods fitted lose their nullification ability so trollceptors can be bubbled.
Wouldn't really change much for us though because we send our entosis ships with small gang protection looking for a skirmish.
Now that is an interesting suggestion....
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3178
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 04:02:31 -
[372] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:I think the objection is that with letting interceptors and other fast moving ships use the entosis link is that we are still getting the blueball tactic. Now instead of not showing for the fight, the attacker runs from it.
Granted, I agree that if nobody shows up and reinforcement happens and nodes spawnGǪthe alliance holding that system screwed up. They deserve what they get. Granted if nobody shows up ever and they lose the systemGǪokay, again they deserve it.
I think what people would like is for there to be some chance of shots being fired vs. just getting the warning, burning to the system under attack, damp/jam/whatever the ship with the entosis link, that then fucks off to another system to entosis the relevant structure thereGǪuntil somebody shows up and damps/jams/whatever again.
Maybe things will change on their own. Defenders will get better at stopping the single frigate/ceptor etc. from doing the entosis thing. The attackers might bring more people, and fights will start occurring. But if not, my guess is that the current version of Fozziesov will be changed.
Edit: Typo Yeah, I'm thinking that it could be good if, when an attacker activates an Entosis Link, it must be subject to engagement by whatever the defenders decide to bring until the node is captured... CCP has already taken a step in that direction by preventing warp while an Entosis is active. But something fast can burn away in a straight line, and I don't like restricting speed artificially. What about restricting how from from the node the Entosis ship can travel? Like, the range of the Entosis? So an interceptor orbiting a node at 7 km/s can continue to do so while using a T1 Entosis - but could never get further than 25km away from the node? Similarly for T2, with a 250 km limit. That gives the Entosing ship the space to operate within its limits and use its appropriate tactics in combat - but for the duration of the capture, it's subject to remaining on grid and cannot simply burn away in a straight line. And to be clear, I'm talking about the capture of the node, not just an Entosis cycle. In other words, like a reverse POS shield, anybody can land on-grid with a contested node, but any ship with an Entosis Link mod fitted cannot leave grid until the node is either fully capture of defended. Shenanigans with mobile depots would, of course, be possible. But preventing an Entosis ship from leaving I think can provide for some interesting tactics... including traps!
Now that is an interesting response.
I'm skeptical of Fozziesov in its current form...but then again something like a sov revamp is going to probably need iterating on....
In any event, thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1008
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 06:16:21 -
[373] - Quote
Look at that, Teckos Pech praising anything that makes it more difficult for people to do guerilla hit and run type attacks. Love the self-interested posting.
The Imperium has just got on with it and set up their systems ADM, I have especially noted that EXE seems to have been rather efficient at it. Having done that you just have to maintain it and blap the odd person who won't be able to do anything really in your prime time with an interceptor. With your high ADM its is perhaps working as intended because to RF your systems someone will have to bring a fleet for grid control. I have to ask did Mo threaten to hot drop any one not ratting, quite a reverse in policy that one.
For the past couple of weeks looked in detail at Estoria which is of some interest to me, even the die hard mission runners in Stain are in Sov space grinding, and many of their PvP'rs too, its only a few pipe systems which are getting RFR'd but that is more to keep them occupied so we can do what we want, those people no longer have free reign to camp us in Stain because we can cause them pain back on the systems they have sov on but don't use, so instead of hassling us, they are saving their systems.
If you make it easier to kill something like you suggest, then you remove the ability for people to fight back against harassment by doing the same back, hell I have a way of being as annoying as AFK cloaky campers to those people who just dropped an AFK toon in every system I used, and I rather like it and you lot are moaning about it, typical.
Stop moaning, your coalition is doing it right and many others too, and another thing to note, the change in attitudes in this game will be even greater when the new structures come in, especially when they are destructible. This means that people should keep watching and learning, while waiting for that structure change to occur and then see how that pans out. Personally I think it requires certain groups to die due to boredom before 0.0 can be fun again. I find the concept of people like the Imperium, PL and NCDOT doing whack a mole on any small sov holder pretty boring and that requires a long period of boredom for these groups in only finding one system to hell camp or people using sov in a nomadic way.
CCP allowed Titans and Supers to ruin their game, coming back from that will take time.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16820
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 07:11:04 -
[374] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:[This situation can no longer exist in its current state. We are highly determined and if all our demands and solutions are not addressed in a week's time, we reserve the right to fight back for our game time and fun, which we were stripped off by the new game mechanics.
What precisely do you mean by "fight back"?
Will you hire a lawyer and sue CCP for loss of income? Will you demand the refund of your subscriptions?
Anyway, your deadline expires in 60 hours. Remember to ventilate deeply and thoroughly before you start to hold your breath.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
931
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 07:46:47 -
[375] - Quote
Quote: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 conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated. I have removed a post.
ISD Decoy
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3178
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 07:58:17 -
[376] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Look at that, Teckos Pech praising anything that makes it more difficult for people to do guerilla hit and run type attacks. Love the self-interested posting.
The Imperium has just got on with it and set up their systems ADM, I have especially noted that EXE seems to have been rather efficient at it. Having done that you just have to maintain it and blap the odd person who won't be able to do anything really in your prime time with an interceptor. With your high ADM its is perhaps working as intended because to RF your systems someone will have to bring a fleet for grid control. I have to ask did Mo threaten to hot drop any one not ratting, quite a reverse in policy that one.
For the past couple of weeks I looked in detail at Estoria which is of some interest to me, even the die hard mission runners in Stain are in Sov space grinding, and many of their PvP'rs too, its only a few pipe systems which are getting RF'd but that is more to keep them occupied so we can do what we want, those people no longer have free reign to camp us in Stain because we can cause them pain back on the systems they have sov on but don't use, so instead of hassling us, they are saving their systems.
If you make it easier to kill something like you suggest, then you remove the ability for people to fight back against harassment by doing the same back, hell I have a way of being as annoying as AFK cloaky campers to those people who just dropped an AFK toon in every system I used, and I rather like it and you lot are moaning about it, typical.
Stop moaning, your coalition is doing it right and many others too, and another thing to note, the change in attitudes in this game will be even greater when the new structures come in, especially when they are destructible. This means that people should keep watching and learning, while waiting for that structure change to occur and then see how that pans out. Personally I think it requires certain groups to die due to boredom before 0.0 can be fun again. I find the concept of people like the Imperium, PL and NCDOT doing whack a mole on any small sov holder pretty boring and that requires a long period of boredom for these groups in only finding one system to hell camp or people using sov in a nomadic way.
CCP allowed Titans and Supers to ruin their game, coming back from that will take time.
Okay lets think about this.
A guys shows up, activates the entosis link waits for the first cycle to about finish then burns away....notice is sent and off he goes to the next structure. He does that for as many structures as he can, then docks up.
Is it valid? Sure. There are damn few rules in the game and he is not doing anything all that outlandish given the mechanics.
Is he creating content? Yeah, the people who own the sov will likely have to respond.
Most important question, is it interesting? No, not really. In fact, it is rather boring.
Now, I'm not saying change it, CCP. I'm saying my issue is that I hope this isn't all we are going to get out of Fozziesov. Cause if it is, that downward trend in players logged in...it will likely start going down again. When it goes down enough...none of us will be logging in (FYI, to my trained eye, the downward trend appears to have abated...lets hope it continues like that and even goes the other way).
Yes, the Imperium is doing okay with this aside from the hot spot in Pure Blind. I'm hoping it leads to more than just interceptor gangs and other stuff running around using their entosis links or ******* off. I like the idea of people deciding to fight over a system, constellation, etc.
I'm hoping Fozziesov will become that. But everybody like you having a boner over the current situation is not really a good long term solution to the problems facing the game.
To the extent that Fozziesov results in a more dynamic, diverse and interesting NS....fantastic. No really. Maybe some of the current alliances will let go of space and that will happen. If Fozziesov induces some alliances to even....gasp...bring in people more dedicated towards things like mining I'm fine with it. After all, getting some guys out there to mine sites will help push up those indices. And hey, they can probably build stuff too...making sourcing stuff locally easier too. I'm hoping this is where Fozziesov goes. I'm just skeptical it will. After all, to get miners and a dynamic and diverse null sec...you'll also need stability.
Think about it, places that are unstable and chaotic are not usually places where you find people thriving. Those are usually places people want to leave. So for NS we need a healthy tension between conflict and stability. Things stable enough for people to want to invest the time and energy into NS...yet with enough conflict for there to "fun".
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1009
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 08:35:20 -
[377] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Okay lets think about this.
A guys shows up, activates the entosis link waits for the first cycle to about finish then burns away....notice is sent and off he goes to the next structure. He does that for as many structures as he can, then docks up.
Is it valid? Sure. There are damn few rules in the game and he is not doing anything all that outlandish given the mechanics.
Is he creating content? Yeah, the people who own the sov will likely have to respond.
Most important question, is it interesting? No, not really. In fact, it is rather boring.
Now, I'm not saying change it, CCP. I'm saying my issue is that I hope this isn't all we are going to get out of Fozziesov. Cause if it is, that downward trend in players logged in...it will likely start going down again. When it goes down enough...none of us will be logging in (FYI, to my trained eye, the downward trend appears to have abated...lets hope it continues like that and even goes the other way).
Yes, the Imperium is doing okay with this aside from the hot spot in Pure Blind. I'm hoping it leads to more than just interceptor gangs and other stuff running around using their entosis links or ******* off. I like the idea of people deciding to fight over a system, constellation, etc.
I'm hoping Fozziesov will become that. But everybody like you having a boner over the current situation is not really a good long term solution to the problems facing the game.
To the extent that Fozziesov results in a more dynamic, diverse and interesting NS....fantastic. No really. Maybe some of the current alliances will let go of space and that will happen. If Fozziesov induces some alliances to even....gasp...bring in people more dedicated towards things like mining I'm fine with it. After all, getting some guys out there to mine sites will help push up those indices. And hey, they can probably build stuff too...making sourcing stuff locally easier too. I'm hoping this is where Fozziesov goes. I'm just skeptical it will. After all, to get miners and a dynamic and diverse null sec...you'll also need stability.
Think about it, places that are unstable and chaotic are not usually places where you find people thriving. Those are usually places people want to leave. So for NS we need a healthy tension between conflict and stability. Things stable enough for people to want to invest the time and energy into NS...yet with enough conflict for there to "fun".
That is a better post, I am not simplisticly getting a boner over it, I am telling you that I can now get back at the people who could and did AFK cloaky camp me with impunity which is more boring than what you described, now I get into a specific fit Loki with 250 km range 5,000 m/s speed, nullified cloaked and cause them pain back on the systems they do not use. You know that I will not do it on systems they use.
Many people in hisec are bored with the Goon lead gank campaigns in hisec, its not interesting for that group on the receiving end either and it has resulted in people leaving the game, should CCP nerf ganking no, should they make adjustments yes, but they haven't.
In terms of Pure Blind, there is a weak spot, poor systems with low ADM which are difficult to get up to a defensible level and with good reason, its bad space. It is also border system skirmish warfare, but I spot checked a number of systems before I found a Condor kill with an enosis link. But is there combat also around the mining sites or the anoms? That is also part of the battleground, not just the structure.
I think the downward trend has also stopped, the numbers were showing more of a loss of people doing stuff in hisec, activity in null has increased, however that may be people doing frantic work to get their ADM up. I am skeptical too, not so much at the issues people here have detailed starting off with the OP, but more to do with the large numbers of people that will come in and hell camp anyone who sets up in systems that they can defend. Add that to destructible stations which may end up being designed to be loot fonts then one has to say that it will fail.
I think its too early for changes like you suggested. But also at some point there will be a fight between people who actually want the space and hopefully without third parties ruining it and then we shall see. But with a load of very organised and highly equipped bored people looking to kill something in this game I wonder if it would get the chance to actually happen.
This system needs time to settle down, the Imperium are leading the way in how they have structured themselves, but I see similar developments in Estoria too but I would so love to see a real border war develop in Pure Blind. But I doubt it will happen because the same massive super and titan blob also looms over this system, because at the end of the day it is all about grid control in systems that people want to keep and in that case you will get big fights, but perhaps you guys won't get them because you are just too strong...
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 09:24:20 -
[378] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:One modification I might agree with - ships with entosis mods fitted lose their nullification ability so trollceptors can be bubbled.
Wouldn't really change much for us though because we send our entosis ships with small gang protection looking for a skirmish. Now that is an interesting suggestion.... I have another, how about any entosis ship that leaves grid without completing an entosis cycle then the entosis module explodes and is permanently lost. That's 50 million (estimated mod price) and a refit needed everytime there is a failed attack.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 09:41:05 -
[379] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:[quote=Eli Stan]Also, one of the expliccit goals of Aegis Sov was to make it easy to take unclaimed space. Allowing interceptors to claim sov when nobody around is a good thing. As preventing an interceptor from taking sov is easy when the space is occupied. Easier than dominion, which battleships would be. If you cant field a battleship to your target system, you probably shouldn't be trying to take sov. I think if you can not fend off what you call a "troll ceptor" that has only 25km to entosis then you should not hold sov. At least in that system anyways! And once again, it's not that it can;t be done, it's that it's boring. A game that is boring is destined to die. Just look at it mate. A new sov system and the player count hardly blips.
Maybe boring to you but defenetly not to me. I am on the offensive all day long. You are on the defensive. Thats what you get for trying to defend a system thats you dont live in. I got more than I can handle and I am having fun every night. Its early days yet and people are still working it out. Besides other parts are left also to deploy. I am pritty sure once people realise that they cannot defend system that are too far they will let go of them. |
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:06:27 -
[380] - Quote
High sec ganking is 'unfun' for the person getting ganked, should we ban all non wardec aggression in high sec?
Perhaps every person ever ganked by Goons should grab an entosis link and go get revenge by attacking Goon space in Pure Blind. :) |
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2422
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:08:01 -
[381] - Quote
Icycle wrote:A new sov system and the player count hardly blips. Have to admit that this has me quite concerned. At this stage I'm less interested in who is right and who is wrong and more interested in why people aren't logging back in.
The new sov system needs to work from a player count perspective. So far, it ain't.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6488
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:15:59 -
[382] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Maybe boring to you but defenetly not to me. I am on the offensive all day long. You are on the defensive. Thats what you get for trying to defend a system thats you dont live in. I got more than I can handle and I am having fun every night. Its early days yet and people are still working it out. Besides other parts are left also to deploy. I am pritty sure once people realise that they cannot defend system that are too far they will let go of them. It's nothing to do with systems we don't live in. Even defending systems we do live in is boring. Nobody wants to chase around nullified ships. Never did, never will, it's a bad design. I understand that you are having fun because you follow your leaders in being overly grr goons, so the idea of goons having to waste their time makes you fap like crazy, but the system itself is just not entertaining.
You keep trying to claim this is about people not bothering to defend or not living in their space and I keep telling you it's not about that. I couldn't give a flying **** what happens to space too far away for us to defend, but the system is boring as sin FOR SPACE WE LIVE IN. You hang around with gen eve too much.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6488
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:19:59 -
[383] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:High sec ganking is 'unfun' for the person getting ganked, should we ban all non wardec aggression in high sec? That's different though, since the players being ganked did nothing to be in that place. Sov defenders put billions of isk and countless man hours into their space. CCP developing a system that favours aggressors trolling and is boring to defend is a bad idea.
Akballah Kassan wrote:Perhaps every person ever ganked by Goons should grab an entosis link and go get revenge by attacking Goon space in Pure Blind. :) Please do. I can't think of a faster way to get CCP to make changes than to mass troll sov holders. To be honest though it's only a matter of time if the CSM have already been called up on it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:20:01 -
[384] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Icycle wrote:A new sov system and the player count hardly blips. Have to admit that this has me quite concerned. At this stage I'm less interested in who is right and who is wrong and more interested in why people aren't logging back in. The new sov system needs to work from a player count perspective. So far, it ain't. Did anybody actually expect the new changes to trigger big wars and bring players flocking back? The only thing that can make that happen is the leaders of null sec alliances.
CFC dudes complain yet they themselves create the problem by blue-balling any threat. Fozziesov cannot be judged a success or failure until some major players really try to take sov from other major powers.
Why don't non sov holding alliances like PL really test the mechanics by attacking Goon renter space in Pure Blind? |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1033
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:23:18 -
[385] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Icycle wrote:A new sov system and the player count hardly blips. Have to admit that this has me quite concerned. At this stage I'm less interested in who is right and who is wrong and more interested in why people aren't logging back in. The new sov system needs to work from a player count perspective. So far, it ain't. It's not going to go back up, when those of us still playing are telling our unsubbed friends "don't bother coming back yet. This **** is AIDS, and until they unfuck it, spend your $15 elsewhere." |
TrickyBlackSteel
Russia Caldari RUCA Emperor
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:45:13 -
[386] - Quote
Hello, i want an explain about , why in dominion sov mechanic attacking a system , i was anchoring at least 2 sbus that costs around 400milTo attack,and now in fozziesov mechanic , im not paying anything , i have a system with strategic 5 bridges , capital constructions, why, someone to attqck my sov shouldNt lose anymoney ? |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1009
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 10:57:39 -
[387] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Icycle wrote:A new sov system and the player count hardly blips. Have to admit that this has me quite concerned. At this stage I'm less interested in who is right and who is wrong and more interested in why people aren't logging back in. The new sov system needs to work from a player count perspective. So far, it ain't.
There are a number of other issues that impact player count, some people are waiting for the break up of the mega coalitions, some people are fed up being ganked, some people are fed up with their industry being nerfed and walked, some people left because they can no longer use multi-account control software, others because of the toxic nature of some players, others because CCP is presumed to be nerfing their HTFU play-style when with the tick box on corp aggro.
This new sov system is very much a work in progress and the final piece is the new structures, once that is in place then I think people can make a proper judgement and making nerf's before the full picture is in place and the pain is for systems which they don't really use much.
The key benchmarks on success of not will include player count, but there are other pointers like for example new entities trying sov space. However if they make the new structures loot fonts then while you may be happy for your play style, others will say nope.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1009
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 11:24:58 -
[388] - Quote
TrickyBlackSteel wrote:Hello, i want an explain about , why in dominion sov mechanic attacking a system , i was anchoring at least 2 sbus that costs around 400milTo attack,and now in fozziesov mechanic , im not paying anything , i have a system with strategic 5 bridges , capital constructions, why, someone to attqck my sov shouldNt lose anymoney ?
Kill the ship and they lose a module that is worth a lot of ISK at the moment, just imagine that it is a SBU piloted by a player and you will be good.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
71
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 12:03:01 -
[389] - Quote
These are common themes I see over and over again. I will probably update this as more come.
I dont want to spend the day running after entosis ships! Owning sov/ihubs/stations is too tredious! This is null sec. Its meant to be very dangerous. If you want to own something, you got to protect it. If you cant protect its very likelly you are either out gunned or have over extended your territories and do not have sufficient backup in the area. Move into the area and defend and its very unlikelly it will get entosied or consolidate dont over extend your territories.
New sov does not encourages big battles! New sov is borring! The sov is a small help to encourage small gang warfare instead of a big slugfest. Quit blue balling everyone you find. Set your neightbours to neut and let the slug fest begin Deploy to an enemy territory, put a pos and attack them. Dont blame CCP or new sov for your wrong doing. Dont wait for the fun come to you. If you are an entity that pays off enemies to go away, stop doing it if you want more action.
New entosing is like like mining! I want to shoot structures not entosis them! While it may look like a mining lasor I dont see it that way. I actually see it like a lasor. It has exact same mechanics. It get reinforced and needs to be defended when comes out of reinforcement and blows up at the end just like in previous sov.
"Troll ceptor" entosis! What you call a troll ceptor is a genuine to me attempt to attack and herass an enemy. They are easy to defend against. A frigate with entosis cant warp away and has to orbit at 25km. Really easy to kill. A cruiser with tech 2 entosis cant warp away. Also easy to kill and catch with a ceptor. You can also disrupt their entosis easelly with a dampener or ECM. If you find your systems are getting entosied a lot, its cos they its very likelly you have over extended your territory and have many empty or unoccupied. If it not, it would not get entosied. If its empty and you are not living in it, its fair game and should be allowed to get entosied. If you want to counter this, them move to the system. Easy fix. If you have over extended, the drop sov in some of the regions and consolidate your power in less regions. This will effectivelly prevent others from entosing. Otherwise get renters or allies to occupy the systems and maybe they can help with the system defence.
Cant catch a "Troll ceptor" nullified! Very easy to catch, get a fast ship lock ship like a keres and fill it with sebos and a point. Trust me, it works. For the really hard ones, you can compensate with implants, faction sebos and or a booster.
CCP did not provide the tool with new sov! True. CCP need to provide ways to see who attack, where, system status etc in game rather than offgame. I would also like for it to allow still to be visible off game as not all of us can always have a client at that momment.
Entosis should only be allowed in Battleships! Entosis ship should do 0 m/s speed! You are over thinking it. Battleships need a buff in targetting, damage and tanking. Battleships a middle layer between marauders and the current battleship. The whole concept of entosis and battleship is contradictory. Entosis ship should not do 0 metres per second cos its not a disposable cyno ship. Its a very expensive module and the ship cannot warp. Its only chance is to try to out run you. And as all things go, you should not be able to catch everythign you happen to see. Currently in the mecanics there is plenty of chance.
Bombers should be nerfed! A properly fit carrier will need aproximatelly 30+ bombers to kill within 2 minutes. Thats a lot of people to kill one carrier. You can improve the tank even with a triage or have a cyno module for call for backup. Also you can use links or even a booster to tank better. Bombers are weak and easy to kill. Any frigate can kill a bomber easy. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
2164
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 12:03:56 -
[390] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:Perhaps every person ever ganked by Goons should grab an entosis link and go get revenge by attacking Goon space in Pure Blind. :) Please do. I can't think of a faster way to get CCP to make changes than to mass troll sov holders. To be honest though it's only a matter of time if the CSM have already been called up on it. I am still expecting Goons. They are meant to take Provi in two days. Can they please hurry up and come do that?
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1009
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 12:20:54 -
[391] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:High sec ganking is 'unfun' for the person getting ganked, should we ban all non wardec aggression in high sec? That's different though, since the players being ganked did nothing to be in that place. Sov defenders put billions of isk and countless man hours into their space. CCP developing a system that favours aggressors trolling and is boring to defend is a bad idea. Akballah Kassan wrote:Perhaps every person ever ganked by Goons should grab an entosis link and go get revenge by attacking Goon space in Pure Blind. :) Please do. I can't think of a faster way to get CCP to make changes than to mass troll sov holders. To be honest though it's only a matter of time if the CSM have already been called up on it.
I rather like your posts but you say that the person did nothing to be in that place, you mean they did not train up to fly a freighter or Jump Freighter or they did not pay 1.6 or 6.6 bn for the ship and they did not work to fill it full of stuff either. So thats billions and countless man hours all gone, at least with Sov you can win it back, not the ganked...
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6488
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 12:33:02 -
[392] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:High sec ganking is 'unfun' for the person getting ganked, should we ban all non wardec aggression in high sec? That's different though, since the players being ganked did nothing to be in that place. Sov defenders put billions of isk and countless man hours into their space. CCP developing a system that favours aggressors trolling and is boring to defend is a bad idea. Akballah Kassan wrote:Perhaps every person ever ganked by Goons should grab an entosis link and go get revenge by attacking Goon space in Pure Blind. :) Please do. I can't think of a faster way to get CCP to make changes than to mass troll sov holders. To be honest though it's only a matter of time if the CSM have already been called up on it. I rather like your posts but you say that the person did nothing to be in that place, you mean they did not train up to fly a freighter or Jump Freighter or they did not pay 1.6 or 6.6 bn for the ship and they did not work to fill it full of stuff either. So thats billions and countless man hours all gone, at least with Sov you can win it back, not the ganked... But they have no more right to the space they are flying that anyone else, that's the point. Ships blow up, that's a risk we take flying them. But with sov people own their space and put a lot into holding it and it should take a reasonable amount of commitment and effort for someone to contest that.
Now don't get me wrong, dominion was far too much. You needed fleets of ships and structures and had to grind through millions of HP. That was far too much. What they've got now though is too far the other way. All you need is an interceptor and an entosis module and you just burn off into the distance if someone arrives on grid.
What I want to see is a balance between those two extremes. Aggressors should need to put enough on the line to mean that most people aggressing sov actually have the intention of taking it, not just wasting the defenders time, and it should be enough to make it worth fighting over. Without that, major sov holders won't fight because they'll be too busy looking out for the hundreds of interceptors swarming their space, fights won't happen when small groups attack a larger one as they'll refuse to commit to the attack, and the space will be even more stagnant than under the old system.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1010
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 13:26:13 -
[393] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:High sec ganking is 'unfun' for the person getting ganked, should we ban all non wardec aggression in high sec? That's different though, since the players being ganked did nothing to be in that place. Sov defenders put billions of isk and countless man hours into their space. CCP developing a system that favours aggressors trolling and is boring to defend is a bad idea. Akballah Kassan wrote:Perhaps every person ever ganked by Goons should grab an entosis link and go get revenge by attacking Goon space in Pure Blind. :) Please do. I can't think of a faster way to get CCP to make changes than to mass troll sov holders. To be honest though it's only a matter of time if the CSM have already been called up on it. I rather like your posts but you say that the person did nothing to be in that place, you mean they did not train up to fly a freighter or Jump Freighter or they did not pay 1.6 or 6.6 bn for the ship and they did not work to fill it full of stuff either. So thats billions and countless man hours all gone, at least with Sov you can win it back, not the ganked... But they have no more right to the space they are flying that anyone else, that's the point. Ships blow up, that's a risk we take flying them. But with sov people own their space and put a lot into holding it and it should take a reasonable amount of commitment and effort for someone to contest that. Now don't get me wrong, dominion was far too much. You needed fleets of ships and structures and had to grind through millions of HP. That was far too much. What they've got now though is too far the other way. All you need is an interceptor and an entosis module and you just burn off into the distance if someone arrives on grid. What I want to see is a balance between those two extremes. Aggressors should need to put enough on the line to mean that most people aggressing sov actually have the intention of taking it, not just wasting the defenders time, and it should be enough to make it worth fighting over. Without that, major sov holders won't fight because they'll be too busy looking out for the hundreds of interceptors swarming their space, fights won't happen when small groups attack a larger one as they'll refuse to commit to the attack, and the space will be even more stagnant than under the old system.
The same comment applies to people who do not use their space, if someone has their indexes to the top level then that interceptor is wasting his time and is being trolled back. The issue only really arises in terms of space that is not used, or which is being camped. This is where even people like myself who are sympathetic to sov holders POV go a bit glassy eyed, what about a cloaked alt in a rail destroyer or two, soon sort that out?
My feeling is that the super powers in this game over shadow even this new system, because still at the end of the day its grid control that really matters, at the moment your leadership and that of NCDOT and PL is looking foward to curb stomping someone who has lived in a few systems or a Constellation and actively defended it. That threat is something that all current sov holders have to deal with, so I would like to point at the balance of this, small entities can go after space that is not used and harass that space. Large entities can go after a medium sized entity in a constellation and completely flatten them no matter how they used that space, the superiority you have worked up still has its value. Also your coalition through great strategic play set their whole area up securely and then was able to go around Eve with impunity kicking butt, you ability to do that is reduced a bit due to this chore, but isn't that a good thing for the game, that strategic decision on home security also feature and do not rely solely on being miles away from anyone and protected by large EHP and a dominant cap fleet /blob in that area.
There are many things that may be tweaked in this system, but the hit and run ability on systems that are not used much is not one of them.
As one of the more thoughtful posters I hope you see that.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6489
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 13:55:44 -
[394] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:The same comment applies to people who do not use their space, if someone has their indexes to the top level then that interceptor is wasting his time and is being trolled back. The issue only really arises in terms of space that is not used, or which is being camped. This is where even people like myself who are sympathetic to sov holders POV go a bit glassy eyed, what about a cloaked alt in a rail destroyer or two, soon sort that out?
My feeling is that the super powers in this game over shadow even this new system, because still at the end of the day its grid control that really matters, at the moment your leadership and that of NCDOT and PL is looking foward to curb stomping someone who has lived in a few systems or a Constellation and actively defended it. That threat is something that all current sov holders have to deal with, so I would like to point at the balance of this, small entities can go after space that is not used and harass that space. Large entities can go after a medium sized entity in a constellation and completely flatten them no matter how they used that space, the superiority you have worked up still has its value. Also your coalition through great strategic play set their whole area up securely and then was able to go around Eve with impunity kicking butt, you ability to do that is reduced a bit due to this chore, but isn't that a good thing for the game, that strategic decision on home security also feature and do not rely solely on being miles away from anyone and protected by large EHP and a dominant cap fleet /blob in that area.
There are many things that may be tweaked in this system, but the hit and run ability on systems that are not used much is not one of them.
As one of the more thoughtful posters I hope you see that. Oh, I'm right there with you on unused space. Like I've said, I have no issue if they want to make it even easier to take unused space, but a disposable interceptor should be absolutely zero threat to used space. Sov holders shouldn't have to waste time chasing around nullified ships all day controlled by people with no interest in actually taking the space.
Babysitting structures is not gameplay. Remember that this is game, and it should be entertaining. no mechanics should be built around the idea of someone effectively turning EVE into a job. Some things should take effort, sure, but it should still be entertaining.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1010
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 14:35:02 -
[395] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Oh, I'm right there with you on unused space. Like I've said, I have no issue if they want to make it even easier to take unused space, but a disposable interceptor should be absolutely zero threat to used space. Sov holders shouldn't have to waste time chasing around nullified ships all day controlled by people with no interest in actually taking the space.
Babysitting structures is not gameplay. Remember that this is game, and it should be entertaining. no mechanics should be built around the idea of someone effectively turning EVE into a job. Some things should take effort, sure, but it should still be entertaining.
As you might know I have been banging on about AFK cloaky camping for years, where people not playing the game, stop people from playing the game, yet CCP has ignored any suggestion to deal with it. In my neck of the woods, certain Stainwagon players do a lot of this, and with the new approach to sov I can say oh dear a cloaky AFK camper in my systems that I use, hmmmph, instead of leaving my toon logged in and going off to play another game while I assess his likely playing times, I just hop into a ship with an entosis link and go mess with his stuff, suddenly my negative feelings about Eve are improved.
I would take trying to kill these people as a challenge and I would use the newer more motivated players to do it, sprinkled with a few gung-ho vets. Over time this may settle down a bit, yes people will still do it to troll, but I still think its early days.
Years ago in B7 we had some Test SB's in system, so we set a trap for them and killed two out of the three, they came back with a cloaky vaga to add to their fleet and it was fun dealing with that, I expect in time that type of skirmish escalation to develop, I may be wrong, I also expect that people getting fed up with a particular system will just push for a op to get the ADM up so as to make it more difficult and hence cause a potential fight while doing that, both may create content.
At this point people are trolling each other, at some point the gloves will come off for real conflict and then people can sit back and assess it properly, but so far its only really nibble like conflict in the main, though the TRI and RA fight may change that.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Gerad Aihaken
Keepers of Balance Legion of xXDEATHXx
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 15:01:44 -
[396] - Quote
Thanks for being polite, I do appreciate!
Let me try to be short here.
Excuse me, but did any of you try new SOV mechanics? If yes - can you tell me how was it fun? Did you try to get any SOV and hold it? If no -- then, sorry, your opinion is only a theory without any practice background.
We had some practice with Suddenly Spaceships to actually try this new mechanics. It produced a hell lot of a boring content. So, the issue is that current mechanics allows to produce more boring content, than the previous one, due to a lot more ways to deny fights.
And, I guess, Suddenly Spaceships also had their reasons to withdrew from that fighting... At least now it seems that they've left it: sorry if I am wrong here :) |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1010
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 15:23:29 -
[397] - Quote
Gerad Aihaken wrote:Thanks for being polite, I do appreciate! Let me try to be short here. Excuse me, but did any of you try new SOV mechanics? If yes - can you tell me how was it fun? Did you try to get any SOV and hold it? If no -- then, sorry, your opinion is only a theory without any practice background. We had some practice with Suddenly Spaceships to actually try this new mechanics. It produced a hell lot of a boring content. So, the issue is that current mechanics allows to produce more boring content, than the previous one, due to a lot more ways to deny fights. And, I guess, Suddenly Spaceships also had their reasons to withdrew from that fighting... At least now it seems that they've left it: sorry if I am wrong here :)
Did I try it, well I did RF one TCU, was it fun, yes, but that would wear off, no I did not try to get any sov and hold it, because at this point we need to see how things develop further with a certain erosion of the bigger entities, some from over-stretch like you and others from boredom because they don't find easy curb stomp fights using their massed firepower.
Did I try Dominion sov, yes, was it boring yes, structure grind after structure grind, and your point is what?
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6489
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 15:41:28 -
[398] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:As you might know I have been banging on about AFK cloaky camping for years, where people not playing the game, stop people from playing the game, yet CCP has ignored any suggestion to deal with it. I'm in agreement with that, have posted the same many times. But it's unlikely to change anytime soon, and has nothing to do with sov. Sov mechanics shouldn't be purposely made bad just because other bad mechanics exist in the game.
Dracvlad wrote:At this point people are trolling each other, at some point the gloves will come off for real conflict and then people can sit back and assess it properly, but so far its only really nibble like conflict in the main, though the TRI and RA fight may change that. It might do, but it's unlikely. Only the bigger groups are likely to go for an all out war with each other, and as the russian alliances have shown, they don't want to fight when there's the risk of losing their space in a couple of days to individual layers in disposable ships. I can't see anyone choosing to deploy while that's happening short of us.
Dracvlad wrote:I started looking at the Pure Blind systems under attack and yes it is harassment, but I have noticed Goon systems losing ADM, it looks like a harassment campaign that could develop into something more serious should you deploy to Provi for example and looking at the kill board for 3V8-LJ a Goon system I saw some some skirmish fleets decking it out, looks good to me in terms of making strategic decisions for campaigns which are more than just looking for someone to blap, which in truth had turned conflict in 0.0 into a joke... I imagine we'd have a decent idea of how to cope with both. whether or not in happens with the sov system in the current state is another matter. That said, we only need to send disposable interceptors to hassle people out of their space.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1010
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 16:00:00 -
[399] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dracvlad wrote:As you might know I have been banging on about AFK cloaky camping for years, where people not playing the game, stop people from playing the game, yet CCP has ignored any suggestion to deal with it. I'm in agreement with that, have posted the same many times. But it's unlikely to change anytime soon, and has nothing to do with sov. Sov mechanics shouldn't be purposely made bad just because other bad mechanics exist in the game. Dracvlad wrote:At this point people are trolling each other, at some point the gloves will come off for real conflict and then people can sit back and assess it properly, but so far its only really nibble like conflict in the main, though the TRI and RA fight may change that. It might do, but it's unlikely. Only the bigger groups are likely to go for an all out war with each other, and as the russian alliances have shown, they don't want to fight when there's the risk of losing their space in a couple of days to individual layers in disposable ships. I can't see anyone choosing to deploy while that's happening short of us. Dracvlad wrote:I started looking at the Pure Blind systems under attack and yes it is harassment, but I have noticed Goon systems losing ADM, it looks like a harassment campaign that could develop into something more serious should you deploy to Provi for example and looking at the kill board for 3V8-LJ a Goon system I saw some some skirmish fleets decking it out, looks good to me in terms of making strategic decisions for campaigns which are more than just looking for someone to blap, which in truth had turned conflict in 0.0 into a joke... I imagine we'd have a decent idea of how to cope with both. whether or not in happens with the sov system in the current state is another matter. That said, we only need to send disposable interceptors to hassle people out of their space.
What I was getting at with the AFK cloaking reply is that its boring and bad mechanics even though the alternative of forcing a log off would be gamed. And it is something that will be used against Sov because the objective is to attack the development of the ADM when it would be better to have rush and grab events.
So far we have not seen anyone go for a full ADM system or a capital system when someone has a reasonable force and fights full on for it, until that happens its too early to make an informed decision. I also think that the go off without any care in the world to mess with someone else for fun mentality sold this very complex game short, campaigns now have to be close and focussed along with defence, its a very good thing.
You guys can send fleets of interceptors, but do you even try that against a fully focussed alliance with a core group of PvP players a long way away from any escalation ability, maybe you do, but that could turn into a turkey shoot of your interceptors, your T2 Loki works well by the way and that is more of a pain for people to deal with, lthe Arazu too. Have you actually done that to someone well away from easy jump range for your caps and larger fleets?
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Trii Seo
Executive Outcomes
838
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 16:09:42 -
[400] - Quote
Icycle wrote: New sov does not encourages big battles! New sov is borring! The sov is a small help to encourage small gang warfare instead of a big slugfest. Quit blue balling everyone you find. Set your neightbours to neut and let the slug fest begin Deploy to an enemy territory, put a pos and attack them. Dont blame CCP or new sov for your wrong doing. Dont wait for the fun come to you. If you are an entity that pays off enemies to go away, stop doing it if you want more action.
So basically "Ignore the objective! Shoot people instead of playing node whack-a-mole!", because this is the only way an actual slugfest would happen?
This is how you actually lose in this system. The system does not require you to fight - in fact, it favours evading the fight. There will be no slugfest, because the aim of most nullsec coalitions or alliances is to win.
It's almost like someone intends to turn the epic war of 0.0 into a contest where two people beat each other with squeaky mallets, seeing who gets driven to insanity and quits first..
The king is dead, long live the king!
Glory to Maximilian Singularity the Sixth, First of his Name!
Proud pilot of the Imperium
|
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1010
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 16:20:54 -
[401] - Quote
With the change in the sov mechanics the Imperium reduced their space and focussed on getting their ADM up, however in Pure Blind they failed. The question one has to ask is why do you want to hold on to that space when its so boring to do so, well its a strategic need, you cannot allow people to sneak in staging POS's, currently you get it reported with Sov, but you have to defend that sov to get that report. Is that the only reason you keep those systems, do people want to live in those systems?
Those systems are the entry points into your space and there is NPC 0.0 there, so you are fighting against those people based there, you keep those sov systems to bottle up the Mordus Legion and to prevent others sneaking in assets to do a surprise dunk, where is the value for you, is it to keep them focussed on those systems rather than harass your main ISK making areas, that has a value.
So you have strategic value in keeping those systems because they control entry to 0.0, you have the ease of intel for POS's during the current system before the new structures arrive and you keep Mordus Legion occupied around the edges in that area, all three good reasons to keep the fights there. Perhaps you will not want to explain any other reason and I would understand that., for me while it is boring for you those systems which do not have anyone really living there act as a buffer zone. This is pure strategic thinking, but there has to be a cost for such a buffer.
When we look at the Russians who whined here, they are just exercising pure strategic judgeement based on the old system, their arguments having merit in terms of pure gameplay as do yours miss the impact of how this affects 0.0 long term.
For me its interesting to watch this unfold and its too damn early to nerf the way that people RF things.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
Trii Seo
Executive Outcomes
839
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 16:28:14 -
[402] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: For me its interesting to watch this unfold and its too damn early to nerf the way that people RF things.
It is, definitely, too early to make sweeping changes. A lot of mindset-shifting is yet to occur. That said, since we're supposed to 'reduce' living space, tools to build it up proper should be introduced sooner rather than later.
The king is dead, long live the king!
Glory to Maximilian Singularity the Sixth, First of his Name!
Proud pilot of the Imperium
|
Jang Ezhdeha
20th Legion Mordus Angels
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 17:29:56 -
[403] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Quote:And yet it doesn't happen in sov null, because the system actively discourages meaningful conflict. Thanks for proving the point that it's the mechanics, not the players. The system is three weeks old. We have lots of people playing it as if Dominion Sov were still the applicable paradigm. It's the players, not the system, preventing meaningful conflict right now. I honestly believe it's the lack of required commitment to contest sov. We've been saying all along that entosis links should be what make battleships relevant again. If you had to drop a battleship to contest sov you'd really only do it if you wanted to take the sov, not for a troll - at least not too frequently. Eli Stan wrote:Perhaps you and I have different ideas of what it means to live in a system? Living in a system means availability to defend it by definition, and there's no idle standby required. It does not mean constantly orbiting an Outpost, TCU or Ihub. You can be in station chatting on comms. You can be in space mining. You can be in space ratting. You have no less than 15 minutes to respond to an Interceptor entering system. In our null system, my fleet is constantly, 23x7, on the lookout for Interceptors and other hostiles. We have pilots spread out across up to six systems. We have advance warning. It doesn't interfere with our living within our home system. It's a natural part of our life there. We welcome the activity, even if it's an Interceptor we can't catch but can only chase off. And I get that, but why bother mining or ratting if you're constantly having to reship and chase around a ship designed not to be caught? A lot of people seem to want sov to be a career choice not an entertaining game mechanic. If that's how CCP want to take it, fair enough, but it won't bring in more players.
I think what you really want by making the Entosis ships Battleships and larger is a reason to drop massive cap fleets along with your other friends in CFC again. You want it so you can remain uncontested as you were before Ageis Sov since no one could come close to dropping the number of carriers, dreads, super carriers and titans as CFC could especially so close to your home systems. The new Sov system make the playing filed a little more even which lets be honest may not seem to be much of a threat to you now but it will be soon enough, especially when the fleets start to become bigger and more organized. I can even foresee a new niche being created out of all of this, merc corps and alliances built for one sole purpose, taking sov from the big and handing it out to whomever pays. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
80
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 18:01:25 -
[404] - Quote
Trii Seo wrote:Icycle wrote: New sov does not encourages big battles! New sov is borring! The sov is a small help to encourage small gang warfare instead of a big slugfest. Quit blue balling everyone you find. Set your neightbours to neut and let the slug fest begin Deploy to an enemy territory, put a pos and attack them. Dont blame CCP or new sov for your wrong doing. Dont wait for the fun come to you. If you are an entity that pays off enemies to go away, stop doing it if you want more action.
So basically "Ignore the objective! Shoot people instead of playing node whack-a-mole!", because this is the only way an actual slugfest would happen? This is how you actually lose in this system. The system does not require you to fight - in fact, it favours evading the fight. There will be no slugfest, because the aim of most nullsec coalitions or alliances is to win. It's almost like someone intends to turn the epic war of 0.0 into a contest where two people beat each other with squeaky mallets, seeing who gets driven to insanity and quits first..
No slugfest happen when important systems get occupied, pvp escalation happens or you deploy into someones back yard. It will happen more of then if you decided to set some blues to neutral since you got no one left to fight. At least not any ways near.
I dont see how you are going to win but not fight? I mean to got to show up for to enforce and after reinforce a system. You cant win any other way. "The system does not require you to fight" is a fantacy to me unless you dont defend it in any of the two situations.
Epic battle will happen but it will not happen while every one is blue to each other! Fozzy sov adresses that by forcing to down size in space. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6489
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 19:45:20 -
[405] - Quote
Jang Ezhdeha wrote:I think what you really want by making the Entosis ships Battleships and larger is a reason to drop massive cap fleets along with your other friends in CFC again. You want it so you can remain uncontested as you were before Ageis Sov since no one could come close to dropping the number of carriers, dreads, super carriers and titans as CFC could especially so close to your home systems. The new Sov system make the playing filed a little more even which lets be honest may not seem to be much of a threat to you now but it will be soon enough, especially when the fleets start to become bigger and more organized. I can even foresee a new niche being created out of all of this, merc corps and alliances built for one sole purpose, taking sov from the big and handing it out to whomever pays. Why would I care if we're dropping carriers or cruisers? Either way we're going to outblob the opposition. The reason I want bigger ships to have entosis links is because I believe that attacking sov is something you should do when you want to take sov, and that should require a level of commitment. If you're too cheap to drop a couple of battleships, what good will holding sov for the three seconds you get to hold it do you?
And no, the new sov system doesn't make it eve. Smaller guys still stand no chance of taking wanted sov from bigger groups. No matter how you try to twist it more, better organised players will always win. All the new systems has done is allow people who don't want sov to be a threat using disposable ships causing the exact dull and conflictless gameplay CCP have been trying to avoid.
Lol, I'd love to see someone pay several billion to a merc corp to take sov, give it to a little guy then watch the big guy roflstomp all over the little guy and take it back. If you're too small to take your own sov how the hell do you think you will be able to defend it? Remember, the easier it is for you to take sov from a big group, the easier it is for that big group to take it back.
Edit: Thinking more abut your "merc" idea, the only way that would work if you continued to pay the mercs to defend your space. So really if you think about it, you're talking about renting.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
32
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 20:17:22 -
[406] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
Edit: Thinking more abut your "merc" idea, the only way that would work if you continued to pay the mercs to defend your space. So really if you think about it, you're talking about renting.
And rolling back fozziesov would just create absentee landlords who don't have to defend their outlying renter territory from any low scale harasment. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6489
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 20:27:36 -
[407] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Edit: Thinking more abut your "merc" idea, the only way that would work if you continued to pay the mercs to defend your space. So really if you think about it, you're talking about renting. And rolling back fozziesov would just create absentee landlords who don't have to defend their outlying renter territory from any low scale harasment. Which is why I'm not asking for it to be rolled back. I have no problem with unused spoace being easy to take, but attackers should have to actually commit to attacks, otherwise conflict won't be created. As we've seen, people will just fly around in cheap disposable ships trolling.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
517
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 20:37:17 -
[408] - Quote
....Ya know, it would be sort of funny to charge ISK for using an entosis link. I mean it costs money to declare a war, pay bills, use security tags, form alliances and corps, and maintain them. I think it is a valid point that SBUs used to cost money, there was at least some ante on the table, even though a few billion is actually fairly trivial. It won't stop dedicated trolls (nothing can) and it doesn't give much player vindication (you still won't be able to blow most of them up), but at least it could detract a little bit from people who have no incentive and no cost other than time to go nuts. Honestly we need more ISK sinks.
The ideas to disable nullification on entosis are pretty good. Don't get me wrong, the onus of defense should be on sov owners, but it may be a teensy tiny bit tilted to attackers now.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Nameira Vanis-Tor
Angry Mustellid The Periphery
228
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 07:22:57 -
[409] - Quote
-1 to petition sounds like Argis Sov is broadly meeting its objectives.
Sov Nullsec was not a vibrant content rich environment. It was a 'Blue Donought' where occasionally everyone would gank someone out of the club. |
Jang Ezhdeha
20th Legion Mordus Angels
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 11:33:34 -
[410] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Jang Ezhdeha wrote:I think what you really want by making the Entosis ships Battleships and larger is a reason to drop massive cap fleets along with your other friends in CFC again. You want it so you can remain uncontested as you were before Ageis Sov since no one could come close to dropping the number of carriers, dreads, super carriers and titans as CFC could especially so close to your home systems. The new Sov system make the playing filed a little more even which lets be honest may not seem to be much of a threat to you now but it will be soon enough, especially when the fleets start to become bigger and more organized. I can even foresee a new niche being created out of all of this, merc corps and alliances built for one sole purpose, taking sov from the big and handing it out to whomever pays. Why would I care if we're dropping carriers or cruisers? Either way we're going to outblob the opposition. The reason I want bigger ships to have entosis links is because I believe that attacking sov is something you should do when you want to take sov, and that should require a level of commitment. If you're too cheap to drop a couple of battleships, what good will holding sov for the three seconds you get to hold it do you? And no, the new sov system doesn't make it eve. Smaller guys still stand no chance of taking wanted sov from bigger groups. No matter how you try to twist it more, better organised players will always win. All the new systems has done is allow people who don't want sov to be a threat using disposable ships causing the exact dull and conflictless gameplay CCP have been trying to avoid. Lol, I'd love to see someone pay several billion to a merc corp to take sov, give it to a little guy then watch the big guy roflstomp all over the little guy and take it back. If you're too small to take your own sov how the hell do you think you will be able to defend it? Remember, the easier it is for you to take sov from a big group, the easier it is for that big group to take it back. Edit: Thinking more abut your "merc" idea, the only way that would work if you continued to pay the mercs to defend your space. So really if you think about it, you're talking about renting.
I think you do care whether it is carriers or cruisers after all your modus operadni has been the super cap blob where in years past it was blobbing sub caps by various other entities. CFC took it to a new level with the escalation from sub caps to blobbing caps and you did it very well but the fleet composition of the entosis fleets now keep you from dropping caps to a certain degree which again makes the field of battle more conducive to smaller corps, alliances and gangs in general. Ageis sov was intended to open things up for everyone else and so far it looks like its on its way to doing so. While those in CFC or whatever you call yourselves now may look at it as just a pain in the rear for others its creating content and its a way for the little guy to hit the big guy and I'm willing to bet we will see some really fun battles in the near future. You only have yourselves to blame for this CFC and I thank you on behalf of myself, Mordus Angels and the rest of the little guys out there looking to take swings (and land a few) at the big bullies out there. |
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6499
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 12:30:11 -
[411] - Quote
Jang Ezhdeha wrote:I think you do care whether it is carriers or cruisers after all your modus operadni has been the super cap blob where in years past it was blobbing sub caps by various other entities. CFC took it to a new level with the escalation from sub caps to blobbing caps and you did it very well but the fleet composition of the entosis fleets now keep you from dropping caps to a certain degree which again makes the field of battle more conducive to smaller corps, alliances and gangs in general. Ageis sov was intended to open things up for everyone else and so far it looks like its on its way to doing so. While those in CFC or whatever you call yourselves now may look at it as just a pain in the rear for others its creating content and its a way for the little guy to hit the big guy and I'm willing to bet we will see some really fun battles in the near future. You only have yourselves to blame for this CFC and I thank you on behalf of myself, Mordus Angels and the rest of the little guys out there looking to take swings (and land a few) at the big bullies out there. I think you missed the point. No matter what ship types are used, our response will be the same: blob the **** out of it. The only reason ship type matters is for commitment. Right now, attacking sov requires no commitment. A solo guy can set up and alliance and contest sov on his own without losing much when he's undoubtedly stopped. This is why sov trolling exists and why most people attacking sov have no intention of fighting - thus create no conflict.
If however people had to commit a moderate amount of resources to attacking sov, they would have a reason to fight for it and thus conflict would be created. Dominion required alliances to commit far too much, fozziesov requires far too little. Somewhere between the two is the right balance and the one I'm fairly certain CCP will find in time.
And I get it, you're super excited because you can make goons react to your existence, but it's not creating the type of content CCP wanted to create. Rather than look for balance you're just sitting there patting yourselves on the back, more likely because your overlord told you to rather than because you actually believe in it yourselves. I'm sure even you guys will get bored of mining structures before too long and you'll realise that what we're pushing for is what's best for the game.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
32
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 12:36:10 -
[412] - Quote
Always makes me laugh seeing Lucas talk about 'overlords' when his alliance is part of the biggest feudal society yet created in Eve. :) |
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
33
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 14:07:39 -
[413] - Quote
Anyway I'm done with this thread. O.P proposal gets -1 from me.
Make entosis ships lose nulifier immunity and destroy the entosis module if the pilot has to flee out of distance without completing it's entosis cycle. Also cap the amount of capture nodes in space to 10 throughout the constellation at any one time and have a new one respawn every time one is captured.
|
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 14:09:20 -
[414] - Quote
Some of you have talked about rentlords.
Well that is te only one option that many corps have to go on null, they have no pvp guys on their corp, and probably they dont want to make pvp, at least on a daily basis. With this changes, renters have left just because rentlords cant reach everywhere and renters are not going to fight back, so if their system are constantly in reinforce mode, why stay in null and why pay for a system that dosent provide enough is to pay the bills?
Until all the parts usnderstand once and for all that there are at least two kind of players in EVE (the hardcorers pvperrs and those who dont wish to pvp) we are going to see many threads like this one and others well knowned.
This new sov mechanics are not going to attract new players into null, it will make the opposite. I guess the problem we are talking about here are not only this sov mechanic, theres something wrong or broke behind that and CCP needs to find what are wrong or broke and fix it.
Sov in dominion only can be contested if the attackers want to take sov, even if they transfer that sov to anybody else but that costs isks, now eveyone can contest the sov, not take it, its free of charge and do that everydays.
CCP want to take isks from game, its easy... As the null sec has pirate faction they are legally the owners of that space, instead of caliming sov for alliances, make a sov claimable to corps, where those corps have to pay the fee-¦s to those pirate faction in a proportion that have been charged to the renters by renterlords, those NPC provide all the upgrades, they control the sov unit and the ihubs, corps pay the upgrades, onde they pay the upgrade are working, The npcs can provide more services like patrolling space if the renter corp wish to pay for that and so on. Moonmining are only available for the renter corp and no one else can set pos-¦s on that system, and you will see the alliances dropping sov, new players going into null etc. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6501
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 14:34:27 -
[415] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Always makes me laugh seeing Lucas talk negatively about 'overlords' when his alliance is part of the biggest feudal society yet created in Eve. :) Nothing wrong with leadership mate, it's how the world runs too. The difference is the level of control pushed down by people like gen eve and gevlon which prevents your members from being able to form their own opinions. I frequently disagree quite publicly with members and leadership of our coalition and there's no way I'd accept being told what and where to post like you have been. Plus, let's face it, your leaders are considerable more childlike and neckbeardy than ours.
Akballah Kassan wrote:Anyway I'm done with this thread. O.P proposal gets -1 from me. Careful, you might get yelled at and lose your funding.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1036
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 15:36:54 -
[416] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Anyway I'm done with this thread. O.P proposal gets -1 from me.
Make entosis ships lose nulifier immunity and destroy the entosis module if the pilot has to flee out of distance without completing it's entosis cycle. Also cap the amount of capture nodes in space to 10 throughout the constellation at any one time and have a new one respawn every time one is captured.
That's actually not a terrible idea. It might pull in on a bit of the trolling, given that the entosis module usually costs more than the hull it's strapped to, when used by "sov guerrillas" (since that's what they seem to want to be called). I'd still like to see prop mods disabled completely when running the link, but one step at a time, eh? |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
325
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 16:43:05 -
[417] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:destroy the entosis module if the pilot has to flee out of distance without completing it's entosis cycle That's an interesting idea that I think merits further consideration.
In the meantime, with entities like NOC and BOS getting involved in multi-billion ISK fights (the most recent being 280 pilots in Costolle destroying a total of nearly 200 billion ISK over a period of 70 minutes,) sometimes over a POS, sometimes simply from the result of two groups trying to out-escalate each other, I can't help but snicker at sov null pilots who whine about a single interceptor interrupting their ratting and mining. Sounds like they're better suited for highsec life. Null needs more of the kind of pilot that finds chasing an interceptor interesting.
I think I understand why BOS is saying that getting kicked from CFC was the best thing to happen to them...
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1036
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 16:50:52 -
[418] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:destroy the entosis module if the pilot has to flee out of distance without completing it's entosis cycle That's an interesting idea that I think merits further consideration. In the meantime, with entities like NOC and BOS getting involved in multi-billion ISK fights (the most recent being 280 pilots in Costolle destroying a total of nearly 200 billion ISK over a period of 70 minutes,) sometimes over a POS, sometimes simply from the result of two groups trying to out-escalate each other, I can't help but snicker at sov null pilots who whine about a single interceptor interrupting their ratting and mining. Sounds like they're better suited for highsec life. Null needs more of the kind of pilot that finds chasing an interceptor interesting. I think I understand why BOS is saying that getting kicked from CFC was the best thing to happen to them... I am 100% positive that the recent BOS fight had precisely **** all to do with interceptors lasering a node. The big fights have been caused by POSes and money moons for a long time now. In that regard, absolutely nothing has changed.
I can count on one hand how many people have said that chasing an instawarping, nullified ship is entertaining. They also happen to be the same people relying on those ships almost exclusively. Funny how that works out, eh? |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
325
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 17:08:22 -
[419] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:destroy the entosis module if the pilot has to flee out of distance without completing it's entosis cycle That's an interesting idea that I think merits further consideration. In the meantime, with entities like NOC and BOS getting involved in multi-billion ISK fights (the most recent being 280 pilots in Costolle destroying a total of nearly 200 billion ISK over a period of 70 minutes,) sometimes over a POS, sometimes simply from the result of two groups trying to out-escalate each other, I can't help but snicker at sov null pilots who whine about a single interceptor interrupting their ratting and mining. Sounds like they're better suited for highsec life. Null needs more of the kind of pilot that finds chasing an interceptor interesting. I think I understand why BOS is saying that getting kicked from CFC was the best thing to happen to them... I am 100% positive that the recent BOS fight had precisely **** all to do with interceptors lasering a node. The big fights have been caused by POSes and money moons for a long time now. In that regard, absolutely nothing has changed.
Exactly. Big fights will still happen when both sides are willing to commit - that hasn't changed with the implementation of Aegis Sov.
What has changed, however, is the ease with which alliances could hold on to systems they don't use. Once the alliances get tired of defending such systems, we'll still get the big fights over valuable resources/system, and the big fights just for fun, and smaller entities will be able to carve out small niches for themselves. |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1036
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 17:19:15 -
[420] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:destroy the entosis module if the pilot has to flee out of distance without completing it's entosis cycle That's an interesting idea that I think merits further consideration. In the meantime, with entities like NOC and BOS getting involved in multi-billion ISK fights (the most recent being 280 pilots in Costolle destroying a total of nearly 200 billion ISK over a period of 70 minutes,) sometimes over a POS, sometimes simply from the result of two groups trying to out-escalate each other, I can't help but snicker at sov null pilots who whine about a single interceptor interrupting their ratting and mining. Sounds like they're better suited for highsec life. Null needs more of the kind of pilot that finds chasing an interceptor interesting. I think I understand why BOS is saying that getting kicked from CFC was the best thing to happen to them... I am 100% positive that the recent BOS fight had precisely **** all to do with interceptors lasering a node. The big fights have been caused by POSes and money moons for a long time now. In that regard, absolutely nothing has changed. Exactly. Big fights will still happen when both sides are willing to commit - that hasn't changed with the implementation of Aegis Sov. What has changed, however, is the ease with which alliances could hold on to systems they don't use. Once the alliances get tired of defending such systems, we'll still get the big fights over valuable resources/system, and the big fights just for fun, and smaller entities will be able to carve out small niches for themselves. You will until "newpos" ends up turning all structures into a node mining quagmire. Then even those will likely stop, since there won't be a reason to commit large amounts of assets to attacking and defending those either. We shall see, and I hope you're right, but I know better. |
|
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1720
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 17:22:08 -
[421] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:If however people had to commit a moderate amount of resources to attacking sov, they would have a reason to fight for it and thus conflict would be created. Dominion required alliances to commit far too much, fozziesov requires far too little. Somewhere between the two is the right balance and the one I'm fairly certain CCP will find in time.
The problem I have with this logic is that it breaks one of the more interesting design decisions of Aegis sov, which is that the defender decides how many resources the attacker has to commit in order to take the system, at least within the limit's of the defender's ability to do so.
Is your system undefended? Then why shouldn't some random in a frigate be able to take it from you, if you ignore every chance the system gives you to to defend it?
Is your system defended? Then there should be someone there, or at most a jump or two out, to shoo away the interceptor before it can do much of anything. As it happens, the perfect answer to the entosis interceptor is the even cheaper T1 EWAR frigate. Unlike the attacker, you can have a big stack of them in your station for anyone to grab and use. You can even get fancy and use EAFs or EWAR cruisers. Entosis the station to stop his progress, then damp him until he has to turn off his prop mode to be in targeting range, or just hit him with ECM and force him to go through warm-up cycle after warm-up cycle. Troll the troll. Then, if it's a vanguard for a serious attempt at taking your system, you'll be seeing a fleet before long. If it's just someone buzzing around, they'll go away.
It's just natural that a would-be attacker would not commit to a response they can't reliably anticipate, anymore than you would fully commit to kicking a hornet's nest before you had any idea how many hornets would come out of it.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
325
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 17:34:36 -
[422] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:You will until "newpos" ends up turning all structures into a node mining quagmire. Then even those will likely stop, since there won't be a reason to commit large amounts of assets to defending those either. We shall see, and I hope you're right, but I know better.
You mean the Citadels? I see it playing out similarly to TCUs and Outposts - alliances that want to hang on to their POS-equivalents will need to have a constant presence in the structure's system, which will promote consolidation and gives local entities the opportunity to acquire them from remote entities. Anytime there's a real push from one group to take over a moon from another group who wants that moon, there will still be a big fight. (Keep in mind that CCP has explicitly stated that one of their design goals for Aegis is to change how "big fights" happen, so that they don't happen on a single grid in a single system, and instead are spread out across an entire constellation.) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6512
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 17:43:20 -
[423] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:The problem I have with this logic is that it breaks one of the more interesting design decisions of Aegis sov, which is that the defender decides how many resources the attacker has to commit in order to take the system, at least within the limit's of the defender's ability to do so.
Is your system undefended? Then why shouldn't some random in a frigate be able to take it from you, if you ignore every chance the system gives you to to defend it? Even if an attacker had to commit more, that would still be the case. All it would do is raise the minimum. For an unused system, the commitment should remain low, but for a system that is used, the defender shouldn't have to go chasing every disposable frigate entering the system. One of the perks of system ownership should be that it requires more work from an aggressor.
Dersen Lowery wrote:Is your system defended? Then there should be someone there, or at most a jump or two out, to shoo away the interceptor before it can do much of anything. As it happens, the perfect answer to the entosis interceptor is the even cheaper T1 EWAR frigate. Unlike the attacker, you can have a big stack of them in your station for anyone to grab and use. You can even get fancy and use EAFs or EWAR cruisers. Entosis the station to stop his progress, then damp him until he has to turn off his prop mode to be in targeting range, or just hit him with ECM and force him to go through warm-up cycle after warm-up cycle. Troll the troll. Then, if it's a vanguard for a serious attempt at taking your system, you'll be seeing a fleet before long. If it's just someone buzzing around, they'll go away. Have you done this though? Sure it's easy enough to defend, it's boring as **** though. You already know from the moment they arrive that you're not going to get a fight. You're going to get them evading you as much as they can and then likely cloaking up. Even if you do manage to get a point, the attacker loses effectively nothing. Without the need to commit to an attack there will be no real conflict generated by the mechanic.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1721
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:12:08 -
[424] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dersen Lowery wrote:The problem I have with this logic is that it breaks one of the more interesting design decisions of Aegis sov, which is that the defender decides how many resources the attacker has to commit in order to take the system, at least within the limit's of the defender's ability to do so.
Is your system undefended? Then why shouldn't some random in a frigate be able to take it from you, if you ignore every chance the system gives you to to defend it? Even if an attacker had to commit more, that would still be the case. All it would do is raise the minimum. For an unused system, the commitment should remain low, but for a system that is used, the defender shouldn't have to go chasing every disposable frigate entering the system. One of the perks of system ownership should be that it requires more work from an aggressor.
It does, regardless. It's not like you cycle the sov lasers once and everything is yours. But the whole point is to make the obstacles the other players, and get everything else out of the way. If there are no players defending the system then the obstacles put up by the game are trivial.
Besides, what requiring battleships will do is go all the way back to requiring overwhelming force, because unless you're picking off a border system that you know will not be defended (and how would you know that?) you don't send a single battleship. That'll just get picked off at a gate on the way. You send a fleet, with support. How big? Well, if you want success then it has to be bigger than any predictable defense, which, because that's hard to predict, means that you're blobbing as much as you can. (Remember, the odds are good that the locals can muster caps and supers more easily than you can). And if you can't muster that then you don't even try, and there are no smaller entities taking sov, and there's no conflict.
Lucas Kell wrote:Have you done this though? Sure it's easy enough to defend, it's boring as **** though. You already know from the moment they arrive that you're not going to get a fight. You're going to get them evading you as much as they can and then likely cloaking up. Even if you do manage to get a point, the attacker loses effectively nothing. Without the need to commit to an attack there will be no real conflict generated by the mechanic.
And without the ability to poke the system in relative safety, to determine how eager the owners are to defend it, there will also be no conflict. That's the problem. Nobody's going to Leroy a fleet of battleships into a system just to feed you. They only will if they're convinced that you can't answer what they have. Once you think of the interceptors as scouts, possibly vanguards, the system makes more sense. The fleet doesn't show up until the FC is convinced that he has a good shot at winning, or if the FC just wants a fight, he'll want to know that the defending fleet will make for a good engagement.
I would welcome tweaks that reduced the level of tedium, but I like the idea that the defender sets the difficulty too much to compromise it.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6514
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:33:50 -
[425] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:It does, regardless. It's not like you cycle the sov lasers once and everything is yours. But the whole point is to make the obstacles the other players, and get everything else out of the way. If there are no players defending the system then the obstacles put up by the game are trivial.
Besides, what requiring battleships will do is go all the way back to requiring overwhelming force, because unless you're picking off a border system that you know will not be defended (and how would you know that?) you don't send a single battleship. That'll just get picked off at a gate on the way. You send a fleet, with support. How big? Well, if you want success then it has to be bigger than any predictable defense, which, because that's hard to predict, means that you're blobbing as much as you can. (Remember, the odds are good that the locals can muster caps and supers more easily than you can). And if you can't muster that then you don't even try, and there are no smaller entities taking sov, and there's no conflict. A solo pilot can contest sov in a disposable frigate. While he might not take it, he require a response every single time from a defender.
If you owned a pos and I kept flying up to it and shooting it with a frigate and you kept chasing me off, would you have to keep doing it forever? No, you'd realise I'm just a frigate and ignore me until you needed to respond. So why does a POS require more to threaten than an entire system?
And no, having to have battleships would simply mean that attackers would have to attack sov properly and would create conflict. All they are doing now is triggering notifications and running away when defenders arrive. It's whack-a-mole sov and it's bad for the game. The playercount not going up for such a pivotal change is a sign of how much of a failure it is.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:And without the ability to poke the system in relative safety, to determine how eager the owners are to defend it, there will also be no conflict. That's the problem. Nobody's going to Leroy a fleet of battleships into a system just to feed you. They only will if they're convinced that you can't answer what they have. Once you think of the interceptors as scouts, possibly vanguards, the system makes more sense. The fleet doesn't show up until the FC is convinced that he has a good shot at winning, or if the FC just wants a fight, he'll want to know that the defending fleet will make for a good engagement. Oh bull. Nobody is "poking a system" to find out how many defenders respond. The "fleet" doesn't show up at all, because the people sending the interceptors have no interest in sov.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:I would welcome tweaks that reduced the level of tedium, but I like the idea that the defender sets the difficulty too much to compromise it. Even if an attacker needed 1 battleship, the defender would still set it. They might respond with just 1 man or they might arrive with 250 battleship or a full on super fleet. Whatever the minimum bar is set at, the defender will set the difficulty between that and the number of members of their coalition.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:40:25 -
[426] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Have you done this though? Sure it's easy enough to defend, it's boring as **** though.
If chasing a lone interceptor is that boring use some of your renter-corp tax earnings to pay somebody isk to do it! It can't be any more boring then shooting npc's in a Haven. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6516
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:46:39 -
[427] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Have you done this though? Sure it's easy enough to defend, it's boring as **** though. If chasing a lone interceptor is that boring use some of your renter-corp tax earnings to pay somebody isk to do it! It can't be any more boring then shooting npc's in a Haven. Alternatively, we'll just do what we've doing. Crawl into an even igger blob of non-aggression pacts and roll in isk through renters. If CCP leave in terrible mechanics we'll simply opt out to the extent we can and it will be worse than dominion. I doubt they will though as they have sense enough to want to drive conflict in null, not drive further stagnation. So look out for the upcoming changes.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:50:56 -
[428] - Quote
Just thought I'd share this from another thread.
alpha36 wrote:
I feel like npc 0.0 is too safe and theres little to no risk involved these days. It used to be that if someone was in your space and up in your grill basing out of npc you could go in there with a freighter full of bubbles and camp that **** for 30 days until they die and give up, leave.
So people are willing to HELLCAMP NPC STATIONS FOR A WHOLE MONTH with no pvp content to destroy an enemy yet the same people won't chase around a lone interceptor?
I think this Goon just blew the arguement about entosis wars being boring out of the water. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6516
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:05:09 -
[429] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Just thought I'd share this from another thread. alpha36 wrote:I feel like npc 0.0 is too safe and theres little to no risk involved these days. It used to be that if someone was in your space and up in your grill basing out of npc you could go in there with a freighter full of bubbles and camp that **** for 30 days until they die and give up, leave. So people are willing to HELLCAMP NPC STATIONS FOR A WHOLE MONTH with no pvp content to destroy an enemy yet the same people won't chase around a lone interceptor? I think this Goon just blew the arguement about entosis wars being boring out of the water. We do chase lone interceptors. The difference between that and this is that hellcamping is something people choose to dot. Sovtrolling is a design flaw that all sov holders are forced to deal with. Bad design is bad design. It's going to get changed, it's just a matter of time.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:08:22 -
[430] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:
I think this Goon just blew the arguement about entosis wars being boring out of the water.
We do chase lone interceptors. The difference between that and this is that hellcamping is something people choose to dot. Sovtrolling is a design flaw that all sov holders are forced to deal with. Bad design is bad design. It's going to get changed, it's just a matter of time.
Wouldn't suprise me at all to see CCP cave in to nullbears like yourself but it won't be good for the game.
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6516
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:18:47 -
[431] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:
I think this Goon just blew the arguement about entosis wars being boring out of the water.
We do chase lone interceptors. The difference between that and this is that hellcamping is something people choose to dot. Sovtrolling is a design flaw that all sov holders are forced to deal with. Bad design is bad design. It's going to get changed, it's just a matter of time. Wouldn't suprise me at all to see CCP cave in to nullbears like yourself but it won't be good for the game. Of course it will be. Games being entertaining is pretty much a must-have. Them making the game less boring is a good thing, even if you're so "grr goons" that you'd rather see the game die.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1039
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 21:38:47 -
[432] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote: Wouldn't suprise me at all to see CCP cave in to nullbears like yourself but it won't be good for the game.
It shouldn't suprise you. If you know a single thing about the production and economic aspects of this game, it shouldn't shock you in the slightest. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3192
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 22:03:22 -
[433] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote: Wouldn't suprise me at all to see CCP cave in to nullbears like yourself but it won't be good for the game.
It shouldn't suprise you. If you know a single thing about the production and economic aspects of this game, it shouldn't shock you in the slightest.
There is something to keep in mind, keeping people in ceptors happy trolling sov or changing nullsec so that it will be a diverse and interesting place?
The idea of a diverse and interesting place is a NS with more people in it overall. That is, the idea of a fallow system with an outpost as a FOB for either a war of aggression or defense will no longer be a ThingGäó.
To have NS be like that you cannot have too much instability. People don't make huge investments in terms of time and (in game) resources when things become more risky (and the rewards stay the same). What happens when the members of an alliance think their alliance is about to cascade? Move a bunch of ships and assets into their sov? Or move their **** someplace safe(er)? What happens when a NS alliance gets war decced in HS? Do they move more stuff around in HS with in-alliance characters, or do they switch over to safe(er) OOC alts, preferably ones in noob/NPC corps, or maybe make use of Red Frog?
That is why the linking to the NS statement on TheMittani.com was a bit disingenuous, IMO. That entire document was about moving NS to being more self-sustaining, more developed, and having more people in NS. And yes, it seems the alliances in the Drone regions are woefully behind the ball on pumping the average number of people in their systems.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 03:33:19 -
[434] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote: Wouldn't suprise me at all to see CCP cave in to nullbears like yourself but it won't be good for the game.
It shouldn't suprise you. If you know a single thing about the production and economic aspects of this game, it shouldn't shock you in the slightest. There is something to keep in mind, keeping people in ceptors happy trolling sov or changing nullsec so that it will be a diverse and interesting place? The idea of a diverse and interesting place is a NS with more people in it overall. That is, the idea of a fallow system with an outpost as a FOB for either a war of aggression or defense will no longer be a ThingGäó. To have NS be like that you cannot have too much instability. People don't make huge investments in terms of time and (in game) resources when things become more risky (and the rewards stay the same). What happens when the members of an alliance think their alliance is about to cascade? Move a bunch of ships and assets into their sov? Or move their **** someplace safe(er)? What happens when a NS alliance gets war decced in HS? Do they move more stuff around in HS with in-alliance characters, or do they switch over to safe(er) OOC alts, preferably ones in noob/NPC corps, or maybe make use of Red Frog? That is why the linking to the NS statement on TheMittani.com was a bit disingenuous, IMO. That entire document was about moving NS to being more self-sustaining, more developed, and having more people in NS. And yes, it seems the alliances in the Drone regions are woefully behind the ball on pumping the average number of people in their systems.
Not only the drone lands, from east to south its the same, guess the populated area should be north and west... Guessing why this sov mechanic have been released when theres one colalition that cant be defeated. CCP heve been making mistakes during years and still ongoing to make some more. Better leave all systems that are not in use, and let CCP see with is eyes that nobody are going to claim that sov-¦s. Maybe those who like this sov system will go there claim it all...
|
Karti Aivo
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
22
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 14:36:26 -
[435] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
- meandeane651, head diplomat and alliance command for Gentlemen'sClub Gentlemen's.Club
- Rots Mijnwerker, leader The Blood Covenant
- Pandoro89, Gus Garlic, Maestr0 as Razor leaders RAZOR Alliance
lol what is this? Do you call that group "The Collective of Old ISK and Stable Renting Empires" ?
Fozziesov was supposed to hit people like you and this post is a mere confirmation of its working. Not that your arguments got no substance, but that list on its own is a hilarous collection |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1047
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 14:58:25 -
[436] - Quote
Karti Aivo wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
- meandeane651, head diplomat and alliance command for Gentlemen'sClub Gentlemen's.Club
- Rots Mijnwerker, leader The Blood Covenant
- Pandoro89, Gus Garlic, Maestr0 as Razor leaders RAZOR Alliance
lol what is this? Do you call that group "The Collective of Old ISK and Stable Renting Empires" ? Fozziesov was supposed to hit people like you and this post is a mere confirmation of its working. Not that your arguments got no substance, but that list on its own is a hilarous collection Yeah, except even Sion agrees with a lot of what he's saying, and has stated as much here. |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 20:45:52 -
[437] - Quote
This is starting to remind me of when I reach the top of the tech tree in some SIM or the get the best gear in some RPG. It gets harder and harder to find the game fun.
Kind of like in Eve once your Alliance has all the best gear.
After awhile you find it hard to keep doing the same ol Sov HP grind, so you complain for the Devs to come up with something better.
Once they do come up with something "better" and you find your "best gear" isn't really needed anymore, you say "who in their right mind..." I'd rather grind Sov HP in the best gear than this? Even though your complaints about the old system got us here.
But I think the issue goes back to what I was saying before, how once you get the best gear and top out in the game, it can be hard to find the game still fun. It increasingly becomes harder for many.
What do we do?
Well, we could keep trying to find a way to make the game fun again for those who have the best gear, though I think that would be far harder and never please any sense of a plurality of Eve players, especially when more and more have the best gear.
Or we could zero the clock in a sense, kind of like starting a new instance in that Favorite SIM or RPG.
And I don't mean a reboot of the game, that could be even more challenging to find a happy plurality of Eve players than a whole new Sov mechanic.
-I suggest we get rid of all current Supers and Titans. -Give owners some very high percentage of estimated build costs. -Refund SP and cost of skill books for Titans to all players. -Allow them to sell or keep the mods on their own. -Bring back Titans and Motherships as unique items, that require some special component found in exploration to build.(and are removed after extended periods of non-use) -And keep the new version of Sov, with improvements over time.
So Sov still doesn't need to be a HP grind, and now we have some "best gear" that can be owned, but only a set number can exist at any time, so we don't get into a situation where everyone has the best gear, all the time.
With only one Titan and Mom per major faction, we could have 6, 12, or 18 different ones, that could significantly influence battles, but not normally decide them.
So, the best gear would be very hard to get for any individual and can change hands due to destruction or terms of surrender.
This idea could fall like a lead balloon, but I think the idea that it gets harder to have fun in a game once you have the best gear is a valid one, at least for many of us.
We could keep kicking around ideas and kicking the Devs when we get the chance, but I think the problem is more within ourselves as to why this game has become tedious for many of us.
Kind of like when you reach the top of the tech tree in a Sim and have nothing else to improve. I think the solution is to limit "the top gear" and allow it to change hands.
Then only a very few are affected by this, and the rest of us can vie to de-throne them.
This could go a long way to improving the game for all, and no longer having it as Super Caps Online, as some like to call it. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6530
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 21:03:39 -
[438] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:-I suggest we get rid of all current Supers and Titans. -Give owners some very high percentage of estimated build costs. Goodbye economy.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito squadron Mordus Angels
46
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 01:40:41 -
[439] - Quote
Just want to remind people how Goons fight wars and why Fozsov needs to stay, quoting from the infamous thread on Reddit about Goon tactics pre the recent changes.
Quote: So. Earlier today I had a domifleet with 230 dudes and great comp, full boosts, triage, fuckloads of capital support, 170 FYF support, 110 ishtar support, and bomber support. I had twice what the hostiles had in a doctrine that countered them. I could have jumped right into them while they were set up and wrecked their face earlier today. Why didn't I? Because the hostiles wanted me to do that. They wanted a fight. They would have lost that fight, but they would have got a fight. They would have gotten a handful of kills, and we would have gotten about an equal number in return. But that isn't the way we do things, and it never will be. I don't want to give the enemies a single ******* inch of what they want. Not one bit. They either get helldunked or blueballed. There is no middle ground.
Their whole tactic was to bore attackers to death. Now the shoe is on the other foot we get so many tears.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
406
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 02:07:17 -
[440] - Quote
love how this thread is hidden in a forum only nullsec alliances tend to read, nothing fishy about that at all.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
|
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1724
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 03:45:00 -
[441] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:A solo pilot can contest sov in a disposable frigate. While he might not take it, he require a response every single time from a defender.
What response, though? Undocking an alt in a Maulus? You don't have to stop what you're doing. You don't have to form up. It's an Interceptor.
If somebody really wants to mess with you, they won't send a trollceptor. They'll park a cyno-equipped covops in a safe spot in your system and go AFK.
Lucas Kell wrote:If you owned a pos and I kept flying up to it and shooting it with a frigate and you kept chasing me off, would you have to keep doing it forever? No, you'd realise I'm just a frigate and ignore me until you needed to respond. So why does a POS require more to threaten than an entire system?
Because CCP is completely changing the way players interact with structures. A POS is an old-style structure that has overstayed its welcome by a decade or so.
If you want to understand the change, just look at Dominion sov as CCP intended it: they were certain that the giant walls of hit points presented by structures would deter players from destroying them; they would essentially be passive, while players fought players. Well, that didn't exactly work out, so now there are no hit points. There's just a module whose entire raison d'+¬tre is to tell the server that you're there to assert a claim on a specific thing. Players can shoot other players. Or station services, if they prefer that.
Lucas Kell wrote:And no, having to have battleships would simply mean that attackers would have to attack sov properly and would create conflict.
If by conflict you mean that they could be picked off by bomber wings on region or constellation gates, sure. I understand that the Imperium would very much like to defend at its borders.
Convince me that anyone is going to send that many billions of ISK your direction at that warp speed without a fairly high assurance of victory--say, gained by sending a frigate ahead to provoke a response and relay it back. If you were to go and take a system and you had to have one battleship with a fitting crippled to accommodate this link of yours, what would your support fleet look like? What would be a reasonable number of pilots? How much ISK would you be willing to put on the line?
You say that they're running when defenders arrive. Why are you bothering to muster defenders, plural? It's an interceptor with comparable tank and DPS to a Venture. Its Entosis Link can be trivially hard countered by absolutely anything with a T1 Entosis Link. Undock a Maulus, lock the station, turn on the Entosis Link. Lock the interceptor, turn on damps. Orbit the station at 500. Run a small shield booster if you want to, just in case the interceptor pilot loses his mind and decides to attack with his dozens of DPS.
What am I missing?
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
826
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 05:55:38 -
[442] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote: Undock a Maulus, lock the station, turn on the Entosis Link. Lock the interceptor, turn on damps. Orbit the station at 500. Run a small shield booster if you want to, just in case the interceptor pilot loses his mind and decides to attack with his dozens of DPS.
What am I missing? You're missing the 499 times you had to do that since last Thursday, in a ADM 6 system. Real exciting game-play there right? Boy, what a conflict driver, just look at those battle reports.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6540
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 08:40:50 -
[443] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:What response, though? Undocking an alt in a Maulus? You don't have to stop what you're doing. You don't have to form up. It's an Interceptor. Any response is bad. Back in the day, a single person coming into a system in s crappy frigate going "I'm gonna take your sov lololololololololololol" would be ignored as they are no threat. Now they are as much of a threat to sov as a solo titan is. A response is forced by the bar being so low and worse will result in no conflict in nearly every case as they'll just run away and cloak.
Dersen Lowery wrote:If somebody really wants to mess with you, they won't send a trollceptor. They'll park a cyno-equipped covops in a safe spot in your system and go AFK. Which is fine (though I don't like AFK play but that's another matter) because they open a choice. You can leave, ignore them or hide until they go away. Ttrollcepors don't give that choice. Not chasing them means you get reinforced.
Dersen Lowery wrote:Because CCP is completely changing the way players interact with structures. A POS is an old-style structure that has overstayed its welcome by a decade or so. So under he new system, when the new style POS comes out, you're expecting them to be able to be taken out by a lone frigate too? In less time than an entire system can be?
Dersen Lowery wrote:If by conflict you mean that they could be picked off by bomber wings on region or constellation gates, sure. I understand that the Imperium would very much like to defend at its borders.
Convince me that anyone is going to send that many billions of ISK your direction at that warp speed without a fairly high assurance of victory--say, gained by sending a frigate ahead to provoke a response and relay it back. If you were to go and take a system and you had to have one battleship with a fitting crippled to accommodate this link of yours, what would your support fleet look like? What would be a reasonable number of pilots? How much ISK would you be willing to put on the line? By conflict I mean ships exploding one way or another. That's not going to happen when they can just as easily contest sov with a ship designed to run away. Those players serious about taking sov are attacking with fleets. That should be how contesting sov at al works. Sov is an alliance level activity. It should take a decent amount of investment to do and how much you are willing to put on the line should be dependent on how much you want the system.
Dersen Lowery wrote:You say that they're running when defenders arrive. Why are you bothering to muster defenders, plural? It's free intelligence for your assailant, and for an interceptor with comparable tank and DPS to a Venture. Its Entosis Link can be trivially hard countered by absolutely anything with a T1 Entosis Link. Undock a Maulus, lock the station, turn on the Entosis Link. Lock the interceptor, turn on damps. Orbit the station at 500. Run a small shield booster if you want to, just in case the interceptor pilot loses his mind and decides to attack with his dozens of DPS.
What am I missing? They (plural) are running when defenders (plural) arrive. This happens in multiple locations at any one time. Yes, each one only requires one ship to respond but in all the places it happens it require multiple responses.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 15:56:10 -
[444] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Snowmann wrote:-I suggest we get rid of all current Supers and Titans. -Give owners some very high percentage of estimated build costs. Goodbye economy.
Yeah, that could create some high inflationary pressures.
Another option would be to refund majority of the costs via game time, except a Titan would result in well over 5 years game time. Not too sure how many would be happy about that.
Or just give them PLEX, but the PLEX hoarders would probably hate that.
Maybe 2 yrs free game time, 24 PLEX and some limited BPCs of a Alliance Tournament quality ship that only goes to them would do. :)
Yeah well, anyways... I'm getting carried away here.
I still think what I wrote holds true, but compensating those who currently own them is a complicated issue. How do you do it in a fair way that doesn't create havoc somewhere else in the game.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3197
|
Posted - 2015.08.08 17:30:22 -
[445] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Snowmann wrote:-I suggest we get rid of all current Supers and Titans. -Give owners some very high percentage of estimated build costs. Goodbye economy. Yeah, that could create some high inflationary pressures. Another option would be to refund majority of the costs via game time, except a Titan would result in well over 5 years game time. Not too sure how many would be happy about that. Or just give them PLEX, but the PLEX hoarders would probably hate that. Maybe 2 yrs free game time, 24 PLEX and some limited BPCs of a Alliance Tournament quality ship that only goes to them would do. :) Yeah well, anyways... I'm getting carried away here. I still think what I wrote holds true, but compensating those who currently own them is a complicated issue. How do you do it in a fair way that doesn't create havoc somewhere else in the game.
Do you have an idea without CCP giving the players money? Just curious.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium. CODE.
14010
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 01:33:47 -
[446] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Snowmann wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Snowmann wrote:-I suggest we get rid of all current Supers and Titans. -Give owners some very high percentage of estimated build costs. Goodbye economy. Yeah, that could create some high inflationary pressures. Another option would be to refund majority of the costs via game time, except a Titan would result in well over 5 years game time. Not too sure how many would be happy about that. Or just give them PLEX, but the PLEX hoarders would probably hate that. Maybe 2 yrs free game time, 24 PLEX and some limited BPCs of a Alliance Tournament quality ship that only goes to them would do. :) Yeah well, anyways... I'm getting carried away here. I still think what I wrote holds true, but compensating those who currently own them is a complicated issue. How do you do it in a fair way that doesn't create havoc somewhere else in the game. Do you have an idea without CCP giving the players money? Just curious.
If I personally had to make a suggestion on the matter, I would suggest that CCP (after announcing well beforehand) delete any and all blueprints for them. No more new ones, the existing ones will be the last.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1052
|
Posted - 2015.08.09 12:34:35 -
[447] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: If I personally had to make a suggestion on the matter, I would suggest that CCP (after announcing well beforehand) delete any and all blueprints for them. No more new ones, the existing ones will be the last.
That's actually not a terrible suggestion. It would give us all even more reason to cheer those blessed lowsec Russians that are killing supers left and right. |
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.10 16:29:19 -
[448] - Quote
So, the week as passed and what its gonna be? Are there any lights on the horizont? Guess its better to me to unsub... 2 days left for me...
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2015.08.10 17:03:20 -
[449] - Quote
Pah Cova wrote:So, the week as passed and what its gonna be? Are there any lights on the horizont? Guess its better to me to unsub... 2 days left for me...
You can contract your stuff to me, and I'll make sure it's put to good use blowing stuff up and being blown up.
|
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.10 17:13:58 -
[450] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Pah Cova wrote:So, the week as passed and what its gonna be? Are there any lights on the horizont? Guess its better to me to unsub... 2 days left for me...
You can contract your stuff to me, and I'll make sure it's put to good use blowing stuff up and being blown up.
Blow your own stuff, guess its the right way. You want stuff and isks? There are 2 ways for that...
1 - Work as I do. 2 - Buy plexes and sell them
Its very easy.
|
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.08.10 17:55:52 -
[451] - Quote
Pah Cova wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Pah Cova wrote:So, the week as passed and what its gonna be? Are there any lights on the horizont? Guess its better to me to unsub... 2 days left for me...
You can contract your stuff to me, and I'll make sure it's put to good use blowing stuff up and being blown up. Blow your own stuff, guess its the right way. You want stuff and isks? There are 2 ways for that... 1 - Work as I do. 2 - Buy plexes and sell them Its very easy.
I'm in no need for more stuff. I'm just sad thinking about your stuff not ever getting used properly.
|
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.10 18:01:19 -
[452] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Pah Cova wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Pah Cova wrote:So, the week as passed and what its gonna be? Are there any lights on the horizont? Guess its better to me to unsub... 2 days left for me...
You can contract your stuff to me, and I'll make sure it's put to good use blowing stuff up and being blown up. Blow your own stuff, guess its the right way. You want stuff and isks? There are 2 ways for that... 1 - Work as I do. 2 - Buy plexes and sell them Its very easy. I'm in no need for more stuff. I'm just sad thinking about your stuff not ever getting used properly.
Guess you are needing, otherwise you didnt ask me for it.
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.08.10 19:38:20 -
[453] - Quote
Pah Cova wrote:Guess you are needing, otherwise you didnt ask me for it.
Not need - I want you stuff, to blow it up. If you don't give it to anybody, could you please blow it all up and send screenshots of the explosions? That'd be just as good as giving it all away, and way better than having it sit in a station belonging to an unsubbed character.
Anyway, to keep this on topic, here's a reiteration of a change I think would benefit everybody:
- An activated Entosis Link self-destructs if it is turned off without having successfully captured a node, reinforced a sov structure, or disables/enable a station service. This allows Interceptors to continue to be viable ships for an actual sov attack, and continue to be viable trolls for empty systems, but makes each "run away" sovtroll cost the troller at least 30 million ISK and requires them to refit somewhere if they want to continue. |
Robert Sawyer
The Vendunari End of Life
67
|
Posted - 2015.08.11 10:11:07 -
[454] - Quote
I started playing EVE Online with the hope of engaging in these huge fleet battles. Now, every time I'm trying to interest myself in this, I just get a sweet offer of Entosis look-out.
The whole fozziesov thing is garbage. The huge power blocs are crumbling and dozens of new alliances are popping up everywhere. And don't get me started on the Entosis Link, that is a troll's ultimate tool.
"And when, at last, the moment is yours, that agony will become your greatest triumph."
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
64
|
Posted - 2015.08.11 13:22:00 -
[455] - Quote
Robert Sawyer wrote:
The whole fozziesov thing is garbage. The huge power blocs are crumbling and dozens of new alliances are popping up everywherel.
Wasn't that exactly what Fozziesov was hoping to achieve?
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1090
|
Posted - 2015.08.11 13:41:06 -
[456] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Robert Sawyer wrote:
The whole fozziesov thing is garbage. The huge power blocs are crumbling and dozens of new alliances are popping up everywherel.
Wasn't that exactly what Fozziesov was hoping to achieve? Yeah, except all of the crumbling happened before Aegis. What we have now, is blocs that are even more firmly entrenched, because no one in null with the ability to actually unseat them, cares to mess with this godawful new system. What we do have though, is plenty of "runawaaaaaay trollololol made you undock". The only ones actually losing any space were those who were highly overextended, and they're just not even bothering to contest sovlasering on their unused space. |
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.11 17:40:50 -
[457] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Robert Sawyer wrote:
The whole fozziesov thing is garbage. The huge power blocs are crumbling and dozens of new alliances are popping up everywherel.
Wasn't that exactly what Fozziesov was hoping to achieve?
Well, guess its not working as intended, new alliances rise and fall. This is not about pvp, what we see in eve long time ago are only ganking, and ganking is not pvp, pvpeers use to say that they do pvp, but what they do its just ganking, 10 vs 60 or more, that is not pvp, however there are some players who like to do the real pvp, thats why new sov mechanics are not working properly, new alliances can conquer systems but cant hold them, they are going to be hotdropped until they leave, so small entities its just a mirage.
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
36
|
Posted - 2015.08.12 08:06:05 -
[458] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote: If I personally had to make a suggestion on the matter, I would suggest that CCP (after announcing well beforehand) delete any and all blueprints for them. No more new ones, the existing ones will be the last.
That's actually not a terrible suggestion. It would give us all even more reason to cheer those blessed lowsec Russians that are killing supers left and right.
That is a good suggestion, in conjunction with the new Sov changes.
Though I would still suggest that once the last of any racial type is destroyed, it would return to the game as a unique item, as I had suggested.
It may take 10 years to get anywhere near that point, but it could be a good first step.
|
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.12 20:10:38 -
[459] - Quote
My idea to fix sov trolling is two-fold:
1. Move the notification to the sov holder to earlier in the cycle (half way through, the beginning, whatever). 2. Increase the cycle time for the initial assault.
If you're going to attack someone in a trollceptor, they'll have notice and you'll be a sitting duck for longer. Problem solved. |
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
335
|
Posted - 2015.08.12 20:20:35 -
[460] - Quote
Jeff Kione wrote:My idea to fix sov trolling is two-fold:
1. Move the notification to the sov holder to earlier in the cycle (half way through, the beginning, whatever). 2. Increase the cycle time for the initial assault.
If you're going to attack someone in a trollceptor, they'll have notice and you'll be a sitting duck for longer. Problem solved.
Nah. The defenders should just have pilots in their system. If the system doesn't have pilots in it during its vulnerability, the defenders deserve to lose their system.
-- Eli (who is happy to hear so many entities upset they can't defend their systems in absentia, and further is happy to hear so many entities find being on-grid with a hostile Interceptor boring as they are better suited for living in highsec where they don't have to worry about such things and can go back to their carebearing ways without worry albeit at reduced income levels, not like I am interested in claiming sov for myself but for the health of the game in general I believe it's necessary for those people to be booted out of their current sov playstyles. As I told Lucas - I hope their empires crumble to the ground around them.)
ps - oh, and regarding supers... If Drifter battleships are adjusted so as to rove around sovnull and use Entosis links against sov structures, that'd certainly make supers more necessary as even carriers can have difficulty tanking them. |
|
Jeff Kione
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 13:48:40 -
[461] - Quote
Eli Stan wrote:Nah. The defenders should just have pilots in their system. If the system doesn't have pilots in it during its vulnerability, the defenders deserve to lose their system.
-- Eli (who is happy to hear so many entities upset they can't defend their systems in absentia, and further is happy to hear so many entities find being on-grid with a hostile Interceptor boring as they are better suited for living in highsec where they don't have to worry about such things and can go back to their carebearing ways without worry albeit at reduced income levels, not like I am interested in claiming sov for myself but for the health of the game in general I believe it's necessary for those people to be booted out of their current sov playstyles. As I told Lucas - I hope their empires crumble to the ground around them.).
I don't disagree that you shouldn't be able to keep your space if you aren't using it. But if you set your vulnerability to your prime time, then your solution is to what, always leave some people behind to defend your system if you want to go on roams? Make sure you have alts that can be logged in and defend against a lone interceptor? |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
36
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 05:54:22 -
[462] - Quote
Jeff Kione wrote:Eli Stan wrote:Nah. The defenders should just have pilots in their system. If the system doesn't have pilots in it during its vulnerability, the defenders deserve to lose their system.
-- Eli (who is happy to hear so many entities upset they can't defend their systems in absentia, and further is happy to hear so many entities find being on-grid with a hostile Interceptor boring as they are better suited for living in highsec where they don't have to worry about such things and can go back to their carebearing ways without worry albeit at reduced income levels, not like I am interested in claiming sov for myself but for the health of the game in general I believe it's necessary for those people to be booted out of their current sov playstyles. As I told Lucas - I hope their empires crumble to the ground around them.). I don't disagree that you shouldn't be able to keep your space if you aren't using it. But if you set your vulnerability to your prime time, then your solution is to what, always leave some people behind to defend your system if you want to go on roams? Make sure you have alts that can be logged in and defend against a lone interceptor?
No large org, Alliance or Corp, Null Sec or Low Sec, that I have ever been in has ever had every single person online and active go on a roam. That normally happened in med sized Corps or very small Alliances, and on rare occasions.
I'm not trying to suggest that that is the rule, just seems to be the norm.
|
Kai55a
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 17:30:56 -
[463] - Quote
Thanks to new sov, capitals and super capitals are not needed to attack and they don't help to defense sov!
So nothing is limiting power projection now except awful implementation of sov game mechanics. It's boring, time consuming, etc. When CCP fix the worst issues (number of beacons, ceptors, etc.), nothing will limit power projection because it's not a big deal to deploy non capital ships to any borders and start dropping sov. Groups like PL may not stay there for long time; they could do it for fun; for money, etc.
Big fail, CCP! |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
36
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 20:27:05 -
[464] - Quote
I think as long as alliances try to hold more Sov than they need, life will continue to suck. The rules of the game have changed and many don't want to adapt to them.
Many appear to be trying to do the same ol thing under the new rules, and blame everyone except themselves.
|
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
69
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 22:33:56 -
[465] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:I think as long as alliances try to hold more Sov than they need, life will continue to suck. The rules of the game have changed and many don't want to adapt to them.
Many appear to be trying to do the same ol thing under the new rules, and blame everyone except themselves.
Everyone in EVE is a bear who needs to adapt or GTFO (unless you happen to be in null sov) |
Alexander Kalkoken
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.15 01:53:36 -
[466] - Quote
In the same vein that 'Nowhere in EVE is completely safe', as has been stated multiple times by ganking groups in High Sec, I am extremely pleased to see this same attitude finally being applied in Null Sec as well for the Sov system - in that it Can be attacked by anyone & requires vigilance on the part of the group involved in its defense.
Perhaps if people had not been as extreme in their views about such, I could be a bit more hesitant about the new inclusion of sovtrolls assaulting without intention of use - however, with the repeated calls for less High Sec & more gank options, I see no problems with the system in its current state. You got exactly what you wanted - more risks. The difference is, when it is applied to your own space instead of to others, you now cry foul. |
X Gallentius
Aliastra Gallente Federation
2902
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 03:46:17 -
[467] - Quote
Hey let's look at the map through the filter of the old system instead of looking at it through the new system.
Just because you don't claim sov over empty systems that don't matter, doesn't mean you don't control them. (Only defend space you think is really important - maybe stations or station systems - and then go dunk the other side's jump bridges, cynojammers, POSes, POCOs and Citadels for the bigger fights and/or total domination).
England was able to control half the world with worse logistics than you guys currently have. I'm sure you can figure out a way to maintain a large 0.0 empire again. (Suck it up and adapt)
JUSTK is recruiting.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16904
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 10:18:00 -
[468] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: England was able to control half the world with worse logistics than you guys currently have
That's because Britain had massive capital ship superiority, meaning that no one else could have comparable logistics.
The British Empire is actually an example I used in illustrating how improved communication, logistics and power projection technology increase the maximum possible amount of territory a single group can coherently control.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
X Gallentius
Aliastra Gallente Federation
2902
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 13:29:52 -
[469] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:X Gallentius wrote: England was able to control half the world with worse logistics than you guys currently have
That's because Britain had massive capital ship superiority, meaning that no one else could have comparable logistics. The British Empire is actually an example I used in illustrating how improved communication, logistics and power projection technology increase the maximum possible amount of territory a single group can coherently control. I wonder who else has massive cap ship superiority, logistics, and ability to project power across the universe - all the while having enough resources to defend their isolated home island in the upper left corner of Europe, err... 0.0?
JUSTK is recruiting.
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1122
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 18:56:45 -
[470] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Malcanis wrote:X Gallentius wrote: England was able to control half the world with worse logistics than you guys currently have
That's because Britain had massive capital ship superiority, meaning that no one else could have comparable logistics. The British Empire is actually an example I used in illustrating how improved communication, logistics and power projection technology increase the maximum possible amount of territory a single group can coherently control. I wonder who else has massive cap ship superiority, logistics, and ability to project power across the universe - all the while having enough resources to defend their isolated home island in the upper left corner of Europe, err... 0.0? Had would be the word you are looking for. Not has. |
|
Aaz Rdtsc
Nomen-illis-Legio Legion of xXDEATHXx
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 18:58:43 -
[471] - Quote
+1 |
Hellion Vlad
The Branded Few Test Alliance Please Ignore
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:12:00 -
[472] - Quote
Quit QQing and defend your space. I do not see anyone that has alliances that work crying.
CCP great job keep it up.
Sign, Hellion Vlad - Branded for Life! |
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:18:05 -
[473] - Quote
This thread is proof that, even in its incomplete state, FozzieSov is a success and what was needed to shake the status quo. |
MeJulie
Apocalypse Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:18:48 -
[474] - Quote
-1
Lost interest at the Wall of Text. |
Pirs Brostan
Ramds
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:22:08 -
[475] - Quote
I am against the proposals in the petition. I for CCP. We all know WHY you are against such mechanics. UAxDEATH, go to working. |
Yukimisama
Deviant Dollyz
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:22:26 -
[476] - Quote
This is pretty important to be addressed imo as a new player still figuring everything out, I'd probably quit the game after my year or two of skill training's complete if this is really what Null has become. I joined up in EVE for events like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vvtp8qaUdNk
Not singular players running around like asshats with Entosis II's keeping everything in an entire region vulnerable together and spamming around not actually doing anything or even trying to initiate any warfare beyond a gatecamp catching them.
In My World...
|
aussieftw
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:42:12 -
[477] - Quote
+ 1. Fozziesov is pain now, we really need some changes. |
TOJICTOTA
True Power Team
26
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:44:40 -
[478] - Quote
U DICHA POPKA PRIGORELA NORM. |
CyberRaver
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:44:59 -
[479] - Quote
Fully agree with this
Fozziesov is aids and the games worse off for it |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1123
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:47:29 -
[480] - Quote
Caius Sivaris wrote:This thread is proof that, even in its incomplete state, FozzieSov is a success and what was needed to shake the status quo. That's the thing, it hasn't. All of the big sov holders are still the big sov holders. The only difference is that large fights are all but unheard of now, and everyone is so annoyed with the new mechanics, that they aren't even bothering to go back and laser nodes that have been out for over two weeks. So, if by shaken up, you mean hit with a taser and thrown into the trunk, sure. |
|
Maco Mirta
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:51:22 -
[481] - Quote
+1 |
JBM Holdings
Terra Ceia
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:51:37 -
[482] - Quote
Stuffz, i can has? |
Blaze Tiberius
Blackwater Associates Euphoria Pharmaceuticals
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:52:42 -
[483] - Quote
My alliance has had some epic fights since Fozzie Sov came out.
Really the only people who are complaining about Fozzie Sov are the huge renter alliances who are losing money.
Due to Fozzie Sov my small alliance was able to claim and hold sov for the first time EVER!
It gives smaller groups a chance to establish themselves.
And a message to XxDeathxX, Triumvirate and the rest of the renter alliances...if you are unable or unwilling to defend every single system in your huge swaths of territory then YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO HOLD THEM!
FozzieSov hurts renter alliances and I LOVE IT! |
Wayne Caderu
Disciples of Aphrodite The Glory Holers
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:54:00 -
[484] - Quote
What's this thing, capturing a system? you guys are fuckin' weird.
Now if we could address how C5/C6s are gloriously over saturated isk farms.... |
Emmilia Deriannice
Death Magnetic. Legion of xXDEATHXx
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:54:36 -
[485] - Quote
agree |
Starcruiser Stasarik
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:55:50 -
[486] - Quote
To everyone reading this thread, remember that UAxDEATH is our new CSM member. Just think about that as you contemplate the thread and all that it entails. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
170
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:58:53 -
[487] - Quote
I hope you all quit eve.
No one cares about us lets go spam Jita that will make people rally to our course |
Lelob
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
200
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:58:57 -
[488] - Quote
Screw these guys they are literally the worst of the worst who never used their sov and just sucked nullsec dry for their ****** renting empires/RMT schemes. Do I care if alot of PL contracts came from xdeath? Nope, cuz they almost all universally sucked. Sov-based occupancy is the way to go and if these worthless leeches don't like it then they can suck it. |
Wallymarts
Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 19:59:47 -
[489] - Quote
I kind of cared about this, it was a very well written topic from you UA death, however..
All of your dipshit legion guys make me not give a **** about it. 200 of you spamming jita local like a bunch of whining little girls.
I hope you guys get trolled 24/7 for ever.
If you are losing sov, its because you don't deserve to have it.
|
Euripides Aargau
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:00:25 -
[490] - Quote
Well I didn't bloody well vote for him.
To all the bittervets shitting up jita local and trying to force their way- you aren't the majority. You're just the loudest. And maybe it's because I'm not bitter and not a vet yet, but I actually like the new sov. It opens things up for new smaller groups to nick off a small chunk of sov from the old crusty alliances. I'd rather play that game than the one from 6 months ago. |
|
Euripides Aargau
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:01:46 -
[491] - Quote
Wallymarts wrote:All of your dipshit legion guys make me not give a **** about it. 200 of you spamming jita local like a bunch of whining little girls.
To be honest, it didn't feel like they made it any worse than it usually is. I don't care much less about their opinion than the usual scam spams. |
XveNos
Planlos Brothers of Tangra
932
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:05:08 -
[492] - Quote
sign post 1 |
Duncan McClain
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:05:46 -
[493] - Quote
Blaze Tiberius wrote:My alliance has had some epic fights since Fozzie Sov came out. Really the only people who are complaining about Fozzie Sov are the huge renter alliances who are losing money. Due to Fozzie Sov my small alliance was able to claim and hold sov for the first time EVER! It gives smaller groups a chance to establish themselves. And a message to XxDeathxX, Triumvirate and the rest of the renter alliances...if you are unable or unwilling to defend every single system in your huge swaths of territory then YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO HOLD THEM! FozzieSov hurts renter alliances and I LOVE IT!
It appears that you didn't hold sov for very long. I agree with my null sec brother that change is needed.
Congrats on on your new CSM status. |
Orioniys
Unkindness Incorporated Violent Declaration
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:07:33 -
[494] - Quote
Personally, I approve of FozzieSov, it's allows the smaller yet unknown people to actually carry weight and have a chance at owning their Own Sov in Null sec, without having to join or rent the bigger Alliance bullies who just want to Own everything and Rent Everything for ISKIES. Quite a Number of unknown alliances have started making the eve influence map somewhat interesting.
So In actual Fact FOZZIESOV WORKING AS INTENDED |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
171
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:08:00 -
[495] - Quote
But your a bot... you don't get to +1 we made you and we can watch you all die. |
aussieftw
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:13:13 -
[496] - Quote
Orioniys wrote:Personally, I approve of FozzieSov, it's allows the smaller yet unknown people to actually carry weight and have a chance at owning their Own Sov in Null sec, without having to join or rent the bigger Alliance bullies who just want to Own everything and Rent Everything for ISKIES. Quite a Number of unknown alliances have started making the eve influence map somewhat interesting.
So In actual Fact FOZZIESOV WORKING AS INTENDED We dont want to kill fozziesov we only want to make it less grindy and more fun. Read op post first please before comment. |
MindSweeper
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:14:57 -
[497] - Quote
fozzie sov makes me not want to log in. |
XveNos
Planlos Brothers of Tangra
932
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:15:21 -
[498] - Quote
Tappits wrote:But your a bot... you don't get to +1 we made you and we can watch you all die.
you made me? Dad? |
Blaze Tiberius
Blackwater Associates Euphoria Pharmaceuticals
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:18:02 -
[499] - Quote
Duncan McClain wrote:Blaze Tiberius wrote:My alliance has had some epic fights since Fozzie Sov came out. Really the only people who are complaining about Fozzie Sov are the huge renter alliances who are losing money. Due to Fozzie Sov my small alliance was able to claim and hold sov for the first time EVER! It gives smaller groups a chance to establish themselves. And a message to XxDeathxX, Triumvirate and the rest of the renter alliances...if you are unable or unwilling to defend every single system in your huge swaths of territory then YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO HOLD THEM! FozzieSov hurts renter alliances and I LOVE IT! It appears that you didn't hold sov for very long. I agree with my null sec brother that change is needed. Congrats on on your new CSM status.
The point is that we held it, however fleeting. And we will again. That was impossible under the old mechanics. Your "Null Brothers" are leeches and don't deserve the Sov that they're crying about. |
Blaze Tiberius
Blackwater Associates Euphoria Pharmaceuticals
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:18:48 -
[500] - Quote
MindSweeper wrote:fozzie sov makes me not want to log in.
And nothing of value was ever lost. |
|
B0RG 0VERLORD
Viziam Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:22:00 -
[501] - Quote
Orioniys wrote:Personally, I approve of FozzieSov, it's allows the smaller yet unknown people to actually carry weight and have a chance at owning their Own Sov in Null sec, without having to join or rent the bigger Alliance bullies who just want to Own everything and Rent Everything for ISKIES. Quote:Quite a Number of unknown alliances have started making the eve influence map somewhat interesting. So In actual Fact FOZZIESOV WORKING AS INTENDED
this is all for content,once the initial greifing is over you will see the map return to is normal state,larger alliances are allowing this to happen so they have some kind of content..feel safe for a while if it makes you happy |
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:22:25 -
[502] - Quote
Orioniys wrote:Personally, I approve of FozzieSov, it's allows the smaller yet unknown people to actually carry weight and have a chance at owning their Own Sov in Null sec, without having to join or rent the bigger Alliance bullies who just want to Own everything and Rent Everything for ISKIES. Quite a Number of unknown alliances have started making the eve influence map somewhat interesting.
So In actual Fact FOZZIESOV WORKING AS INTENDED
what you didn't understad is that most of us, me included completely like the idea to let small alliances comes and have their share of null, what we're asking is
aussieftw wrote: We dont want to kill fozziesov we only want to make it less grindy and more fun. Read op post first please before comment.
|
Duncan McClain
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:24:47 -
[503] - Quote
Blaze Tiberius wrote:Duncan McClain wrote:Blaze Tiberius wrote:My alliance has had some epic fights since Fozzie Sov came out. Really the only people who are complaining about Fozzie Sov are the huge renter alliances who are losing money. Due to Fozzie Sov my small alliance was able to claim and hold sov for the first time EVER! It gives smaller groups a chance to establish themselves. And a message to XxDeathxX, Triumvirate and the rest of the renter alliances...if you are unable or unwilling to defend every single system in your huge swaths of territory then YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO HOLD THEM! FozzieSov hurts renter alliances and I LOVE IT! It appears that you didn't hold sov for very long. I agree with my null sec brother that change is needed. Congrats on on your new CSM status. The point is that we held it, however fleeting. And we will again. That was impossible under the old mechanics. Your "Null Brothers" are leeches and don't deserve the Sov that they're crying about.
Most of null is not saying the a change was not needed, just that in its current form, FozzieSov needs to be revamped. I think if you read through the null sec responses you will find that most would just like the mechanic adjusted. Circling a dot while sov lasering it, just isn't fun.
|
Bunka en Daire
The Charlatans
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:31:53 -
[504] - Quote
Nice old song Cry me a river
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gn9A-kdsRo |
Blaze Tiberius
Blackwater Associates Euphoria Pharmaceuticals
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:32:18 -
[505] - Quote
Duncan McClain wrote:Blaze Tiberius wrote:Duncan McClain wrote:Blaze Tiberius wrote:My alliance has had some epic fights since Fozzie Sov came out. Really the only people who are complaining about Fozzie Sov are the huge renter alliances who are losing money. Due to Fozzie Sov my small alliance was able to claim and hold sov for the first time EVER! It gives smaller groups a chance to establish themselves. And a message to XxDeathxX, Triumvirate and the rest of the renter alliances...if you are unable or unwilling to defend every single system in your huge swaths of territory then YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO HOLD THEM! FozzieSov hurts renter alliances and I LOVE IT! It appears that you didn't hold sov for very long. I agree with my null sec brother that change is needed. Congrats on on your new CSM status. The point is that we held it, however fleeting. And we will again. That was impossible under the old mechanics. Your "Null Brothers" are leeches and don't deserve the Sov that they're crying about. Most of null is not saying the a change was not needed, just that in its current form, FozzieSov needs to be revamped. I think if you read through the null sec responses you will find that most would just like the mechanic adjusted. Circling a dot while sov lasering it, just isn't fun.
I think you might be a bit more reasonable than your 'null brothers' who are spamming Jita local right now.
Since we're on the subject, what would you propose instead? |
Thirdsin
The Red Island Foundation Shadow Cartel
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:36:42 -
[506] - Quote
+1
Everything here is obvious to people who have ever fought over sov. |
Kairi Raast
Blue-Fire Great Blue Balls of Fire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:42:30 -
[507] - Quote
Spamming in jita what is essentially a "BAWW I CANT RENT OUT SYSTEMS ANYMORE" thread sure is helping your cause I'm sure. |
Nyalnara
AdAstra. Beach Club
109
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:42:42 -
[508] - Quote
Blaze Tiberius wrote:I think you might be a bit more reasonable than your 'null brothers' who are spamming Jita local right now.
Since we're on the subject, what would you propose instead?
1week ban for all people spamming Jita? That would also allow people enough time to clean most of that "unused" sov...
In case of ponies, keep calm and start running.
French half-noob. Founder of [DEUPP]Dark Evil Undead Ponies Productions.
|
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:44:31 -
[509] - Quote
Kairi Raast wrote:Spamming in jita what is essentially a "BAWW I CANT RENT OUT SYSTEMS ANYMORE" thread sure is helping your cause I'm sure.
i miss when we stopped renting, or when we cried that new sov causing us problems renting |
EvilDoomer
Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:46:02 -
[510] - Quote
FIRE HIM
This is making eve a Joke to play and with all the other kills of Caps and other stuff.
SIGNED PETTION!
|
|
Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
51
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:48:49 -
[511] - Quote
Really upset with CCP.
Better take it out on industrialists.
|
Hauler Joe
Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:52:43 -
[512] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
- meandeane651, head diplomat and alliance command for Gentlemen'sClub Gentlemen's.Club
- Rots Mijnwerker, leader The Blood Covenant
- Pandoro89, Gus Garlic, Maestr0 as Razor leaders RAZOR Alliance
Signed Signed and Signed
HAULER JOE
anbd Fire him to boot the way they killed the use of captital and the jump timers
|
Zedarh Amarizto
KARNAGE
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:58:51 -
[513] - Quote
why dont you nullbears stop bitching about the game and play it, you choose to live in nullsec so man the **** up.
/rant end
Note: Anything you say will be misquoted then used against you.
|
Rixx Javix
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
493
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:59:16 -
[514] - Quote
A Cracker
To go with your wine.
http://eveoganda.blogspot.com
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1542
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 20:59:58 -
[515] - Quote
Unlike most people here I actually read what uaxdeath wrote. I agree with everything except for the first and last comment. The first solution forces massive capital drops on predetermined areas. The idea of new sov was to get away from these super mega dump fights. The game can't support it.
The last (which is the sov transfer), needs work, but it's most widely used use is to transfer sov to renters or for sale. I've never been a fan of renter alliances, sov sales, etc. that doesn't mean it should exist.
Yaay!!!!
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Mercenary Coalition
1725
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:01:11 -
[516] - Quote
The first two points are a relic of alliances with bloated amounts of space being transitioned out of that state of being. Once that shift takes place and their holdings are reduced to systems they use those problems will solve themselves. Stop whining.
The rest of your points, especially related to the UI and sov transfer, should get looked at.
Hero of the CSM
Alek the Kidnapper
"Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."
-Arydanika, Voices from the Void
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:03:32 -
[517] - Quote
Looks like Russians are ganking in Jita as a protest.
See, lots of content being created by the new changes. :) |
John Wolfcastle
Galactic Cargo Inc. Crying Clowns Foundation
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:09:35 -
[518] - Quote
Small new pilot that has it's second contact to sov (first with the pre-fozziesov): I see some issues with the entosis link itself (trollceptors), but overall I don't see that much of problem of the new sov opposed to the old one. Paperwork? What about EVE Spreadhseet everyone is giggling about? Big massive fights? "Lock up that primary there, in 5 minutes you will start shooting it after locked up". Not agreeing 100% on that petition but I agree there are some balances needed here and there.
"Opinion of a small pilot that likes fozziesov" |
Kanzero
Virtus Crusade Curatores Veritatis Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:12:09 -
[519] - Quote
Stop crying |
J1Gs4W
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:24:25 -
[520] - Quote
We can't RMT anymore so we're going to go to Jita and complain about it. |
|
Kaybella Hakaari
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:26:29 -
[521] - Quote
Spamming Jita like that practically screams "We're weak, we can't handle new sov rules, conquer us!" |
Commander Spurty
Dimension Door We need wards.
1548
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:27:47 -
[522] - Quote
There are over 3700 alliances in EVE.
You have been supported by 15.
Your 0.2% majority really makes me think this is a good investment.
If you want 'content', generate it by 'refusing to use super caps' or 'taking gates for December'?
Really, what are your Alliance's campaigns anyway?
What's your alliance's current objectives "PVP" wise in EVE?
Who is your enemy?
You absolutely better know this and have your entire alliance following these objectives or you're not really 'leading an alliance'. You're just a 'congregation'.
There are good ships
And wood ships
And ships that sail the sea
But the best ships are
Spaceships
Built by CCP
|
Lelob
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
201
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:29:56 -
[523] - Quote
Redwyne Vyruk wrote:Orioniys wrote:Personally, I approve of FozzieSov, it's allows the smaller yet unknown people to actually carry weight and have a chance at owning their Own Sov in Null sec, without having to join or rent the bigger Alliance bullies who just want to Own everything and Rent Everything for ISKIES. Quite a Number of unknown alliances have started making the eve influence map somewhat interesting.
So In actual Fact FOZZIESOV WORKING AS INTENDED what you didn't understad is that most of us, me included completely like the idea to let small alliances comes and have their share of null, what we're asking is aussieftw wrote: We dont want to kill fozziesov we only want to make it less grindy and more fun. Read op post first please before comment.
no1 cares about bope, **** off and get out of my alliance kthx |
Lelob
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
201
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:30:44 -
[524] - Quote
Redwyne Vyruk wrote:Kairi Raast wrote:Spamming in jita what is essentially a "BAWW I CANT RENT OUT SYSTEMS ANYMORE" thread sure is helping your cause I'm sure. i miss when we stopped renting, or when we cried that new sov causing us problems renting
feel free to leave and get out of PL then |
Ereilian
Tritanium Industries and Technology Executive Outcomes
135
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:36:43 -
[525] - Quote
"It is like a thousand Russian RMTers screamed in unison and then were silent."
Please bring on the silent bit when your RMT dollars dry up and your morgages and car payments come due.
|
Alexander Rafiello
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:40:06 -
[526] - Quote
It's hilarious how they're in JIta wasting ISK instead of using their manpower to defend their space. I wonder if anyone's taking advantage of this. |
Jun Jr
SovNarKom. Legion of xXDEATHXx
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:41:54 -
[527] - Quote
CCP, you have to trust players! |
Vlad Draculesti
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
42
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:49:02 -
[528] - Quote
Hello Russians!
Fozzy sov is doing EXACTLY what the creators intended it to do which is the following:
Make it so that a big alliance CAN NOT HOLD A HUGE AMOUNT OF EMPTY SPACE.
That is EXACTLY what you have been doing for almost the past decade.
I live in a WH. When i get a connection to Malpias, Cobalt Edge, The Kelevala Expans, Etherium Reach, Outer Passage, Oasa it is COMPLETELY EMPTY bar a few select systems that have stations - and on the way to said stations there are Capsules sitting 300k off a gate that seem to be automated clients / alarm systems to boot.
the whole point of Fozzy Sov was to stop people like you holding so much empty space.
The fact that you use this space as your RMT empire is kinda insulting.
The fact that you have now gone to Jita to protest against Fozzie Sov purely because it's hurting your RMT empire is even more laughable.
We - players outside of your RMT empire WELCOME FOZZIE SOV! |
Nyalnara
AdAstra. Beach Club
110
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:49:51 -
[529] - Quote
Jun Jr wrote:CCP, you have to trust players! Players, you have to trust CCP!
In case of ponies, keep calm and start running.
French half-noob. Founder of [DEUPP]Dark Evil Undead Ponies Productions.
|
Duncan McClain
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 21:53:37 -
[530] - Quote
Nyalnara wrote:Jun Jr wrote:CCP, you have to trust players! Players, you have to trust CCP!
Pretty sure neither one of those things will ever happen.
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16915
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:04:47 -
[531] - Quote
Hey rusrus
While you've been crying in Jita, we've just had a glorious fight with 470 in local over a station timer.
Anyway, better luck on Monday eh?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Le Mittani
SergalJerk Test Alliance Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:31:28 -
[532] - Quote
Nyalnara wrote:Jun Jr wrote:CCP, you have to trust players! Players, you have to trust CCP! I'd rather stick my head into a tigers mouth, due to having a better chance of my trust being rewarded |
Vlad Draculesti
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
42
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:32:08 -
[533] - Quote
Le Mittani wrote:Nyalnara wrote:Jun Jr wrote:CCP, you have to trust players! Players, you have to trust CCP! I'd rather stick my head into a tigers mouth, due to having a better chance of my trust being rewarded
Ahh natural selection i've missed you |
Le Mittani
SergalJerk Test Alliance Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:33:02 -
[534] - Quote
Lelob wrote:Redwyne Vyruk wrote:Orioniys wrote:Personally, I approve of FozzieSov, it's allows the smaller yet unknown people to actually carry weight and have a chance at owning their Own Sov in Null sec, without having to join or rent the bigger Alliance bullies who just want to Own everything and Rent Everything for ISKIES. Quite a Number of unknown alliances have started making the eve influence map somewhat interesting.
So In actual Fact FOZZIESOV WORKING AS INTENDED what you didn't understad is that most of us, me included completely like the idea to let small alliances comes and have their share of null, what we're asking is aussieftw wrote: We dont want to kill fozziesov we only want to make it less grindy and more fun. Read op post first please before comment.
no1 cares about bope, **** off and get out of my alliance kthx
Lamo someone in ISBAD with THE GOD OF KITE calling other corps **** |
Le Mittani
SergalJerk Test Alliance Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:34:20 -
[535] - Quote
Vlad Draculesti wrote:Le Mittani wrote:Nyalnara wrote:Jun Jr wrote:CCP, you have to trust players! Players, you have to trust CCP! I'd rather stick my head into a tigers mouth, due to having a better chance of my trust being rewarded Ahh natural selection i've missed you No really I'd say my odds are much better of keeping my head than ccp being competent at game design. It took them 6 years to make dominion sov okay ish, and then came this atrocity. |
Jack Harvey
Iron Inquisition Sanctuary Pact
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:41:36 -
[536] - Quote
New changes are great, but not perfect. It just sounds like these leaderships are complaining more than problem solving
GÖª still great fights are going on
GÖª carriers can't blob 40 times a day
GÖª ha |
Aldjor Dayman
S.A.S Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:43:37 -
[537] - Quote
+1 to this, Fozzie sov is horrible and has wrecked SOV. CCP - ASK ANY ONE OF THE SOV ALLIANCES how can you just ignore this. Listen to your null sec inhabitants!! |
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 22:54:19 -
[538] - Quote
Lelob wrote:Redwyne Vyruk wrote:Orioniys wrote:Personally, I approve of FozzieSov, it's allows the smaller yet unknown people to actually carry weight and have a chance at owning their Own Sov in Null sec, without having to join or rent the bigger Alliance bullies who just want to Own everything and Rent Everything for ISKIES. Quite a Number of unknown alliances have started making the eve influence map somewhat interesting.
So In actual Fact FOZZIESOV WORKING AS INTENDED what you didn't understad is that most of us, me included completely like the idea to let small alliances comes and have their share of null, what we're asking is aussieftw wrote: We dont want to kill fozziesov we only want to make it less grindy and more fun. Read op post first please before comment.
no1 cares about Lelob, kthx
|
Crebba
The Northerners Northern Coalition.
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 23:00:43 -
[539] - Quote
+1 He is making very valid points and not any outrageous suggestions. |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
150
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 23:16:27 -
[540] - Quote
+1
Despite people whining that this relates to rental income, the OP is right. This system puts null holders on the defensive during vulnerability timers, which undermines the ability to fight for content elsewhere. |
|
Vlad Draculesti
Catastrophic Overview Failure Brave Collective
44
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 23:43:12 -
[541] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:+1
Despite people whining that this relates to rental income, the OP is right. This system puts null holders on the defensive during vulnerability timers, which undermines the ability to fight for content elsewhere.
Which is why you get to set your vulnerability timer to when you are active. If you are unable to defend your space during the period of time that your alliance is most active means that you do not deserve to live in that space.
a lot of the tears being generated here is a direct result of people holding space that they do not have the numbers to defend.
The obvious solution is for them to get with the program - cut down on all the empty space that they cannot defend and either fill it with Renters that will actively use the system or just relinquish the space - allow randoms to move in then tell said people pay us security money or we'll blap "your" space.
Again - if you cannot defend the space you have laid claim too - you do not deserve to keep it. |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1124
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 23:46:38 -
[542] - Quote
Vlad Draculesti wrote:Murkar Omaristos wrote:+1
Despite people whining that this relates to rental income, the OP is right. This system puts null holders on the defensive during vulnerability timers, which undermines the ability to fight for content elsewhere. Which is why you get to set your vulnerability timer to when you are active. If you are unable to defend your space during the period of time that your alliance is most active means that you do not deserve to live in that space. a lot of the tears being generated here is a direct result of people holding space that they do not have the numbers to defend. The obvious solution is for them to get with the program - cut down on all the empty space that they cannot defend and either fill it with Renters that will actively use the system or just relinquish the space - allow randoms to move in then tell said people pay us security money or we'll blap "your" space. Again - if you cannot defend the space you have laid claim too - you do not deserve to keep it. You're missing the point.
If you set your timers to when you are most active, all of your guys are sitting in their space, on the off chance someone comes to take it. However, no one's coming to take it, because everyone else is doing the exact same thing. You see the problem here? |
Inquisitor Tyr
Phantom Squad The Blood Covenant
74
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 23:48:25 -
[543] - Quote
Introduction:
Every problem you sited is exactly the way it is supposed to work. - It limits mega alliances from controlling vast swathes of space - It allows low SP players to participate in the best part of EVE.
I agree, there are some minor tweaks needed.
Conclusion:
Some xxDeath guy is just mad because he cant keep his slave-ling rental alliances running without doing any real work!
@ the OP - go fly a kite. |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1124
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 23:50:17 -
[544] - Quote
That's funny, coming from a guy who's alliance head is a signatory. Looks like you might be in with the wrong crowd chief. |
Inquisitor Tyr
Phantom Squad The Blood Covenant
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 00:17:33 -
[545] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:That's funny, coming from a guy who's alliance head is a signatory. Looks like you might be in with the wrong crowd chief.
"If there are two people in a room and both of them agree, then one of them is useless" - Mark Twain.
Thankfully, there are lots of people in our crowd that have different perspectives. |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1124
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 00:23:12 -
[546] - Quote
Inquisitor Tyr wrote:Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:That's funny, coming from a guy who's alliance head is a signatory. Looks like you might be in with the wrong crowd chief. "If there are two people in a room and both of them agree, then one of them is useless" - Mark Twain. Thankfully, there are lots of people in our crowd that have different perspectives. Fair point, though one would expect an alliance head to speak for the whole, or at least the majority. Such is why we do not have a signatory, even though many of our members are outspoken critics of this terrible sov iteration. |
Budsin Adar
Blue Angel's Joint Alliance Blue
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 00:24:33 -
[547] - Quote
Even myself I don't live there, but i do agree with what has been spoken to all of FozzieCCP. Before all Hell breaks loose. The way FozzieCCP Sov is set I agree with the null sec people. The thing is doing so as is will and can be a pain. But they do have the same rights as if you attacked the pos or sov structure. When they have there own personal gates then that speed can be set or reduced depends on ship . What wrong with large fleets fighting is a node totally seperate from the high sec grids which still can be felt needs to be fixed. What was said here I am in total agreement personally. Everyone in Null sec has there rights to be heard but hey don't ever limit the fun. what ever it is they all want to do!!. If a war comes i can see all of them ganging up on CCP I know the battle would be harsh But CCP realise this they will hunt you down and tear you to shreads. So do you want an all out war? hmm i bet not!!! |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
152
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 00:27:56 -
[548] - Quote
Vlad Draculesti wrote:Murkar Omaristos wrote:+1
Despite people whining that this relates to rental income, the OP is right. This system puts null holders on the defensive during vulnerability timers, which undermines the ability to fight for content elsewhere. Which is why you get to set your vulnerability timer to when you are active. If you are unable to defend your space during the period of time that your alliance is most active means that you do not deserve to live in that space.
You obviously either didn't read my post, or lack the capacity to comprehend it. My point was that timezone overlap means active alliance remain in their home systems during vulnerability timers to defend rather than roaming around to fight. Everyone being on the defensive during their busiest time zone generates a lack of content.
EDIT: Just read further. Good to see I wasn't unclear, because Gallowmere obviously understood my point. |
Mike Thalos
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Circle-Of-Two
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 01:05:34 -
[549] - Quote
+1 |
Mai Khumm
Toronto EVE Online
679
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 01:43:02 -
[550] - Quote
I'm out of popcorn!
**** sakes, I need more popcorn!!!
Toronto EVE Thread!
[email protected]
@Toronto_EVE
(ALT of CO-Host Azami Nevinyrall)
|
|
John Wolfcastle
Galactic Cargo Inc. Crying Clowns Foundation
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 06:25:07 -
[551] - Quote
I just checked some things: 1. On a activly used (and therefore fully upgraded) system, the vulnerable time window is 3hours big (devblog once mentioned 4hours). 2. On a fully upgraded system, entosing something takes around 60minutes. 3. According to Devblog, everyone in system gets a message + notifcation about the attack.
So you don't have to sit all the time and wait to defend these objects. Having one or two alt-scouts in system should be far enough to catch the message of an attacker to call back part of the fleet, it doesn't always have to be one big bulk of ships for everything.
Counternumbers: 1. Totally unused system (beside moon-mining) takes 10minutes to entose. 2. Totally unused system has a vulnerable timewindow up to 18hours. "You didn't need that space anyway", that's why it's so hard to defend. |
infectuz SR
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 06:44:14 -
[552] - Quote
+1 to the original Post |
Covert Cynosural
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 08:42:43 -
[553] - Quote
I like Fozzie Sov You guys in 0.0 shouldn't have that much space and power. Let smaller alliance's have some too |
Aventus Klapto
An My BLUE Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 08:49:04 -
[554] - Quote
Covert Cynosural wrote:I like Fozzie Sov You guys in 0.0 shouldn't have that much space and power. Let smaller alliance's have some too
Good luck. Have you tried to take Sov in a standard 'small alliance' in FozzieSov. It's not going to happen, unless it's dead, worthless space that isn't worth the time of day contesting. |
Prock Landers
12 Monkeys-Roughnecks The Methodical Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 08:50:20 -
[555] - Quote
Add me and my alliance to this petition.
But i believe we wont accomplish anything with it.. CCP got what they wanted with this. Stable servers. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1815
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 09:43:57 -
[556] - Quote
UAxDEATH wrote:Sovereignty is absolutely unprotected against sov trolling
No, it's unprotected if you leave it unprotected.
Frankly I find your list of "demands" followed by an "or else" to be infantile and utterly unbecoming for a memeber of the CSM, even if you were a second choice/step up.
Start acting like an adult and stop being part of the problem.
|
Andrej Minni
North Wind Inc Legion of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 10:53:18 -
[557] - Quote
+1 |
Kanzero
Virtus Crusade Curatores Veritatis Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 10:59:06 -
[558] - Quote
There are some good points, mainly:
- entosis should stop a ship or at least shut its prop mods. That would remove most trolls. / important - in game interface where all data is visible at a glance / somewhat important - reducing the number of nodes / possibly important |
blueskydragonFX
Burning Skies Apocalypse Now.
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 11:08:20 -
[559] - Quote
I support this as a Provi-Block member.
Since this new sov mechanic there's been few big fights in Provi. Goons didn't show up to take Provi with the new mechanics prove enough that the mechanic is broken and non rewarding. All the large scale battles in Eve have come to a halt. Normally a hostile fleet would ref a hub/station to get the attention for a huge fight but now all you have to do is send a a small detachment of snipers to take out the ship that Ethosis the structure and be done with it.
CCP, in the past you made good decisions and bad ones. Like the Production/Research Teams, which you guys removed after it being a complete failure. Rethink about this sov mechanic because it's killing your players with boredom. Eve24News has rarely reports of huge battles since this new sov mechanic and are now reporting that Provi is being camped by hotdroppers (which we have always been :3)
You're killing the player base with all of this.
Fozziesov Jump Fatigue Massive decrease in null to null wormholes
Stop messing up your player base and listen to them. Don't be like the politicians of this world because everyone hates politicians. |
Hinamori Tsesuda
13th Reserve Squadron
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 11:58:08 -
[560] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Hinamori Tsesuda wrote:... but hey were you actually using those systems?... Yes, we are. Now try think of all the ways that we do that aren't mining or ratting. Give you a hint to start you off; there are other infrastructure hub upgrades.
Like what? Industry, moon harvesting, WH and stuff like that? Go ahead, but you own that system only as much as you are willing to defend it and keep it populated.
If you don't like troll-ceptors... Too bad :)
o7
|
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1128
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 12:26:32 -
[561] - Quote
Covert Cynosural wrote:I like Fozzie Sov You guys in 0.0 shouldn't have that much space and power. Let smaller alliance's have some too The problem with this statement, is that it makes you out to believe that there is this group of underprivileged players who just wish they could take some sov of their own. Spoiler alert: there isn't. If there were, we wouldn't be making money hand over fist with the new rental model.
This actually appears to be becoming even more true, now that players are seeing just how awful these new sov mechanics are. Those who want sov already have it. The rest will continue to be dead systems, because there is no reason for anyone to invest the effort and resources into taking and holding them. Trollceptoring is easy. Holding space after the fact is still at the whim of anyone bigger who doesn't want them there. Your small alliance that can field 50 guys? What do you think would happen if we decided we didn't like you, and rolled through with a few hundred trollceptors?
Yeah, exactly. Nothing has been fixed. It's just been made somehow more mind numbing than structure shoots. |
Pierre Cheriende
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 12:39:55 -
[562] - Quote
As a simple minion i support this petition |
Zajian
Shadows of Earth Spears of Destiny
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 12:40:42 -
[563] - Quote
I support this Petition.
It shows problems, and also solutions for known problems in neraly every 0.0 space.
Hopfully CCP will hear. |
Turboauspuff
107th Suicide Kings Nihilists Social Club
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 13:09:33 -
[564] - Quote
+1 |
Arcelia Kaundur
Endgegner.
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 13:23:50 -
[565] - Quote
CCP will not change this, with this sovchange you have to use your brain for once and not throw everything you got at it.
This looks like a desperate way to avoid loosing sov. This game needs some fresh air and it wont happen with all the same alliances holding sov...it gets boring. And it does not change by reversing the changes and turn the own sov inpenetrable fotress. Sov changes were made to see some progress in Sov, and this sov is made to make your chair wobble, because currently there is absolutely no progress in sovchanges and thats a stagnation ccp wont allow. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
107
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 13:31:35 -
[566] - Quote
Fozzy sov is a great change for eve. Most of the space in the drone region have so much unused systems that you cant count them. You dont need that much space. If you want/need it, be prepaire to defend it. But dont whine cos you dont have the numbers or the will power to do many jumps each night to defend systems you dont live in. I dont feel sorry for you at all. Big blue blobs is a disease in eve and alliances that hold on to space that they dont live in only feeds this. It stagnates the game.
I do also support for ccp to add the tools in game to support fozzy sov changes and not having to relly on other external apps. Fozzy sov is the best thing that could have happened to eve. I only wished it was done 5 years ago. Eve would have not been this dead end blue garbage thats turned to. This is suppose to be null and most dangerous part in space. In reality you should be at risk of losing space all the time. Like any front line, it will always get shelled and must have a no mans land!
|
Soldarius
Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore
1363
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 13:34:46 -
[567] - Quote
I have lived in nulsec since 2009. I do not support this petition. Do not speak for me.
The community which OP represents are the worst of the worst when it comes to actual content. They would have CCP revert to Dominion sov, which supported and even mandated vast sprawling empires of unused space, with massive fleets of SP-heavy capital ships jumping across the galaxy in minutes.
Many of the signatory alliances of this petition are historically known to be the worst offenders of botting and RMT. The true intent of this petition is clear for anyone that has played Eve Online for long enough. They wish a return to farming nulsec with vast armies of bots fueling their alliance coffers and/or their rl bank accounts.
So no. I do not and will not ever support this kind of blatantly and obviously self-serving petition and implore CCP to flat out ignore it.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Brocken Rocker
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 13:45:18 -
[568] - Quote
I don't support this petition.
CCP is right in changing the gameplay for some fresh air. Their will be more stratetic descisions in defending and attacking SOV. I think, all of this big alliances are feared, cause they have to split their strike-forces and have to rationing all the Sov-Systems to get a greater defense-bonus.
That means they have much work. That's them an eyesore.
CCP, please hold your course for the SOV-Changes! I support your decisions! |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 13:45:54 -
[569] - Quote
-1
Screaming self-entitlement.
But let's take it down anyway, I love doing that:
1) "critically reduces chances for large scale fights" You mean like... blue donut? I'd say this is a critical increase compared to blue donut. So no, this is bs.
2) "harassment towards any sov owner" Like all the griefers have been telling me all the time "it's not harassment cuz CCP said so". Cope with it, fella.
3) "interface tools" +1 for that point (and for that point only). Tools are lacking indeed. Doesn't justify the rest though.
4) "potential exploit" You gotta be a real optimist if you think the new sov system would come in without an exploitable bug or two. Report a bug, petition when it's used against you - no harm till it's fixed, no harm after.
5) "doesnGÇÖt regenerate back" Seems like semi-valid post for F&I as a balance suggestion, but hardly requires a petition.
6) "notifications" While I somewhat agree that only sending a notification is not sufficient, I am severely against adding names to it - because it opens stupid capabilities like mass convo trolling. The rest **** about the names should go to 3) - interface tools.
7) "transfer sov" Like all the griefers have been telling me all the time "why do you think you're entitled to safe mining?". Right back at you - "why do you think you're entitled to safe sov transfer?". It's a part of the game now that if you wish to transfer sov, there must be a window of opportunity for people to screw with it, and I think fozziesov is an improvement on that.
tl;dr Adapt, bubba. And thanks for your contribution to my tear bucket. |
Good Apollo BS4
Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 14:48:45 -
[570] - Quote
+1 don't necessarily agree with the suggested changes to correct, but anything is better than the current system. |
|
Angelique Duchemin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
940
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 16:45:55 -
[571] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Such is why we do not have a signatory, even though many of our members are outspoken critics of this terrible sov iteration.
That and almost the entirety the list consists of entities that are either hostile to The Imperium or Russian RMT slum lords.
No amount of washing will get the stains off from signing that thing. This all assuming that the petition raises legitimate points and those are few and far between.
The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.
|
Morihiro
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 17:34:51 -
[572] - Quote
+1 |
Anduin Spartan
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 18:09:16 -
[573] - Quote
I'm here just to hang out on the threadnought |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6568
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 18:23:05 -
[574] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Many of the signatory alliances of this petition are historically known to be the worst offenders of botting and RMT. Citation needed.
First off, CCP rarely release the names of alliances housing bots. Secondly, someone botting or RMTing in an alliance doesn't mean that alliance itself is responsible for it. I guarantee every moderate to large group has a number of players RMTing in it, even your own.
At the end of the day, the mechanics they've rolled out are crap and have reduced conflict in null. If the best argument against it you've got is a tinfoil hat theory that they need dominion sov back to bot (which in itself is insane as fewer systems now make more isk and ratting/mining is now a required activity, likely resulting in more botting) then you really won't get very far.
Brocken Rocker wrote:CCP is right in changing the gameplay for some fresh air. Correct.
Brocken Rocker wrote:Their will be more stratetic descisions in defending and attacking SOV. I think, all of this big alliances are feared, cause they have to split their strike-forces and have to rationing all the Sov-Systems to get a greater defense-bonus.
That means they have much work. Wrong. Systems are now easier to hold, and while large alliances can hold less total space, they need less as each system supports more people. This system makes it harder to take sov from a larger alliance that wants it, and once it's settled down you'll simply see large alliances using these small alliances that are moving in on the outskirts as farming for PvPers. If you think you'll be able to move a 100 man alliance into a sov system next door to a 10k alliance and not get roflstomped daily, you're having a laugh.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Jina Snow
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 20:01:29 -
[575] - Quote
I support this Petition. |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
106
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 22:19:53 -
[576] - Quote
-1 for the reasons given here, and everywhere else I have posted...
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5973652#post5973652 |
Jeven HouseBenyo
Baron and Serpent Productions
207
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 02:01:55 -
[577] - Quote
So let me get this straight.
CCP, with the release of FozzieSov, managed to 'break' your 'shiny' when it comes to Sov. And now you want it either quickly changed (to something startlingly similar to what was in place before) or rolled back until a better iteration is brainstormed and passes the Sisi feedback thread sniff test.
I say to those at this wailing wall what was suggested to us 'offering rage, tears and great gnashing of teeth' about the Icongate complaints.
Evolve or move on.
So it's a little different, when it's your 'shiny' on the line.....
>Jeven's Keyboardist
Minny boat flyer, when all else doesn't work, smack the control panel.
Snark at 11 24/7/365.25.
You're not rid of me yet..... Erzulie help you.
No you can't has my stuffs!
|
Arcelia Kaundur
Endgegner. Kids With Guns Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 07:22:31 -
[578] - Quote
Inquisitor Tyr wrote:Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:That's funny, coming from a guy who's alliance head is a signatory. Looks like you might be in with the wrong crowd chief. "If there are two people in a room and both of them agree, then one of them is useless" - Mark Twain. Thankfully, there are lots of people in our crowd that have different perspectives.
the correct quote would be, "...both of them are useless..." |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution The Initiative.
452
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 16:25:47 -
[579] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:I have lived in nulsec since 2009. I do not support this petition. Do not speak for me.
The community which OP represents are the worst of the worst when it comes to actual content. They would have CCP revert to Dominion sov, which supported and even mandated vast sprawling empires of unused space, with massive fleets of SP-heavy capital ships jumping across the galaxy in minutes.
Many of the signatory alliances of this petition are historically known to be the worst offenders of botting and RMT. The true intent of this petition is clear for anyone that has played Eve Online for long enough. They wish a return to farming nulsec with vast armies of bots fueling their alliance coffers and/or their rl bank accounts.
So no. I do not and will not ever support this kind of blatantly and obviously self-serving petition and implore CCP to flat out ignore it.
+1
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.
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution The Initiative.
455
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 17:37:45 -
[580] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Karti Aivo wrote:UAxDEATH wrote:Alliances signed petition
- Alexander Leros, leader Hard Alliance
- Fafer, leader Tr0pa de elite., curator Brothers of Tangra
- Frosch Koenig, leader Synergy of Steel
- Garst Tyrell, leader Triumvirate.
- I Sam, leader Solar Fleet
- Lorianna Lee, leader Dream Fleet
- NullParseException, leader Soviet-Union
- titanokiller, leader Infinity Space.
- tru drksniper, leader Advent of Fate
- UAxDEATH, leader Legion of xXDEATHXx
- Unionn, leader The Afterlife.
- Redwyne Vyruk, manager of BOT and manager of XWX Shadow_of_xXDEATHXx
- meandeane651, head diplomat and alliance command for Gentlemen'sClub Gentlemen's.Club
- Rots Mijnwerker, leader The Blood Covenant
- Pandoro89, Gus Garlic, Maestr0 as Razor leaders RAZOR Alliance
lol what is this? Do you call that group "The Collective of Old ISK and Stable Renting Empires" ? Fozziesov was supposed to hit people like you and this post is a mere confirmation of its working. Not that your arguments got no substance, but that list on its own is a hilarous collection Yeah, except even Sion agrees with a lot of what he's saying, and has stated as much here.
And he's such an expert? When was the last time he even logged in and undocked anything?
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.
|
|
MiRaNTa VaLToN
Slita Mining Corp
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 18:12:56 -
[581] - Quote
I completely disagree:
I would think that the over all effect of trying to defend shouldn't be as one sided as you suggest, the tiring and discouraging task of a long drawn out fleet roam leading no victory would be of great benefit to those who took the effort of trolling in the first place. They would then be able to act on it at a later time once fleet moral is lost or drained.
As a pilot who roams Nulsec from an outsider's point of view I noticed most groups sov is unused space. Hence it taking so long for large groups to defend it. A 6 hour defense fleets is in no way the fault of CCP or of the trolling ship/fleet. You choose to occupy this space you choose the chore of defending it and yes it should be a CHORE defending other wise there would be no down side to owning so much space. All reward no risk is not the way of life in eve as all pilots learn in the early years.
As for wanting large scale engagements: not all alliances can even field such things. This leads to groups no being able to partake in Nulsec at all w/o joining one side or an other. We seen how these so called "Epic Battles" effected nulsec as of the past few years. When the majority of Nulsec was owned by 2 groups, N3 and CFC coalitions, this did in fact lead to stale nulsec activity. Relying on such tactics makes it nearly impossible for any alliance to join, take, hold, and grown in nulsec space with out being forced into said large groups. Case in point Brave: Brave moved to nulsec in the south soon after where forced back out of Nulsec by larger groups capable of bullying them to the breaking point.
I feel that more changes leading to smaller groups being able to both take and defend sov while taxing larger groups holding large amounts of sov should be encouraged. |
Dean Dewitt
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
41
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 19:22:37 -
[582] - Quote
Hi guys,
I see a lot of you, saying "I don't support this petition, the mechanic is fine, there is no problems", others say "The alliances which say that they agree with this petition are mostly renters like Shadow of xXDeathXx". To the guys who says that I would say, Have you tryed defending or attacking a system yet?
I did, so I can say if Aegissov is a sucess or not. In my opinion this sytem is broken, it's been there for 1 month and I'm already bored. What were the goals of Aegis sov? You can read them on this devblog Politics by Other Means The list of the goals and why they are failure
1st goal: As much as possible, ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved.
The old system was a little boring, you had to shoot a structure and kill it before and after rf. Now we have the entosis, if you are an attacker, you wait depending on the ADM between 5min (new system taken) and 60mins, first to reinforce the structure and after just to take ONE NODE (so if the attacker is the only one to take node, he has to take 10nodes, I let you do the math). The defender don't have to form a fleet, he only has to break the lock of the entosis ship (it'll buy him time) or kill quickly the entosis ship.
Goal #2: Clarify the process of taking, holding and fighting over star systems
With the trollceptor, a lot of people just entosis structure just to **** off the owner, they don't even try to take the sov. With this mechanics you don't really know if you are being attack or not.
Goal #3: Minimize the systemic pressure to bring more people or larger ships than would be required to simply defeat your enemies on the field of battle.
With this mechanics, people want to take the node quickly so you just have to bring more alt the get the nodes. People don't split the fleets because you don't know if your ennemie will split his fleet.
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.
This one is half a success
Goal #5: Provide significant strategic benefits from living in your space.
This one was already succeeded, nothing changed.
Goal #6: Spread the largest Sovereignty battles over multiple star systems to take advantage of New EdenGÇÖs varied geography and to better manage server load.
As I said before, you can't split your fleet if the ennemie don't split his fleet.
Goal #7: Any new Sovereignty system should be adaptable enough to be rapidly updated and to incorporate future changes to EVE.
You can't have a perfect system, yes, I agree with that, but you can't release something not finished, if half the idea is good, you have no good idea.
Your goals are failure, you wanted 0.0 to change, you wanted less empty system, yeah I get it. But any alliance who wants to take 0.0 system has to get others blue alliance to help them. You can't change this fact with this. The best change for the 0.0 was jump fatigue and I don't want to change it (or may be for the jump freighter or black ops). Thanks to phoebe conflicts are more local. How many system are rf and not taken? How many sytem are now unclaimed? Here is the Tenerifis map, it'll give you an idea http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Tenerifis or you can see the Catch map http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Catch
Please CCP fix this system quickly, for now living in null sec is not fun.
For the others, I speak for myself and I don't need your approval to say that Aegis sov is broken.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16929
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 20:11:37 -
[583] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:+1
Despite people whining that this relates to rental income, the OP is right. This system puts null holders on the defensive during vulnerability timers, which undermines the ability to fight for content elsewhere.
"It's literally too much to expect us to undock a RLML Caracal and a couple of tackle frigates to defend our sov during our prime"
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution The Initiative.
457
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 20:51:06 -
[584] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Murkar Omaristos wrote:+1
Despite people whining that this relates to rental income, the OP is right. This system puts null holders on the defensive during vulnerability timers, which undermines the ability to fight for content elsewhere. "It's literally too much to expect us to undock a RLML Caracal and a couple of tackle frigates to defend our sov during our prime"
Undock?
But that's boring.
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.
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5273
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 21:39:55 -
[585] - Quote
Jeven HouseBenyo wrote:So let me get this straight.
CCP, with the release of FozzieSov, managed to 'break' your 'shiny' when it comes to Sov. "Who Moved My Cheese!" |
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:07:41 -
[586] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=441365&find=unread
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16932
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:05:39 -
[587] - Quote
Unclaimed, or effectively unclaimed systems are not an indication of failure. The idea that every system should be inarguably owned is a toxic holdover from the Dominion/Pre-Phoebe era. Opportunities for ambitious homesteaders are a good thing.
As for the map, yes let's look at the map shall we?
BEFORE
AFTER
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Steadly Sol
Steadly Sprockets
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:34:17 -
[588] - Quote
Signed. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6574
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:49:01 -
[589] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Unclaimed, or effectively unclaimed systems are not an indication of failure. The idea that every system should be inarguably owned is a toxic holdover from the Dominion/Pre-Phoebe era. Opportunities for ambitious homesteaders are a good thing. As for the map, yes let's look at the map shall we? BEFOREAFTER So before we coloured the map in 4 colours for CFC, NC, Provi and "neutral", and after we colour in the map for each alliance. That way it looks like huge amounts have changed. That about right?
Unclaimed systems are a sign that sov is not worth taking, to the point that people leave systems they could just walk in and claim uncontested. It's because most people don't want sov, they just don't want coalitions to have it either.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16932
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:41:48 -
[590] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Unclaimed, or effectively unclaimed systems are not an indication of failure. The idea that every system should be inarguably owned is a toxic holdover from the Dominion/Pre-Phoebe era. Opportunities for ambitious homesteaders are a good thing. As for the map, yes let's look at the map shall we? BEFOREAFTER So before we coloured the map in 4 colours for CFC, NC, Provi and "neutral", and after we colour in the map for each alliance. That way it looks like huge amounts have changed. That about right? Unclaimed systems are a sign that sov is not worth taking, to the point that people leave systems they could just walk in and claim uncontested. It's because most people don't want sov, they just don't want coalitions to have it either.
Why are you still in a 0.0 alliance?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6586
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 06:38:01 -
[591] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Unclaimed, or effectively unclaimed systems are not an indication of failure. The idea that every system should be inarguably owned is a toxic holdover from the Dominion/Pre-Phoebe era. Opportunities for ambitious homesteaders are a good thing. As for the map, yes let's look at the map shall we? BEFOREAFTER So before we coloured the map in 4 colours for CFC, NC, Provi and "neutral", and after we colour in the map for each alliance. That way it looks like huge amounts have changed. That about right? Unclaimed systems are a sign that sov is not worth taking, to the point that people leave systems they could just walk in and claim uncontested. It's because most people don't want sov, they just don't want coalitions to have it either. Why are you still in a 0.0 alliance? Because I like(d) null and hold out hope CCP won't destroy it in the long run. Nice dodge though bro.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16934
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 06:53:37 -
[592] - Quote
Well I ask because apprently you're so unfamiliar with the state of 0.0 that you're unaware that the sov map is vastly more heterogenous than it was.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6587
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:37:46 -
[593] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Well I ask because apprently you're so unfamiliar with the state of 0.0 that you're unaware that the sov map is vastly more heterogenous than it was. I'd say "vastly" is an overstatement. Some of the russian borderland have been hacked up and a couple of groups have pulled out of null, but the changes haven;t been that big. My comment however was simply that you've taken 2 different style of map and compared them. Why not use the same type of map if you want to get across how much the landscape has changed?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16937
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:40:15 -
[594] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Well I ask because apprently you're so unfamiliar with the state of 0.0 that you're unaware that the sov map is vastly more heterogenous than it was. I'd say "vastly" is an overstatement. Some of the russian borderland have been hacked up and a couple of groups have pulled out of null, but the changes haven;t been that big. My comment however was simply that you've taken 2 different style of map and compared them. Why not use the same type of map if you want to get across how much the landscape has changed? If you could link a more up to date bloc map I'd be delighted to use it.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6588
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:31:37 -
[595] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Well I ask because apprently you're so unfamiliar with the state of 0.0 that you're unaware that the sov map is vastly more heterogenous than it was. I'd say "vastly" is an overstatement. Some of the russian borderland have been hacked up and a couple of groups have pulled out of null, but the changes haven;t been that big. My comment however was simply that you've taken 2 different style of map and compared them. Why not use the same type of map if you want to get across how much the landscape has changed? If you could link a more up to date bloc map I'd be delighted to use it. I don't have such a map. If you don't either, then it's probably better to simply avoid suggesting that looking at 2 different types of map shows the change. Maybe at some point someone that cares enough about such things will roll out a decent analysis of the changes.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
guinea12
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:02:12 -
[596] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Well I ask because apprently you're so unfamiliar with the state of 0.0 that you're unaware that the sov map is vastly more heterogenous than it was. I'd say "vastly" is an overstatement. Some of the russian borderland have been hacked up and a couple of groups have pulled out of null, but the changes haven;t been that big. My comment however was simply that you've taken 2 different style of map and compared them. Why not use the same type of map if you want to get across how much the landscape has changed? If you could link a more up to date bloc map I'd be delighted to use it. I don't have such a map. If you don't either, then it's probably better to simply avoid suggesting that looking at 2 different types of map shows the change. Maybe at some point someone that cares enough about such things will roll out a decent analysis of the changes.
I believe somebody already does care enough.
There you go: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/coalitionsov/Coalitioninfluence.png
Malcanis made the very good point that the notion that every bit of space needs to be owned by someone all the time is rather toxic.
I agree. Why shouldn't we have bits of space that, simply for the fact that the current 0.0 powers right now are not interested in having it or capable of defending it remain in freeport mode until someone steps up to tries and live in it, remain unallocated? |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:24:01 -
[597] - Quote
Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year?
guinea12 wrote:Malcanis made the very good point that the notion that every bit of space needs to be owned by someone all the time is rather toxic.
I agree. Why shouldn't we have bits of space that, simply for the fact that the current 0.0 powers right now are not interested in having it or capable of defending it remain in freeport mode until someone steps up to try and live in it, remain unallocated? Doesn't it make you wonder though why the space is so worthless that nobody wants to claim it? I can't stick a broken fridge outside my house for more than 10 minutes before someone's claimed it. How badly balanced do null systems need to be for them to be so unwanted?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
guinea12
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:25:21 -
[598] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year? No. The map is generated on a daily basis. I don't know if past maps are stored somewhere.
Lucas Kell wrote:Doesn't it make you wonder though why the space is so worthless that nobody wants to claim it? I can't stick a broken fridge outside my house for more than 10 minutes before someone's claimed it. How badly balanced do null systems need to be for them to be so unwanted? I like that analogy. The reason why someone takes the fridge is because it is obviously worthless to you but not to them. Would they wrestle a pitbull for it? No. But if its previous owner doesn't want it anymore, they might as well take it and see if they can find a use for it somehow. I would love the new mechanic to lead to that kind of thing in terms of 0.0 space. |
k898
Desecrated Ascension The Gallows Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:10:40 -
[599] - Quote
They are stored on eve files |
Angelique Duchemin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
940
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:50:55 -
[600] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year?
http://i.imgur.com/yAR8khZ.jpg
The best I could do with an old map and windows paint.
Imperium and N3 where the two blocks.
Providence were neutral and I'm electing to count Brave as N3
While Providence held their region by force of arms (and the space is so bad that no one stronger wanted it)
Brave held catch with N3s permission and at the mercy of N3. So while Brave at the time might not have fought for N3. Their space belonged to N3 and was held by Brave under the threat of N3s capital fleets.
The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6591
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 20:46:25 -
[601] - Quote
guinea12 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year? No. The map is generated on a daily basis. I don't know if past maps are stored somewhere. That's a shame.
guinea12 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Doesn't it make you wonder though why the space is so worthless that nobody wants to claim it? I can't stick a broken fridge outside my house for more than 10 minutes before someone's claimed it. How badly balanced do null systems need to be for them to be so unwanted? I like that analogy. The reason why someone takes the fridge is because it is obviously worthless to you but not to them. Would they wrestle a pitbull for it? No. But if its previous owner doesn't want it anymore, they might as well take it and see if they can find a use for it somehow. I would love the new mechanic to lead to that kind of thing in terms of 0.0 space. That would be nice. Unfortunately most sov space is worth about as much as a low class wormhole. Not the type of thing a passer by is likely to say "ooh, this is nice!"
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16938
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 20:57:33 -
[602] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year? guinea12 wrote:Malcanis made the very good point that the notion that every bit of space needs to be owned by someone all the time is rather toxic.
I agree. Why shouldn't we have bits of space that, simply for the fact that the current 0.0 powers right now are not interested in having it or capable of defending it remain in freeport mode until someone steps up to try and live in it, remain unallocated? Doesn't it make you wonder though why the space is so worthless that nobody wants to claim it? I can't stick a broken fridge outside my house for more than 10 minutes before someone's claimed it. How badly balanced do null systems need to be for them to be so unwanted?
If space is so worthless how come any of it is claimed?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6591
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 21:11:29 -
[603] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year? guinea12 wrote:Malcanis made the very good point that the notion that every bit of space needs to be owned by someone all the time is rather toxic.
I agree. Why shouldn't we have bits of space that, simply for the fact that the current 0.0 powers right now are not interested in having it or capable of defending it remain in freeport mode until someone steps up to try and live in it, remain unallocated? Doesn't it make you wonder though why the space is so worthless that nobody wants to claim it? I can't stick a broken fridge outside my house for more than 10 minutes before someone's claimed it. How badly balanced do null systems need to be for them to be so unwanted? If space is so worthless how come any of it is claimed? It's not that it's completely useless, it's that it's low value. In massive quantities it's OK. To most people though taking a few systems is worth less than just moving into a WH or living in NPC null, and none of it is really worth massive battles these days, hence the lack of real conflict in null. It'd be nice if there were good reasons to fight over it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
guinea12
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 21:25:20 -
[604] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:guinea12 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year? No. The map is generated on a daily basis. I don't know if past maps are stored somewhere. That's a shame. Acutally, k898 was right. They are stored on eve files. Here's the one from exactly one year ago. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/coalitionsov/Coal20140820.png
Lucas Kell wrote:It's not that it's completely useless, it's that it's low value. In massive quantities it's OK. To most people though taking a few systems is worth less than just moving into a WH or living in NPC null, and none of it is really worth massive battles these days, hence the lack of real conflict in null. It'd be nice if there were good reasons to fight over it. You mean, like, economical reasons? Like one of the powerblocks going "oh **** we're so poor, we really need that one constellation the other powerblock has, in order to pay our bills so let's fight them over it"? I am not entirely sure that that is a likely scenario |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1850
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 12:10:51 -
[605] - Quote
I wonder if we added to those maps the headcount/system and relationship between that and crying about the current system.... |
Tsukinosuke
Id Est
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:22:41 -
[606] - Quote
with 1635 members, an alliance holds 234 sovereignty.. that is the problem.. and we all hope FozzieSov will fix it.. none should stop trying to make new eden better space for ALL..
anti-antagonist "not a friend of enemy of antagonist"
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16941
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 09:25:43 -
[607] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Thanks, got another one with the same groupings from last year? guinea12 wrote:Malcanis made the very good point that the notion that every bit of space needs to be owned by someone all the time is rather toxic.
I agree. Why shouldn't we have bits of space that, simply for the fact that the current 0.0 powers right now are not interested in having it or capable of defending it remain in freeport mode until someone steps up to try and live in it, remain unallocated? Doesn't it make you wonder though why the space is so worthless that nobody wants to claim it? I can't stick a broken fridge outside my house for more than 10 minutes before someone's claimed it. How badly balanced do null systems need to be for them to be so unwanted? If space is so worthless how come any of it is claimed? It's not that it's completely useless, it's that it's low value. In massive quantities it's OK. To most people though taking a few systems is worth less than just moving into a WH or living in NPC null, and none of it is really worth massive battles these days, hence the lack of real conflict in null. It'd be nice if there were good reasons to fight over it.
What's OK about "massive quantities", given that the primary wealth generators in sov 0.0 are the anomalies, which improve in quality and quantity as the indexes are increased?
For an alliance the size of INIT., 2 constellations would be ample - we actually have more space than we need sharing Tenal with RZR. When Citadels are introduced, allowing multiple structures per system, then the incentive to consolidate will increase even further.
Aint mean we won't fight for what we have though. We might even use our super special space-magic power of undocking and having fun.
The common theme I see running through this thread (and others like it) is people complaining about having a bad time when they try and engage with Aegis Sov as if it were Dominion Sov. You've put more effort into telling everyone you're not having fun trying to do things the old way in a new system than I've put into actually having fun in it. And I'm having plenty of fun tyvm.
Your cheese has been moved. It's time to cast aside old assumptions about "the right way" to do things and take a fresh look.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16948
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 19:38:53 -
[608] - Quote
Another day, another couple of fun fights in sov space. How's sitting in station crying working out for you?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6603
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 01:30:36 -
[609] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:What's OK about "massive quantities", given that the primary wealth generators in sov 0.0 are the anomalies, which improve in quality and quantity as the indexes are increased? The more you have, the easier it is to defend. If you're fully utilising your space, then 100 people working in 2 systems will be more efficient that 2 sets of 50 in one each. Scaled up that continues, so when you hold a couple of constellations and fully utilise it, the effort to defend it balances out better with the rewards from it.
Malcanis wrote:The common theme I see running through this thread (and others like it) is people complaining about having a bad time when they try and engage with Aegis Sov as if it were Dominion Sov. You've put more effort into telling everyone you're not having fun trying to do things the old way in a new system than I've put into actually having fun in it. And I'm having plenty of fun tyvm. Most people aren't having fun even when playing it as Aegis sov. Mate... it's a mining laser and a structure. That's what the bulk of the mechanic is. Add to that the most efficient way of attacking sov is by using lots of uncatchable ships, and it's a textbook example of a bad mechanic. The mechanic should be engaging and fun for all parties, but it's not. Clearly there are plenty of groups of people who see it as nothing but a chore to play whack-a-mole to defend systems.
Malcanis wrote:Another day, another couple of fun fights in sov space. How's sitting in station crying working out for you? Congratulations. I guess if CCPs aim was "make malcanis happy while clearly the vast majority of null players find the new mechanics boring as sin" then it's a win. I'm not generally docked, we still have fights, much less than normal (dotlan stats show down 16% AFAIK) but less doesn't mean none, and neither am I crying, this is called "providing feedback on game mechanics". You're not so good at trolling these days bro.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
guinea12
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 07:39:06 -
[610] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:The more you have, the easier it is to defend. If you're fully utilising your space, then 100 people working in 2 systems will be more efficient that 2 sets of 50 in one each. Scaled up that continues, so when you hold a couple of constellations and fully utilise it, the effort to defend it balances out better with the rewards from it. Yes. Have your space and live in it and you will reap the rewards. Watching the tournament yesterday, I saw ads aimed at carebears that offered space to pve in. Unsurprisingly, those ads were made by the Imperium as they seem to have understood how this new sov mechanic works and are adapting. More people in 0.0 gives more targets to roaming gangs, makes more need for defensive gangs, makes more pvp content. I hope, we can agree that that's a good thing.
Lucas Kell wrote:Most people aren't having fun even when playing it as Aegis sov. Mate... it's a mining laser and a structure. That's what the bulk of the mechanic is. Add to that the most efficient way of attacking sov is by using lots of uncatchable ships, and it's a textbook example of a bad mechanic. The mechanic should be engaging and fun for all parties, but it's not. Clearly there are plenty of groups of people who see it as nothing but a chore to play whack-a-mole to defend systems. That too is a good thing. It should require effort to defend your space so that you only defend your space if you acutally need it. By the way. Fighting for sov has only ever been interesting if someone fights back. This has not changed since the servers booted up for the first time and it will not change until the day CCP pulls the plug.
Reading some of the posts in this thread, I wonder if anyone has actually bothered to watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao20T98MoMk The reasoning behind Aegis sov is explained quite well by Fozzie himself.
With every major change, the community that is affected goes through different stages. That is not very surprising. The quality of your particular alliance can, as always, be determined by how fast you reach the final stage. Already, some seem to have reached that final stage. The names of these stages are: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance
If your alliance reaches that final stage last, it wasn't any good to begin with. Just saying. |
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6603
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 08:26:35 -
[611] - Quote
guinea12 wrote:That too is a good thing. It should require effort to defend your space so that you only defend your space if you acutally need it. By the way. Fighting for sov has only ever been interesting if someone fights back. This has not changed since the servers booted up for the first time and it will not change until the day CCP pulls the plug. Yes, it should require effort, but it should be entertaining. That's the goal of Fozziesov. And that's where it falls down. For most people involved it's not very fun.
guinea12 wrote:With every major change, the community that is affected goes through different stages. That is not very surprising. The quality of your particular alliance can, as always, be determined by how fast you reach the final stage. Already, some seem to have reached that final stage. The names of these stages are: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance You may want to just accept crappy game mechanics, many people would rather provide feedback and have them turned into good game mechanics. It's why we attend roundtables and the like to provide feedback on the game and it's why the CSM exists. Fozziesov could be good and fun for all, but currently it's not.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
guinea12
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 11:11:09 -
[612] - Quote
Be honest. Have you watched the video? |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6603
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 11:35:13 -
[613] - Quote
guinea12 wrote:Be honest. Have you watched the video? Nope. I was in the audience.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
guinea12
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 11:56:07 -
[614] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:guinea12 wrote:Be honest. Have you watched the video? Nope. I was in the audience. That must have been awesome. I admit, I am a bit jealous. Reading through some of the things you posted, I would have never guessed. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6604
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 12:16:10 -
[615] - Quote
guinea12 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:guinea12 wrote:Be honest. Have you watched the video? Nope. I was in the audience. That must have been awesome. I admit, I am a bit jealous. Reading through some of the things you posted, I would have never guessed. Yeah, was fun
What that I've posted has made you think that?
The way I see it, the goals have always been: 1. Make sov entertaining for all players involved. - This I feel has failed. Most players attacking sov are doing so to troll. They don't want sov, they just want to waste people's time by forcing them to chase them about. It's very amusing I'm sure for the people doing the trolling, but it's the equivalent of wider spread blueballing for defenders. In addition, when you are taking or defending sov properly, most of the fleet is sitting about waiting while the "entosis crew" run around doing stuff. Because entosis doesn't benefit from more players, if you bring 20 players, most of them have nothing to do if there's no engagement.
- For this I suggest increasing the minimum size of ship for fitting an entosis. BC would be a good choice. How to get the whole fleet involved in capture, I don't know. The system seems to be inherently boring if you don't get an engagement. Perhaps a much more rapid takeover or defense of space if completely uncontested would be good.
2. Make the system to contest sov simpler. - This has been a success. The only thing I'd suggest here is more in-game info as info available on crest should always be available in game so that everyone can access it with ease.
3. Ensure the system directs you to bring fleets that defeat your enemy and measures success on control of the grid. - This is partially working, but with evasion fit ships, you can just spread out over the system into small fleets who couldn't actually control the grid, hoping that one or two of them get through. As you successfully trigger timers, you make it so that the defender has even more locations to go to to reset the systems and it continues to grow from there. There will likely be a large scale demonstration of why this is bad soon. Empty systems, sure, they should be sure easy to take, but occupied systems shouldn't be under threat from tiny evasion fit fleets. Those types of ships should remain primarily for scouting and intercepting a target for a fleet, not to actually run the takeover.
- For this I suggest letting systems naturally reset if aggressors don;t continue the takeover of sov, and requiring multiple entosis links to get a sov capture started with a higher ADM.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Ben Fenix
Net Neutrality
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 16:24:11 -
[616] - Quote
Grats on making CSM. :)
Now that you are CSM, are you allowed to continue with this petition in the form of collective bargaining? Or is this suddenly against your NDA / CSM Contract?
Perfect timing. :)
Capital Ships Matter !
|
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
465
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 15:42:35 -
[617] - Quote
I am going to need to push for my old damage stacking penalty I wrote up years ago. Incentive to split fire over press F1. Still can blob fire, but total damage is less than if spread, etc etc. Squad on squad fight, need ewar, etc. |
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
8339
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 11:36:47 -
[618] - Quote
Jesus, you nullbears whine more than even the hardiest Dodixieite.
Adapt or die, HTFU, etc etc.
[b]----
CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off.[/b]
|
Max Fubarticus
The Scope Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 18:41:22 -
[619] - Quote
Problem: fozziesov in its current state critically reduces chances for large scale fights, fights that significantly separate EVE Online from its competitors.
False narrative. The large scale fights you speak of center around legacy tactics ( capital blops etc.). The new mechanic levels this playing field by allowing "guerrilla style" tactics to be an effective tool. By "effective tool" I mean:
1. A means in which an opponent can gather intel by measuring your response. 2. Requires the SOV holder to defend what they desire to keep and prioritize SOV holdings. 3. Requires any group who is determined to hold SOV, That they have ability to demonstrate force projection in relation to current or desired SOV holdings. and much more...
Gone are the days of holding SOV under the "threat" of response umbrella. If anything, you will have a fight. The scale depends upon your willingness to risk ships or SOV. That also means you will no longer be able to make the statement to your prospective renters that "the area is safe" Nothing is safe. Period!
Quote:Problem: low skill requirement practically affirms harassment towards any sov owner. While new player harassment is subject to a support ticket. Roaming fleets or interceptors shouldnGÇÖt be able to affect sovereignty
Really? By your own logic that would also mean that low sp members of CODE, flying Catalysts are harassing miners and haulers in hi sec! Your logic also demands that they should have to fly something other than a cheap destroyers in order to gank in hi sec. This whole petition nonsense is without merit. For years and years players have claimed null is broke. The fact is that those players whining about the new SOV are nothing more than a bunch of elitist adolescents who stomp their feet and throw tantrums when things don't go according to their liking. Adapt or leave!! |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16984
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 13:21:33 -
[620] - Quote
Ben Fenix wrote:Grats on making CSM. :)
Now that you are CSM, are you allowed to continue with this petition in the form of collective bargaining? Or is this suddenly against your NDA / CSM Contract?
You posted this petition at 7-31 and Gorga was kicked out on 8-04? Perfect timing. :)
It doesn't contraven the "NDA" in anyway. It's laughably a wrong-headed attempt from a buggy whip manufacturer to ban automobiles, but it's still a perfectly legitimate action for any EVE player, CSM or otherwise, to make a case for a change they want.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
|
Harry Forever
SpaceJunkys
1278
|
Posted - 2015.09.10 13:24:16 -
[621] - Quote
but we want you guys to suffer
YouTube - Harry Forever vs. Goonswarm
|
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
160
|
Posted - 2015.09.10 16:21:54 -
[622] - Quote
I proposed something a few days ago that would solve a lot of the issues Fozzie Sov is raising namely the indexes and the bullshits with command nodes, but still adressing the issue of unhabited space.
If people wanto read the wall of text: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5996949#post5996949
|
DeeeBo
The Flying Tigers Gentlemen's.Club
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.18 00:53:22 -
[623] - Quote
CCP just needs to admit that the recent changes are a failure, just like the Incarna expansion was. I mean give us a reason to log on this winter. Roll back the Phoebe jump changes, bring back Dominion SOV, let us slug it out all winter while they figure out something better, but please let's stop the lunacy of the current mechanics. Dominion SOV wasn't perfect and yes it was ridiculous that a fleet could travel from one end of EVE to the other in minutes, BUT IT WAS FUN . . . not tedious, boring, mind-numbing work. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17163
|
Posted - 2015.10.18 10:48:09 -
[624] - Quote
DeeeBo wrote:CCP just needs to admit that the recent changes are a failure, just like the Incarna expansion was. I mean give us a reason to log on this winter. Roll back the Phoebe jump changes, bring back Dominion SOV, let us slug it out all winter while they figure out something better, but please let's stop the lunacy of the current mechanics. Dominion SOV wasn't perfect and yes it was ridiculous that a fleet could travel from one end of EVE to the other in minutes, BUT IT WAS FUN . . . not tedious, boring, mind-numbing work.
Uhm, no it wasn't fun and yes it was "tedious, boring, mind-numbing work".
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Orob Ninebands
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
55
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 22:45:25 -
[625] - Quote
Counter-Point:
I have heard many, many, many people express their approval of the new Sov mechanics. Not everyone thinks it is bad. Remember, we mostly only hear from the upset people in this game.
|
Orob Ninebands
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
55
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 22:46:54 -
[626] - Quote
DeeeBo wrote:CCP just needs to admit that the recent changes are a failure, just like the Incarna expansion was. I mean give us a reason to log on this winter. Roll back the Phoebe jump changes, bring back Dominion SOV, let us slug it out all winter while they figure out something better, but please let's stop the lunacy of the current mechanics. Dominion SOV wasn't perfect and yes it was ridiculous that a fleet could travel from one end of EVE to the other in minutes, BUT IT WAS FUN . . . not tedious, boring, mind-numbing work.
This is the new Sov, learn to accept it or don't log on. It isn't going away.
|
Orob Ninebands
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
55
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 22:48:57 -
[627] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Your cheese has been moved..
That right there pretty much sums up the crying.... |
DeeeBo
The Flying Tigers Gentlemen's.Club
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 19:28:01 -
[628] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:DeeeBo wrote:CCP just needs to admit that the recent changes are a failure, just like the Incarna expansion was. I mean give us a reason to log on this winter. Roll back the Phoebe jump changes, bring back Dominion SOV, let us slug it out all winter while they figure out something better, but please let's stop the lunacy of the current mechanics. Dominion SOV wasn't perfect and yes it was ridiculous that a fleet could travel from one end of EVE to the other in minutes, BUT IT WAS FUN . . . not tedious, boring, mind-numbing work. Uhm, no it wasn't fun and yes it was "tedious, boring, mind-numbing work".
Dominion SOV was not perfect and SOV Grinding sucked, agreed, but the fights made it worth it IMO.
Orob Ninebands wrote:DeeeBo wrote:CCP just needs to admit that the recent changes are a failure, just like the Incarna expansion was. I mean give us a reason to log on this winter. Roll back the Phoebe jump changes, bring back Dominion SOV, let us slug it out all winter while they figure out something better, but please let's stop the lunacy of the current mechanics. Dominion SOV wasn't perfect and yes it was ridiculous that a fleet could travel from one end of EVE to the other in minutes, BUT IT WAS FUN . . . not tedious, boring, mind-numbing work. This is the new Sov, learn to accept it or don't log on. It isn't going away.
Being that CCP has changed the SOV system multiple times over the course of the game, that's ridiculous to say it isn't going away. Maybe it won't go away today or tomorrow, but eventually it will. The question is how soon will it go away. For all of the complaints regarding Dominion SOV, it was hugely successful. People have turned to the forums (myself included) because we enjoy the game, unsubbing or "not logging on" should be a last resort.
Orob Ninebands wrote:Counter-Point:
I have heard many, many, many people express their approval of the new Sov mechanics. Not everyone thinks it is bad. Remember, we mostly only hear from the upset people in this game.
True, GÇ£upset peopleGÇ¥ are most likely to fill out surveys or provide feedback (complain). While I am sure "not everyone thinks it is bad", judging by the threadnaught this has turned into, the dwindling subs/actives, etc. I would say not enough people think it is a good idea or find it an enjoyable way to play.
o7 DeeeBo
|
Terminal Insanity
Pwn 'N Play SpaceMonkey's Alliance
824
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 15:32:25 -
[629] - Quote
CCP: put a player alt into Imperium and come join us for our entosis fleets, see the joy you bring us firsthand.
"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
|
Seraph IX Basarab
Angry Dragons Psychotic Tendencies.
748
|
Posted - 2016.01.09 01:09:30 -
[630] - Quote
I mean if people go in and try to entosis adm6 systems...you're doing it wrong.
House of Black and White
An ingame channel dedicated to more interesting ways to play
|
|
ISD Buldath
ISD STAR
273
|
Posted - 2016.01.09 04:34:51 -
[631] - Quote
Forum necros are bad, mmk? Locked.
~ISD Buldath
Interstellar Services Department
Support, Training and Resources Division
Lt. Commander
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: [one page] |