| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
13073
   |
Posted - 2015.08.18 22:54:40 -
[1] - Quote
Hey everyone. With vacation season winding down here in Iceland, we're fast approaching the first release since the Aegis Sovereignty deployment: Galatea on August 25th.
Galatea will contain the first (and definitely not the last) set of updates to the sov capture system released in Aegis, thanks in large part to your excellent feedback and observations we've made of the first few weeks of the new system on Tranquility. This first set of adjustments is focused on the capture times and maximum number of Command Nodes, as well as some tweaks to the Entosis Link penalties itself.
The first and most significant change in this release is that we are reducing the base capture time of Structure Command Nodes from 10 minutes to 4 minutes, and Station Services from 5 minutes to 4 minutes. This means the capture times for these structures will range from a minimum of 4 minutes (for defenders and when the multiplier is at its base of 1) to a maximum of 24 minutes (for attackers against a 6x multiplier structure).
To help ensure that defenders maintain a robust but fair advantage, we are also starting the defending alliance off with 60% control in the overall event tug of war when nodes start spawning. This means that an uncontested defense will now require capture of 8 nodes at 4 minutes (plus warmup) a piece, down from 10x10 before. In total, the fastest possible defense would require 4 players and 12 minutes post-Galatea, compared to 5 players and 24 minutes pre-Galatea.
To help reduce the clutter that builds up in lower value systems when capture events are left for extended periods of time uncontested, we are also reducing the cap on total nodes that can spawn per structure from 20 to 10. We are also reducing the spawn rate of randomly appearing extra nodes by approximately 50% (this second part only applies to the randomly spawning extra nodes, not the the nodes that spawn instantly when old ones are completed).
We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty.
We are also releasing the first batch of Sov UI little things, which CCP Punkturis and CCP Sharq sourced from your feedback in this thread. These changes include an overview of sov data in the constellation show-info window, direct access to the default vulnerability timer and a new region column in the sov dashboard and improved tooltips in the infrastructure hub UI. Punkturis is continuing to work on improving the sov UI and we encourage people to keep posting their requests in the little things thread.
Finally this release also contains a number of bug fixes, some of which are quite visible (Alliance logos once again appearing in space on the TCU) and others which improve handling of rare edge cases (such as alliances disbanding mid-fight) and back-end code.
The Galatea is just the beginning of our commitment to iterating and improving nullsec and sov. We are hard at work on the changing coming in future releases, including formal methods for dropping sov, the ability to turn IHub upgrades on and off, updates to the formula for calculating activity defense multipliers, new PVE experiences for sov nullsec and much more. Nullsec and Sov remain our focus here at Team Five 0 and we'll be continuing to update you on progress as we go forward. We are listening to your feedback and continuing to observe the results of our changes as we make them.
These Galatea changes will also obviously not be the final changes to the capture mechanics themselves. We have some changes we know we want to make (like partially captured structures returning to defender control at a slow constant regeneration pace to reduce the need for "maintenance linking") and others that we don't want to rule out but that also need more investigation and internal/external discussion before making final decisions (such as ship restrictions on Entosis Links). Thanks to everyone who's been providing constructive feedback so far, we hope you'll continue.
Thanks everyone, and good hunting!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
FT Cold
The Scope
Gallente Federation
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:01:21 -
[2] - Quote
Interesting, I like how you've responded to the community on this one. |
Jay Amazingness
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:01:54 -
[3] - Quote
:munch: |
Gypsys Bear
Iris Covenant
The Gorgon Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:03:18 -
[4] - Quote
3rd.
Comments later |
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:04:01 -
[5] - Quote
This fixes literally none of the concerns. Troll ships will still be a thing
Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!
|
GOB III
Adversity.
Northern Coalition.
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:04:38 -
[6] - Quote
feawen likes this |
Alendriana
Trojan Legion
Fidelas Constans
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:05:25 -
[7] - Quote
So glad we will still see troll ships....... not |
Feawen
Adversity.
Northern Coalition.
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:05:59 -
[8] - Quote
I'm glad CCP is taking this seriously and tweaking Sov. I'm sure there are more tweaks to be made in the future but this is the first step towards a FUN sov system and something everyone will enjoy
Thanks FOZZIE! |
Zetaomega333
HIFI INDUSTRIAL
Gentlemen's.Parlor
94
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:05:59 -
[9] - Quote
So how does capping at 4km/s solve the troll ceptor problem? Do you plan on reducing the t1 entosis cycle time to 4 minutes instead of 5 |
Balthusdire Dominus
Valar Morghulis.
Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:06:06 -
[10] - Quote
The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work. |
|
|
RatKnight1
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Nulli Secunda
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:06:38 -
[11] - Quote
So, we can still fly trollceptors?
Yeah.
A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.
Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game. |
bear mcgreedy
Shadow State
The Bastion
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:07:07 -
[12] - Quote
/mefacepalm at the way ccp listens to the community...........
maybe if every one sat in jita making the highsec pubbies whine they would fix it... |
Cat silth
ASH TO DUST
Obsidian Descendants
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:07:07 -
[13] - Quote
More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not |
Lim Yoona
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:07:34 -
[14] - Quote
This is some ishtar-type rebalance. So I guess in three years sov might be bearable.
Typical CCP, tip-toeing where giant leaps are needed and taking sledgehammers to china shops  |
progodlegend
League of Non-Aligned Worlds
Snuffed Out
187
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:08:06 -
[15] - Quote
Well this will be fun.
I just finished training up the last skills I needed for my Orthrus too. |
Doctor Chalke
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:08:18 -
[16] - Quote
Swing and a miss CCP. |
Galphii
Oberon Incorporated
Get Off My Lawn
324
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:08:25 -
[17] - Quote
Some good first steps there, though I do question the logic of releasing the new sov system right on the cusp of iceland's extensive holiday season, thus preventing this iteration from taking place sooner. Still, what's done is done and I hope this stuff helps.
The 4k/sec limit is an interesting approach which should see trollceptors diminish (and explode) a little more often, though they're still going to be difficult to catch without links and therefore will still exist. At least there will be no more goddamn 500mn cruisers. Less timesink is also a good thing. Probably have to wait for more iterations before it's a bearable experience though.
"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
|
Michael Oskold
Adversity.
Northern Coalition.
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:08:35 -
[18] - Quote
Mostlyharmlesss wrote:This fixes literally none of the concerns. Troll ships will still be a thing. 4000 m/s is still going to be able to escaping the vast majority of things.
into the trash you go.
|
Credacom
Adversity.
Northern Coalition.
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:08:37 -
[19] - Quote
Good to see, hope more to come soon. Things are getting bad out here.
The big question will be does anyone care?
Shake-up needed asap. |
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:08:58 -
[20] - Quote
2000 m/s or even 3000 m/s would sounds a lot more sensible. |
|
|
Desudes
Adversity.
Northern Coalition.
441
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:09:33 -
[21] - Quote
That fixes a lot of things. 250km links are still pretty homo though.
Excuse me, but what the f*ck are you desu?
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
143
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:09:36 -
[22] - Quote
Thank you, a couple of steps in the right direction.
I suspect coming up with an adhoc 4km/s limit was not easy.. there is no good reason for it to be that number, other than being an arbitrarily reasonable one. I dare say we'll see more of these ad hoc "fixes" as the new Eve sov/structure system falls into place.. |
Magorath
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:09:54 -
[23] - Quote
so.. less time to react as a defender and troll ships still perfectly acceptable.
Now this is content creation.
Never thought I'd say it but pos bashing was actually more fun then watching a timer as it's not a serious take over. I'd have a use for a carrier + dread as well.
|
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:10:12 -
[24] - Quote
This literally changes nothing. You have essentially made it easier for people to troll sovereignty in space people use and done nothing to address the barrier of entry to sovereignty trolling. This is a repeat of the Ishtar "nerfs" where a rethink of the problem is needed not a small tweak.
If you want to fix the problems with the new sovereignty system vastly reduce the number of nodes so people will have to fight over them rather than just capture more than the other guy. Also there needs to be a real barrier of entry to starting a sovereignty attack even rather than having a sovereignty laser and an interceptor
If you don't address the issue of sovereignty in a meaningful way you will keep losing active players and they probably won't ever come back. |
Reagalan
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:10:47 -
[25] - Quote
Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. |
Feawen
Adversity.
Northern Coalition.
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:12:23 -
[26] - Quote
Alphaomega21 wrote:This literally changes nothing. You have essentially made it easier for people to troll sovereignty in space people use and done nothing to address the barrier of entry to sovereignty trolling. This is a repeat of the Ishtar "nerfs" where a rethink of the problem is needed not a small tweak.
If you want to fix the problems with the new sovereignty system vastly reduce the number of nodes so people will have to fight over them rather than just capture more than the other guy. Also there needs to be a real barrier of entry to starting a sovereignty attack even rather than having a sovereignty laser and an interceptor
If you don't address the issue of sovereignty in a meaningful way you will keep losing active players and they probably won't ever come back.
Coming from someone who hasn't actually experienced anything except defending heavily defended space, I don't know how you plan to contribute to the conversation |
Kristoff Merkas
I'm Fine and You
Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:12:36 -
[27] - Quote
This is ridiculous.
Limit it to 2km/s, or even make it like a Cyno, Siege Mode or Bastion Mode and reduce your speed to 0 m/s.
Limit it to ONLY Battlecruisers and Battleships! You should have to risk something to take Sov, not run around in a trollceptor.
Do you even play your OWN GAME? I think not.
I am Loyal... Like a Dog. Give me a ship; give me food, and I'll stick by your side forever.
I <3 Garmurs
LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM FOREVER!!!!
|
Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
DARKNESS.
86
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:13:55 -
[28] - Quote
1: Reduce the speed limit to 3k/s
2: Make it so that if a ship is nullified it cannot fit an entosis link
3: Make it so that a ship cannot fit a cloak and an entosis link (mutually exclusive modules)
I'm not thrilled with this announcement. It doesn't do a damn thing about the 'trollceptor' phenomena and still doesn't address the issue of systems that someone comes and triggers capture nodes but never following up on. Systems should reset to fully defended (non vulnerable) if someone sov wands them but doesn't come do the anoms within X amount of time.
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.-á He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
|
Lim Yoona
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:15:52 -
[29] - Quote
I'm gonna vote with my wallet on this one and cancel my subs. This used to be a good game maybe one day it'll get better.
After this crop of small gang devs goes to Riot. |
bear mcgreedy
Shadow State
The Bastion
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:17:12 -
[30] - Quote
i made it easy for you devs listening to the community... maybe this might be an aide for you ????
http://strawpoll.me/5252730 |
|
|
Maqari Kinraysuwa
Oruze Cruise
59
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:17:19 -
[31] - Quote
Lim Yoona wrote:I'm gonna vote with my wallet on this one and cancel my subs. This used to be a good game maybe one day it'll get better.
After this crop of small gang devs goes to Riot.
Good |
Skit Khamsi
Viziam
Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:17:53 -
[32] - Quote
I think you should advance to start searching for a new job. Thank you for the death of my favorite games. |
Thirdsin
The Red Island Foundation
Shadow Cartel
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:17:57 -
[33] - Quote
Pants on head....
4000m/s is not a fix.
Reducing the time it takes to troll sov is not a fix.
I genuinely don't understand how CCP doesn't "get it" at this point after the ridiculous amounts of 'feedback' about this....
I can't even... |
MindSweeper
Burning Napalm
Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:18:08 -
[34] - Quote
thank god |
Current Habit
Rusty Pricks
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:18:44 -
[35] - Quote
Especially the response here makes me think t his is a step in the right direction. |
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1787
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:19:42 -
[36] - Quote
Disabling prop mods while hacking should still be a thing. What about node decay?
Edit: Let me clarify. If you do decay will it be node by node (each one has a timer, or a % on the contest?
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Creator of Burn Jita
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
its my cyno
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:20:31 -
[37] - Quote
why not make it to where entosis ships aren't immune to warp bubbles or even make it unfittable to warp immune ships.
why not make it risk adverse to attack a sov?
Example: if you want to entosis sov items you have to put forth an isk amount. If you win the sov battle you get the isk back and the sov if you lose the isk goes to who you attacked. Those that are serious about sov will put forth effort and risk ships and conflict.
You are making it worth to just have 1 system to make capitals and just live in NPC space |
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:20:53 -
[38] - Quote
Feawen wrote:Alphaomega21 wrote:This literally changes nothing. You have essentially made it easier for people to troll sovereignty in space people use and done nothing to address the barrier of entry to sovereignty trolling. This is a repeat of the Ishtar "nerfs" where a rethink of the problem is needed not a small tweak.
If you want to fix the problems with the new sovereignty system vastly reduce the number of nodes so people will have to fight over them rather than just capture more than the other guy. Also there needs to be a real barrier of entry to starting a sovereignty attack even rather than having a sovereignty laser and an interceptor
If you don't address the issue of sovereignty in a meaningful way you will keep losing active players and they probably won't ever come back. Coming from someone who hasn't actually experienced anything except defending heavily defended space, I don't know how you plan to contribute to the conversation
If you take a look at a map you might notice we own Pure Blind a region that is quite **** and we have been working very hard to make this region harder to attack. Just because you are incapable of forming defense fleets to protect your space does not make my points any less valid. |
Poision Kevin
Burning Napalm
Northern Coalition.
19
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:21:15 -
[39] - Quote
The fact that you still ***** about "Troll Ceptors" when you can easily kill those now with cruiser hulls and links in system is entertaining. 4km/s instead of 8km/s is a HUGE step. Trolling factor is still ****, surely, but this reduces amount of nodes you have to keep track of as well as speed limit while the entosis link is FITTED (To be seen if it matters offline/online however).
It's not what you might have wanted, but god damn is it in the right direction. I'm sure I speak for most people when I say "Bet you didn't expect that?".
Baby steps... baby steps. |
Doomchinchilla
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:21:16 -
[40] - Quote
Sooo.... when are we going to get LP for entosising these nodes? |
|
|
My Lap
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:22:03 -
[41] - Quote
Skit Khamsi wrote:I think you should advance to start searching for a new job. Thank you for the death of my favorite games.
I hear RIOT takes bad ex CCP devs |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Eternal Pretorian Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:22:16 -
[42] - Quote
Magorath wrote:so.. less time to react as a defender and troll ships still perfectly acceptable.
Now this is content creation.
Never thought I'd say it but pos bashing was actually more fun then watching a timer as it's not a serious take over. I'd have a use for a carrier + dread as well.
^^ This. These changes barely address the major issues pointed out both on the forums, by the CSM, and on the EVE Reddit (namely fewer command nodes, reduction of speed while entosising to more like 10%, and removal of the ability to fit entosis links on ships below cruiser size).
The correct way to address community unrest about the prior changes is not to stand behind them while ignoring how bad they are.
EDIT: By the way, a guy on page 2 linked a poll. You should check the results. |
Xerticle
Sanctuary of Shadows
Triumvirate.
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:22:39 -
[43] - Quote
first |
Bobmon
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
139
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:23:20 -
[44] - Quote
Poision Kevin wrote:The fact that you still ***** about "Troll Ceptors" when you can easily kill those now with cruiser hulls and links in system is entertaining. 4km/s instead of 8km/s is a HUGE step. Trolling factor is still ****, surely, but this reduces amount of nodes you have to keep track of as well as speed limit while the entosis link is FITTED (To be seen if it matters offline/online however).
It's not what you might have wanted, but god damn is it in the right direction. I'm sure I speak for most people when I say "Bet you didn't expect that?".
Baby steps... baby steps.
tell them the truth baby!
GÖ¢GÖ¢Bobmon for CSM10
@BobmonEve
|
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:23:57 -
[45] - Quote
Poision Kevin wrote:It's not what you might have wanted, but god damn is it in the right direction. I'm sure I speak for most people when I say "Bet you didn't expect that?".
Baby steps... baby steps.
Let me tell you, I'll speak for a lot of people when I say, "This is exactly what we've expected".
|
DaReaper
Net 7
2487
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:25:06 -
[46] - Quote
People, can none of you read? The next patch is in like 2 weeks, most likly they don;t have the time to make huge changes to the system.
Instead of crying, why not give it a chance. The worst that happens is its not fixed and then they know this did not fix it so will have time to actually do a big fix.
A reduction of speed might be enough, it might not be, but pissing and moaning doesn't do anyone any good. And calling for the devs to be fired or lose there job is just stupiid.
You, as players, have zero idea as to why it might not be so easy to do what you think. And for all you know this tweek could make things a hell of a lot better. So instead of pissing and moaning, give it a shot. If its not enough, they will have more time to try it again.
Christ, i offten wonder if ccp's numbers on the average age of eve players is legit, because most of you are acting like my god damn 4 year old. Knock it off.
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
Yes i am optimistic about eve.. i'm giving it till dec 31st 2016 before i doom n gloom
|
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:26:44 -
[47] - Quote
If you want to truly fix the sovereignty system once and for all remove it completely and base who's name is on the map by the alliance who has the greatest number of pilots out in space. Then you can start working on the problem of making 0.0 worth fighting over. Maybe by buffing moons so alliances can have an income source that is worth taking. |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2096
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:29:13 -
[48] - Quote
My idea is to make capture towers have a 75km scram and 90%web. That should ensure the death of trollceptors.
Also I don't mind a little structure grind when it results in a big fight.
Take b-r as an example.
In br you had a giant capital fight and then sub capital fights in adjacent systems.
Why not make it so you elink to reinforce and then have to elink to take down the shields now that they are invulnerable... but wheb you get to structure reinforce you have the option to blow the thing up or finish tge elink capture events.
This would cause one main fight over the structure but at the ssme time a race to capture tge capture towers...
So now you csn have your b-r fight and spread it out an entire constaltion.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Mordus Angels
93
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:29:23 -
[49] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us.
More goon BLOB ...
just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now
Y-C3EQ
7RM-N0
GA-P6C
the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting
Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best.
IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners. |
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:30:10 -
[50] - Quote
DaReaper wrote:People, can none of you read? The next patch is in like 2 weeks, most likly they don;t have the time to make huge changes to the system.
Exactly! Limiting the speed to 2000 m/s or disabling the propulsion module altogether would require a complete engine rewrite. |
|
|
My Lap
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:30:13 -
[51] - Quote
When did this game go from this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDVEHE10nHc
to this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83CyR463VWs
So sad... |
Harvister
Tr0pa de elite.
Pandemic Legion
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:32:32 -
[52] - Quote
constructive feedback:
Bravo yaaay \o/ |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
96
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:32:49 -
[53] - Quote
DaReaper wrote:People, can none of you read? The next patch is in like 2 weeks, most likly they don;t have the time to make huge changes to the system.
Instead of crying, why not give it a chance. The worst that happens is its not fixed and then they know this did not fix it so will have time to actually do a big fix.
A reduction of speed might be enough, it might not be, but pissing and moaning doesn't do anyone any good. And calling for the devs to be fired or lose there job is just stupiid.
You, as players, have zero idea as to why it might not be so easy to do what you think. And for all you know this tweek could make things a hell of a lot better. So instead of pissing and moaning, give it a shot. If its not enough, they will have more time to try it again.
Christ, i offten wonder if ccp's numbers on the average age of eve players is legit, because most of you are acting like my god damn 4 year old. Knock it off.
How much more money should we keep giving this company when they keep saying just give it more time? This game has been in a bad state for years now and the getting small changes it gets that are refuted in the forums with well thought post with data to back these up. When people such as GSF, BL, PL, NC. and any of the big sov players tell the devs that their ideas will not work it is not because of the meta it is because they actually play in the area that is being effected and know how bad the ideas that are being put forth are.
Troll Ships were a concern before sov ever went in CCP **** the bed with allowing it to happen. They have a chance to fix it and they put a band aid on a gaping wound. I have not spoken up until now but I really do not think CCP has any idea about how to fix sov or even how sov is played. Again it is not about the status quo because if they do not get there act together CCP is going to be a dead game in less then 6 months |
dancing ninja
Bearded BattleBears
I N F A M O U S
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:33:47 -
[54] - Quote
This is a step in the right direction.
4km/s speed limit will solve some of the trollceptor issues but the 4 minute node is a double edged sword. You have even less time to respond. Now instead of a trollceptor they can bring a cheap tanked drake. Since you only have 4 minutes to respond chances are the response will be in smaller/faster ships which wouldnt be able to anything heavily tanked.
Giving the defenders a 10% starting lead is a nice boost to counter the trolling.
The node self repair will be a huge help once it can be released.
I would still like to see some kind of spreading system index. If you max the index in your system the extra mining/ratting/sov should spread to a nearby system you control. Have it spread with a exponential loss so that it only goes 2-3 systems. It fixes the problem of trolls hitting the systems that you use often but cant safely rat/mine in because of location or low true sec. |
DaReaper
Net 7
2487
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:33:52 -
[55] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:DaReaper wrote:People, can none of you read? The next patch is in like 2 weeks, most likly they don;t have the time to make huge changes to the system. Exactly! Limiting the speed to 2000 m/s or disabling the propulsion module altogether would require a complete engine rewrite.
naw more likely numbers to crunch, other devs to talk too and they believe 4k will work. However, if you don;lt whine and explain why 2k or 3k or whatever would be better they have time to adjust that number.
So again, stop acting like my 4 year old. Take a deep breath and use your words and explain why you think its not enough. Without name calling or throwing a tantrum. They might see reason in your argument and go 'you knwo what.. 4k is too little, lets try xxxx' or they might be looking and something you have zero idea about.
Deep breath, it will be ok.
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
Yes i am optimistic about eve.. i'm giving it till dec 31st 2016 before i doom n gloom
|
Somal Thunder
V0LTA
Triumvirate.
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:34:10 -
[56] - Quote
RatKnight1 wrote:So, we can still fly trollceptors?
Yeah.
A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.
Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game.
What a whine... A lot of ships, including cruisers, can go 4000 m/s, even if that does mean with heat. A modern counter to troll ceptors goes over 7k with heat, 5k without. Now those setups can drop a speed rig or overdrive for something more useful for combat, or it can retain those rigs in order to better catch trollceptors. |
Silvia Heart
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:34:17 -
[57] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners.
Go back to your little hole you trash alliance, idiots like you guys and team 5-0 are literally the cancer killing this game from the inside out. |
Urandas
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:34:31 -
[58] - Quote
A step in the right direction, however not strong enough. 4km/s is still too fast. Honestly it should act like a seige module with -100% speed reduction. If your worried about us bumping the hacking ship away, then make it so the ship can't go over 0m/s.
Theoretically, if a player has 'control' over the grid the hack beacon is on, then they shouldn't need to move. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1801
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:34:36 -
[59] - Quote
Most of the complaints regarding aegis sov would be allayed if interdiction nullification was removed from the game.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Gella Delon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:35:04 -
[60] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners.
Delicious 
You have no ihubs you idiot, the TCU means nothing, you never had control and never will. |
|
|
Kalen Pavle
Quam Singulari
Triumvirate.
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:36:46 -
[61] - Quote
I'll give this a chance if the notification warning goes off at the start of the warmup cycle.
If not it's now even easier to troll border systems. |
DaReaper
Net 7
2488
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:38:00 -
[62] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:DaReaper wrote:People, can none of you read? The next patch is in like 2 weeks, most likly they don;t have the time to make huge changes to the system.
Instead of crying, why not give it a chance. The worst that happens is its not fixed and then they know this did not fix it so will have time to actually do a big fix.
A reduction of speed might be enough, it might not be, but pissing and moaning doesn't do anyone any good. And calling for the devs to be fired or lose there job is just stupiid.
You, as players, have zero idea as to why it might not be so easy to do what you think. And for all you know this tweek could make things a hell of a lot better. So instead of pissing and moaning, give it a shot. If its not enough, they will have more time to try it again.
Christ, i offten wonder if ccp's numbers on the average age of eve players is legit, because most of you are acting like my god damn 4 year old. Knock it off. How much more money should we keep giving this company when they keep saying just give it more time? This game has been in a bad state for years now and the getting small changes it gets that are refuted in the forums with well thought post with data to back these up. When people such as GSF, BL, PL, NC. and any of the big sov players tell the devs that their ideas will not work it is not because of the meta it is because they actually play in the area that is being effected and know how bad the ideas that are being put forth are. Troll Ships were a concern before sov ever went in CCP **** the bed with allowing it to happen. They have a chance to fix it and they put a band aid on a gaping wound. I have not spoken up until now but I really do not think CCP has any idea about how to fix sov or even how sov is played. Again it is not about the status quo because if they do not get there act together CCP is going to be a dead game in less then 6 months
*checks your employment history and laughs* Oh little noob... you know nothing of bad. you are a mere summer child, its sweet.
No, they might of been warned, but untill you see it in action its not going to sink in. In attidtion the whining during testing was about the use of AT ships.
This is not the status quo actually. This tweek is BETTER then they handed pos and dominion sov, which was relase it and wash there hands of it.
Again, they have info you don;t. Why donlt you see if it fixes anything first before you freak out. How bloody hard is that? or if you firmly believe it won;t fix anything, then type out in a logical manner why you think it won;t and why you think your idea will. you are more likly to be seen that way then the other way
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
Yes i am optimistic about eve.. i'm giving it till dec 31st 2016 before i doom n gloom
|
Zxyxcana
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:39:10 -
[63] - Quote
:yawn: Wake me up from ratting when an update actually makes sense. |
Chocolate Mooses
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
33
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:39:58 -
[64] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:
More goon BLOB ...
the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting
Crying about "blobbing" is top secret MOA code for crying about "Not having enough friends or competent pilots."
It's not out fault you are totally ineffective and don't have enough numbers to accomplish anything beyond shooting at ratting ships. This is what happens when you take your marching orders from a random blogger with a officer level tin foil hat. |
Katrin BarRiona
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:40:38 -
[65] - Quote
Lol.
Teen nods? Sirius O.o
You can chek rf one constelation and see how much nods spawn after this? Five-0 try it and see. |
oodell
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:42:31 -
[66] - Quote
Urandas wrote:A step in the right direction, however not strong enough. 4km/s is still too fast. Honestly it should act like a seige module with -100% speed reduction. If your worried about us bumping the hacking ship away, then make it so the ship can't go over 0m/s.
Theoretically, if a player has 'control' over the grid the hack beacon is on, then they shouldn't need to move.
Well, also theoretically, you could have two doctrines fighting each other while both holding an entosis point on a node. Having a -100% penalty would make the (example) entosis tengus in your tengu fleet stick out rather obviously. 4km/sec, on the other hand, is significantly higher than any mainline doctrine I can think of, which is probably where they got that number from. 4km/sec does impact the snowflake entosis trolling ships significantly more.
Querns wrote:Most of the complaints regarding aegis sov would be allayed if interdiction nullification was removed from the game.
Interceptors have been cancer since the day they were release. Not having counters for things in this game has been historically terrible, and right now a gang of interceptors has no counter if they don't want to get caught. Yes you can catch one or two if you're lucky and have the right ships, but the reset blow past you, and you have no way to catch up. |
FlashSpawn
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:43:46 -
[67] - Quote
You're obviously unhappy playing this game. Why don't you ease your pain by contracting me your stuff and going outside for a while ?
|
Allawa Phantom
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:43:59 -
[68] - Quote
like what the **** kind of fix is this? 4K isnt a limit most ships you cant even get to 4K. Even with an over-sized propmod.
What CCP has done here is made Torll Ceptors More Trolly. The 4M limit will INCREASE the amount of Troll Hacking Which is the UNDER LYING PROBLEM with this sov system.
|
Aprozatoarea
Svea Rike
Circle-Of-Two
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:46:04 -
[69] - Quote
this whole new sov system just seems silly, and its very boring. imho the whole system should be scrapped and rethinked. u actually implanted a WOW solution!. |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Eternal Pretorian Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:46:23 -
[70] - Quote
oodell wrote:Interceptors have been cancer since the day they were release. Not having counters for things in this game has been historically terrible, and right now a gang of interceptors has no counter if they don't want to get caught. Yes you can catch one or two if you're lucky and have the right ships, but the reset blow past you, and you have no way to catch up.
This I don't agree with, however they are cancer now.
Ceptors were fantastic after the nerf to combat ceptors. The point is that they're hard to catch, but they can't pose any threat other than tackle/scouting.
Now that they are powerful they are cancer. But the solution is removing entosis links from sub-cruiser sized ships, not a ceptor nerf. |
|
|
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
42
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:47:36 -
[71] - Quote
FlashSpawn wrote:You're obviously unhappy playing this game. Why don't you ease your pain by contracting me your stuff and going outside for a while ?
I will go down with this sinking ship if need be but I would rather make this game good again. |
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:48:37 -
[72] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:oodell wrote:Interceptors have been cancer since the day they were release. Not having counters for things in this game has been historically terrible, and right now a gang of interceptors has no counter if they don't want to get caught. Yes you can catch one or two if you're lucky and have the right ships, but the reset blow past you, and you have no way to catch up. This I don't agree with, however they are cancer now. Ceptors were fantastic after the nerf to combat ceptors. The point is that they're hard to catch, but they can't pose any threat other than tackle/scouting. Now that they are powerful they are cancer. But the solution is removing entosis links from sub-cruiser sized ships, not a ceptor nerf.
Yea because not being able to catch a ship is totally not broken. |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Eternal Pretorian Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:50:20 -
[73] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:
Yea because not being able to catch a ship is totally not broken.
You can with an insta-slasher. And a fit that can escape insta-slashers are useless for anything but moving loot. |
oodell
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:53:02 -
[74] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:oodell wrote:Interceptors have been cancer since the day they were release. Not having counters for things in this game has been historically terrible, and right now a gang of interceptors has no counter if they don't want to get caught. Yes you can catch one or two if you're lucky and have the right ships, but the reset blow past you, and you have no way to catch up. This I don't agree with, however they are cancer now. Ceptors were fantastic after the nerf to combat ceptors. The point is that they're hard to catch, but they can't pose any threat other than tackle/scouting. Now that they are powerful enough to reinforce a station they are cancer. But the solution is removing entosis links from sub-cruiser sized ships, not a ceptor nerf.
Of course they're a threat. A handful of them can skate around a region, be almost completely untouchable, and burn ratters to the ground. They move so fast that even good intel networks fail to keep up. A fleet of them can dodge any defense fleet and just generally wreck havok. Having hostiles in your space is great content. Having untouchable, uncatchable hostiles is cancer.
The only consistent way to deal with them is half a dozen smartbombing titans on an out gate. And with fatigue, you only get one shot at it. It's ridiculous. |
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:54:48 -
[75] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:5pitf1re wrote:
Yea because not being able to catch a ship is totally not broken.
You can with an insta-slasher. And a fit that can escape insta-slashers are useless for anything but moving loot.
You show me how to catch a sub 2 seconds align interceptor and I'll give you 1 bil. |
Kalenn Istarion
Northstar Cabal
Tactical Narcotics Team
32
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:55:38 -
[76] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. With vacation season winding down here in Iceland, we're fast approaching the first release since the Aegis Sovereignty deployment: Galatea on August 25th. Galatea will contain the first (and definitely not the last) set of updates to the sov capture system released in Aegis, thanks in large part to your excellent feedback and observations we've made of the first few weeks of the new system on Tranquility. This first set of adjustments is focused on the capture times and maximum number of Command Nodes, as well as some tweaks to the Entosis Link penalties itself. The first and most significant change in this release is that we are reducing the base capture time of Structure Command Nodes from 10 minutes to 4 minutes, and Station Services from 5 minutes to 4 minutes. This means the capture times for these structures will range from a minimum of 4 minutes (for defenders and when the multiplier is at its base of 1) to a maximum of 24 minutes (for attackers against a 6x multiplier structure). To help ensure that defenders maintain a robust but fair advantage, we are also starting the defending alliance off with 60% control in the overall event tug of war when nodes start spawning. This means that an uncontested defense will now require capture of 8 nodes at 4 minutes (plus warmup) a piece, down from 10x10 before. In total, the fastest possible defense would require 4 players and 12 minutes post-Galatea, compared to 5 players and 24 minutes pre-Galatea. To help reduce the clutter that builds up in lower value systems when capture events are left for extended periods of time uncontested, we are also reducing the cap on total nodes that can spawn per structure from 20 to 10. We are also reducing the spawn rate of randomly appearing extra nodes by approximately 50% (this second part only applies to the randomly spawning extra nodes, not the the nodes that spawn instantly when old ones are completed). We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty. We are also releasing the first batch of Sov UI little things, which CCP Punkturis and CCP Sharq sourced from your feedback in this thread. These changes include an overview of sov data in the constellation show-info window, direct access to the default vulnerability timer and a new region column in the sov dashboard and improved tooltips in the infrastructure hub UI. Punkturis is continuing to work on improving the sov UI and we encourage people to keep posting their requests in the little things thread. Finally this release also contains a number of bug fixes, some of which are quite visible (Alliance logos once again appearing in space on the TCU) and others which improve handling of rare edge cases (such as alliances disbanding mid-fight) and back-end code. The Galatea is just the beginning of our commitment to iterating and improving nullsec and sov. We are hard at work on the changing coming in future releases, including formal methods for dropping sov, the ability to turn IHub upgrades on and off, updates to the formula for calculating activity defense multipliers, new PVE experiences for sov nullsec and much more. Nullsec and Sov remain our focus here at Team Five 0 and we'll be continuing to update you on progress as we go forward. We are listening to your feedback and continuing to observe the results of our changes as we make them. These Galatea changes will also obviously not be the final changes to the capture mechanics themselves. We have some changes we know we want to make (like partially captured structures returning to defender control at a slow constant regeneration pace to reduce the need for "maintenance linking") and others that we don't want to rule out but that also need more investigation and internal/external discussion before making final decisions (such as ship restrictions on Entosis Links). Thanks to everyone who's been providing constructive feedback so far, we hope you'll continue. Thanks everyone, and good hunting!
A specific question which is not clear from the post: Does the reduced timer impact the initial ref timer as well, or only Command Nodes / services which are coming out of reinforcement?
If the shorter times apply to the initial ref period then this is an awful change. If they apply only after a structure has been reffed then it's a net positive.
Try Harder.
|
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
42
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:55:54 -
[77] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:Murkar Omaristos wrote:5pitf1re wrote:
Yea because not being able to catch a ship is totally not broken.
You can with an insta-slasher. And a fit that can escape insta-slashers are useless for anything but moving loot. You show me how to catch a sub 2 seconds align interceptor and I'll give you 1 bil.
Smart bombing titans lots of smart bombing titans. |
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Origin.
Black Legion.
2426
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:56:02 -
[78] - Quote
Entosis active should reduce speed to ZERO.
Reduce number of control nodes further, they are still AIDS.
Also, this. With the new 'local' model in null and requisite defensive posture of entities to hold what they take, a much needed content-generating land-rush of new entrants won't happen until the elephant in the room of 72% calling hisec home is addressed substantively It's time.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
its my cyno
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:57:09 -
[79] - Quote
New changes upcoming take sand out of the sandbox |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2111
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:57:43 -
[80] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty.
A pre aligned warp on a probe results at 0 need to be no longer than 19.5 seconds including acceleration and deceleration for an Arazu with links and damnation point to catch a 4k/s ship. Oh wait, I forgot to take into account lock time... |
|
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:59:13 -
[81] - Quote
Apparently in July of 2015 if you listen to the people complaining about Fozziesov.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2268
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 23:59:36 -
[82] - Quote
Goons and pets will only be happy with a system that lets them rule everything by being offline.
Nah who am I kiddin, they'd still complain. CCP should add pacifiers and some warm milk to SoV holders... maybe a comfort blankie too.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Suitonia
Genos Occidere
Warlords of the Deep
614
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:00:12 -
[83] - Quote
Allawa Phantom wrote:like what the **** kind of fix is this? 4K isnt a limit most ships you cant even get to 4K. Even with an over-sized propmod.
What CCP has done here is made Torll Ceptors More Trolly. The 4M limit will INCREASE the amount of Troll Hacking Which is the UNDER LYING PROBLEM with this sov system.
An Atron with a single overdrive can break 4km/s, and catch troll ceptors now.
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Mercenary Coalition
1726
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:02:40 -
[84] - Quote
Aprozatoarea wrote:this whole new sov system just seems silly, and its very boring. imho the whole system should be scrapped and rethinked. u actually implanted a WOW solution!.
You clearly havnt done much with Dominion sov.
The new system is actually pretty damn good. The fun parts are more fun and the unfun parts now go faster for everyone except people with 50 super carriers to grind with.
"Trollcepters" were hilariously ineffective in the playtests on Duality. Once borders contract to used space and the whiney scrubs have their directors/FCs tell them what ships to use a lot of their issues go away.
The speed limit I'm fine with.
The number of nodes and capture time being reduced so drastically I'm not sure about. Seems like fights will get a lot more swingy in favor of whoever can get started first. Which could be good, could be bad I guess.
Shy of adding sentry guns to stations, iHubs, and TCU there will always be some number of pilots able to "troll" attack your space thanks to the switch away from HP structure grinds. And if you dont go out and defend against them no amount of passive recharge is going to help you.
In the prior system, attackers could warp at will. Now at least you have a chance to catch and kill them. You will never again have the chance to sit back and ignore them, knowing full well that your safety is built on so many hit points that a non 0.0 apex force attacker would have to burn themselves out of EVE and take a day off work to actually affect you.
H. T. F. U. (or hire mercenaries to be hard for you ;) )
Hero of the CSM
Alek the Kidnapper
"Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."
-Arydanika, Voices from the Void
|
Yen Thara
Trademarque
Alternate Allegiance
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:03:18 -
[85] - Quote
Quote:
Interceptors have been cancer since the day they were released. Not having counters for things in this game has been historically terrible, and right now a gang of interceptors has no counter if they don't want to get caught. Yes you can catch one or two if you're lucky and have the right ships, but the rest blow past you, and you have no way to catch up. Let HICs catch them already.
Yeah interceptors have literally no counter, I mean I have only been pipebombed like 5-6 time. If you're that worried about trollceptors set up an intel channel and start setting traps for ceptors. |
oodell
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:07:03 -
[86] - Quote
Yen Thara wrote:Quote:
Interceptors have been cancer since the day they were released. Not having counters for things in this game has been historically terrible, and right now a gang of interceptors has no counter if they don't want to get caught. Yes you can catch one or two if you're lucky and have the right ships, but the rest blow past you, and you have no way to catch up. Let HICs catch them already.
Yeah interceptors have literally no counter, I mean I have only been pipebombed like 5-6 time. If you're that worried about trollceptors set up an intel channel and start setting traps for ceptors.
Any C-team FC is going to use a scout, and smartbombs are easy to avoid with perches. |
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:08:06 -
[87] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Goons and pets will only be happy with a system that lets them rule everything by being offline.
Nah who am I kiddin, they'd still complain. CCP should add pacifiers and some warm milk to SoV holders... maybe a comfort blankie too.
We were for an occupancy based sovereignty system that benefits people who use their space but this is just a bastardization of faction warfare not occupancy based sovereignty. Make a truly occupancy based sovereignty system that is based only on the number of active pilots in the system. Trying to fit sovereign null sec into a Fozzie elite pvp shaped mold will kill all content in null sec and no one will want to hold it. These contrived systems just make it more effort to take and hold space and take advantage of the little to no benefits it gives. |
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky
Wormbro
The Society For Unethical Treatment Of Sleepers
43
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:08:13 -
[88] - Quote
How does this speed cap of 4000m/s stop interceptors from just offlining the module and gong full speed again? They've always been offline the module to gain their mobility and speed back so I don't see how this is any different |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
A Band Apart.
164
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:08:40 -
[89] - Quote
Speed limit on ships fitted Entosis links is WRONG.
A better way to deal with this is to just make the Entosis link module only fittable on destroyer class ships and above. So simple and yet fixes all the issues of the so called troll sepctor.
|
Yen Thara
Trademarque
Alternate Allegiance
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:10:05 -
[90] - Quote
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote:How does this speed cap of 4000m/s stop interceptors from just offlining the module and gong full speed again? They've always been offline the module to gain their mobility and speed back so I don't see how this is any different
I'm not positive but the reduction could be if you have it fitted, whether its online or not makes no difference. |
|
|
Suitonia
Genos Occidere
Warlords of the Deep
615
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:10:57 -
[91] - Quote
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote:How does this speed cap of 4000m/s stop interceptors from just offlining the module and gong full speed again? They've always been offline the module to gain their mobility and speed back so I don't see how this is any different
Offlining the Entosis doesn't speed you up.... you always kept the speed penalty........
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
Suitonia
Genos Occidere
Warlords of the Deep
615
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:11:43 -
[92] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:Speed limit on ships fitted Entosis links is WRONG.
A better way to deal with this is to just make the Entosis link module only fittable on destroyer class ships and above. So simple and yet fixes all the issues of the so called troll sepctor.
The funny thing is Troll Ceptors aren't the most broken thing, it's 500mn Strategic Cruisers
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
oodell
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:13:30 -
[93] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:Speed limit on ships fitted Entosis links is WRONG.
A better way to deal with this is to just make the Entosis link module only fittable on destroyer class ships and above. So simple and yet fixes all the issues of the so called troll sepctor.
There are legitimate use cases for a frigate-sized ship which is also mobile.
Harpyfleet is a strategic doctrine used by more than one alliance for strategic fights over sov. There's no reason why a harpy shouldn't be able to entosis during a fight. |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2096
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:15:11 -
[94] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:Speed limit on ships fitted Entosis links is WRONG.
A better way to deal with this is to just make the Entosis link module only fittable on destroyer class ships and above. So simple and yet fixes all the issues of the so called troll sepctor.
not really if you want to go in a fleet of t3d you should be able to...
but if you want to go in with one ship that is where you should have a good chance of being caught.
That is why i have proposed making capture structures, outposts, ihubs and tcu have a chance to use a 75km scram and web.
This will make it so if a trollceptor tries to attack my outpost i simply undock in a insta thrasher and pop him.
Also with this mechanic and without looking at whats going to happen to capitals i would like to see the return of the option for the structure grind once you pass the first reinfoce timer.
basically you have to e-link the outpost or tcu or ihub and it goes into reinfoce mode. when it comes out you have to capture the capture stuctures in the constalation and that will then cause the second timer which will deactivate the shields...
since there are no shields left you can now shoot the structure... but at the same time there will still be caputre events... so you have to choose try and grind the structure or capture the annoms... or try both...
that way you can have a b-r like fight again.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Sophie Elongur
Hooded Underworld Guys
Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:16:35 -
[95] - Quote
Tentative steps in the right direction...
Stop listening to high and low sec pubbies who know nothing about null and start listening to nullsec players who live out here. |
Borachon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:24:51 -
[96] - Quote
A comment and a clarification:
- I really appreciate the commitment to keep working on this; even if I'm skeptical of this approach, that statement alone was worth the full price of admission of the post. Thanks.
- How do webs interact with the speed limit? Say, for example, an "attacker" starts with a ship that normally would have gone 8 km/s; they fit an entosis link on it, and it's speed is capped to 4 km/s. It's entosising a TCU, and a Huginn with a fed navy web lands and applies a 50km 60% web to it. Does its speed drop to 3200 m/s (8km/s * 40%) or 1600 m/s (4km/s * 40%)?
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
5273
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:30:09 -
[97] - Quote
Well, I'm surprised.
Though I didn't agree entirely with all the feedback, even I could see what the majority wanted.
This wasn't it. In fact, most of these changes were not suggested by anybody in any thread I'm aware of.
It also still doesn't address:
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 |
Reagalan
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
110
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:31:58 -
[98] - Quote
I'm saying this as nicely as possible. Fozziesov is a broken and fundamentally flawed system. No amount of tweaking will ever make it work as well as either of the two previous sov systems.
Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end.
Fozziesov is not fun for a sov defender, who has to race to defend buffer zones from entities who have no intention of actually taking your space, or holding it, or even using it.
It's not fun to chase interceptors around. This has also been a problem as far back as since interceptors recieved bubble immunty which was also one of the worst design decisions in the history of Eve.
Fozziesov lacks permanence. Under Dominion sov, losing a system was potentially, for all intents and purposes, permanent. It could potentially fall into a timezone from which you would never be able to take it back. Under Fozziesov, you can lose systems and take them back later. Losing your space therefore has far less value. There is less on the line.
Since losing space has less value, fewer people give a **** about their space. This is readily apparent in the mass exodus from nullsec.
Fozziesov discourages fighting because it does not force an entity to control a grid in order to win an objective. Ironically, this was one of the stated goals of the system. It discourages fighting because there is no need to commit anything more to win an objective than a single sovhacker.
Any fleet that splits itself to cover multiple nodes, and protect multiple sovhackers, will fall prey to a fleet that maintains coherency, and rolls as one large group winning multiple small fights. It's therefore in the best interest of a defender to not engage, to retain a "fleet-in-being" to discourage an attacker from splitting up. By preventing an attacker from splitting up, he can therefore maximize the tedium on part of the attackers.
Dominion sov, at least, forced both the attacker and defender to commit to a grid to fight over an objective, no matter how adamant the defending FC was at attempting to blueball the attackers. There was always a final timer, and the defender must show up for it in force, or lose.
Fozziesov's focus on the "small entities" detracts from the immense amount of organization that has gone into the maintenance of large space empires. The idea that small, disorganized entities should have an easier time defending their space, or advantages when attacking someone else's, is contrary to the concept of "effort vs reward".
This blind focus on the "small entities" has also directly lead to far fewer large fights in Nullsec, and indeed, the need for them. Large fights, large wars, large empires, and large fleets, have always been far greater content producers than small gangs, or "small entities".
Large fleets make stragglers, targets for small gangs to catch, and reasons for industrialists to build things.
Large wars involve thousands of players, given them reasons to log in, reasons to fight, and reasons for large battles involving mass destruction of ships to occur.
Large empires drive a metagame that is not found in any other game in the world, and provide organizations and structures which unite large numbers of players and provide a support network for new ones, and causes and reasons for older ones to log in.
Eve's metagame has been the number one driver of content for the game. The metagame produces headlines, the metagame produces new players.
Fozziesov, and the focus on "small entities", aims to systematically destroy all of these, and, by extension, destroys a large part of why we play Eve at all.
Despite the focus on "small entities", Fozziesov heavily favors large entities with large numbers of people who are capable of providing extra ships to fit sovlasers to, and to rat and keep up ADMs.
The ADMs of Fozziesov aim to restrict the size of a space empire on the concept of "occupancy sov". In hindsight, "occupancy sov" was a misguided and flawed concept. The size of a space empire should not be limited to the amount of space it can utilize, but by the military pressure exerted by the other players and their space empires.
Entosis Links, the cornerstone of Fozziesov, are a major contributor to the flaws of Fozziesov, and are also a fundamentally flawed concept that should never have been implemented.
The idea of a "magical space laser" that determines whose flag is planted in space is, even on it's face, a laughable concept. We dumped millions of skillpoints into combat skills for a reason.
Citadels, which so-far look like a good re-work of POS/Stations, are greatly hamstrung in their potential because of their reliance on Entosis Link mechanics.
The issue of "trollceptors" is a direct result of Entosis Links. The EHP grind of Dominion sov, and of POS, was an inherent inhibitor of "troll" tactics. Higher DPS ships inherently cost more money. EHP grinds were, by design, inherently conducive to risk-reward concepts. To effect a change in sov, you needed to commit.
This commitment was a major driver of conflict. When a sov war occured, it was a big deal.
EHP grinds may not has been that much fun, but that wasn't the point. Eve was never a "fun" game. Eve inherently is incapable of being a "fun" game. Designing Eve to compete vs other video games is a futile effort, as other games that are designed to be "fun" games will easily outcompete Eve on fun.
Eve has always been the "serious business" game. For all the tedium of Dominion sov, thousands upon thousands of us were willing to harden the **** up and deal with it, because it had permanence, because it had a high bar.
The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system. |
Chessur
Mining Industry Exile Foundation
Warlords of the Deep
589
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:35:25 -
[99] - Quote
I like the changes so far- 4K/S seems nice.
Any thoughts on making Ihubs / TCUs dead space? Or having a dead space deployable? |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Eternal Pretorian Alliance
157
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:37:54 -
[100] - Quote
Holy wall of text batman!
(he's right though) |
|
|
Allawa Phantom
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:38:20 -
[101] - Quote
CCP Hire this guy
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
836
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:39:18 -
[102] - Quote
I love it. CCP is putting out the fire with petrol.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Nevil Kincade
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:39:45 -
[103] - Quote
NO FOZZY !
NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
You are being told a fairy tale!
We have taken a couple of systems (and lost them again) but never due to a single 'trolling' ship. This stuff just doesnt happen in reality against an organized alliance/coalition. It always involved fending of ewar and controlling access to the system. Perhaps stalling for time to get the entosis done but ultimately because the defenders CAME IN TOO LATE. And whos fault is that ?
I cant believe you are giving into this whining of people who just DONT WANT TO PVP. You should see the reality of 'Entosis Trolling' with your own eyes before you make such decisions. The defender comes in, jams the Entosis ship and your warm-up cylce goes to **** wasting you 20 minutes. And if you fit a ship to counter that kitsune or falcon by outrunning it they scream "Unfair! Unfair! Fozzy nerf it pleeeease !!!"
What is this bullshit ? Sov defence by crying for nerfs ? And you play along ???
Entosis links seriously need e-war immunity or be able to keep running without a lock-on !
What do you think how many successfull jams a falcon can get off during the warm-up cycle, 20, 200 ? Because thats the amount of Entosis ships you will need in the future to capture a TCU against a defender who is actually on the ball.
And what if you field 20 ECM ships or 100 ? That gets us to a number the server cant even handle.
And how dare those that own sov to define that kiting is not a proper strategy to fight over a system ? They could easily have put on their OWN ENTOSIS onto the TCU and stopped the attackers progress. If they were TRULY holding the field that shouldnt be a problem right ? Our 9k m/s Entosis ships never could stay on grid with an actual force arriving by the way.
Again: Fozzy bro is believing a fairytale.
What was happening the last few weeks was EXACTLY what Aegis Sov was meant to do: Make power blocs realize they cant occupy all the space themselves. They were supposed to feel the pain of an empire overstretch and make a tough call about what space is worth the effort.
THEY WERE MEANT TO LOOSE SPACE ! And not only the part they choose to. Now they are starting to loose their face in being outplayed and loosing Sov so they throw all their political power at CCP. Of course on the cost of the entire player base.
Please grow a spine you lush sack of potatoe meal ... im so ******* disappointed, you were the last hope for content and conflict in Eve.
P.S.
Aegis Sov has made Pure Blind a content garden of even. Sure the Sov holders don't like to get slaughtered in skirmishes now that they are forced upon them but the content generation part of the new system is absolutely working.
Congratz on that part CCP!
Please don't give up. All the criticism is purely political and certainly not about fun and explosion. |
Allawa Phantom
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:43:05 -
[104] - Quote
I Smell MOA Tears
Its really ironic how the entities who say this system is brilliant is the trolls who run around and entosis stuff then run at the first sight of danger |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2096
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:46:24 -
[105] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:I'm saying this as nicely as possible. Fozziesov is a broken and fundamentally flawed system. No amount of tweaking will ever make it work as well as either of the two previous sov systems.
The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.
I disagree. AFAIK one of the main reasons you guys won b-r was that you were able to lock down adjacent systems keeping out capital reinforcements.
ill say it again make fozziesov a mesh between structure and elink grind.
make it so you use the elink to reinforce the 1st time then you have to use elinks for the 1st capture event.
this then would cause the second reinforce which would then disable the shields and allow the structure to be shoot at.
so now you can put your capitals to work and attack the structure...
but even though the structure is vulnerable you can also choose to capture the annoms spread throughout the consultation.
So no you have a b-r type situation where you have your capital fight over the structure and then a bunch of sub cap fights over the capture annoms.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:47:45 -
[106] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:NO FOZZY !
NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
~some words~
It's funny how an entity whose sole purpose for years was and still is, to try to harass and troll a much larger entity is basically the only entity really supporting fozziesov. |
Nevil Kincade
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:47:48 -
[107] - Quote
Allawa Phantom wrote:I Smell MOA Tears
Its really ironic how the entities who say this system is brilliant is the trolls who run around and entosis stuff then run at the first sight of danger
We are not trolls, we fight CFC every day with great success and you know it.
It's bad enough that the blob of garbage forces it's pvp style on so many players but the political bullshit going even into game design is a danger to Eve as a product. |
Tardvark McDoof
Enlightened Industries
Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:50:25 -
[108] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:NO FOZZY !
NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
You are being told a fairy tale!
We have taken a couple of systems (and lost them again) but never due to a single 'trolling' ship.
Strange, I must've imagined running into all those Interceptors burning off-grid in Pure Blind last night then.
At any rate, none of the 'fixes' really solve any of the complaints about the system. A's for Effort don't really work outside of grade school, you need to revisit your feedback and take it back to the drawing board CCP. |
Rashasha Imshee
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:51:06 -
[109] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us.
I love the tears from the biggest trolls in the game, who weaponized boredom, complaining about getting trolled. When you leave, ccan I have your stuff?
Good job Fozzie, and Team Five-O. |
My Lap
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:51:14 -
[110] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:I'm saying this as nicely as possible. Fozziesov is a broken and fundamentally flawed system. No amount of tweaking will ever make it work as well as either of the two previous sov systems.
...
The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.
Truer words are seldom spoken as this. I doubt Fozzie will take the time to comment on this but it would be nice. |
|
|
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:51:44 -
[111] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:Allawa Phantom wrote:I Smell MOA Tears
Its really ironic how the entities who say this system is brilliant is the trolls who run around and entosis stuff then run at the first sight of danger We are not trolls, we fight CFC every day with great success and you know it. It's bad enough that the blob of garbage forces it's pvp style on so many players but the political bullshit going even into game design is a danger to Eve as a product.
Yep, that's why numbers started dwindling at a disturbing rate ever since fozziesov hit TQ. It must be because it is such a great success and of course all we want is to destroy the game by having the cause of EVE's dwindling numbers reverted.
Hang on, I'm confused now ... |
its my cyno
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 00:56:06 -
[112] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:Allawa Phantom wrote:I Smell MOA Tears
Its really ironic how the entities who say this system is brilliant is the trolls who run around and entosis stuff then run at the first sight of danger We are not trolls, we fight CFC every day with great success and you know it. It's bad enough that the blob of garbage forces it's pvp style on so many players but the political bullshit going even into game design is a danger to Eve as a product.
You mean you kill a bunch of ratters.
we know you know you aren't serious about sov other then to troll it.
Why not make it risk adverse if you are serious. Make it you have to pay1 bil x the adm level of the system. That way it will stop the trolls and make people like you that are serious about sov (yeah right) worth it. You win the isk is yours back you lose the isk goes to the sov holder. Lets see your success rate then |
Var D'ovoli
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
29
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:00:40 -
[113] - Quote
According to this (see the bottom graph) there was more newborn characters created than ever before in eve just a few days after the B-R5RB Battle. The scale of the battle was great advertisement for the game as it reached major news networks. People that I work with that have no interest in the game were talking about it. It's really too bad that that kind of attention will never be directed at eve again. |
Galphii
Oberon Incorporated
Get Off My Lawn
325
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:01:03 -
[114] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:
ill say it again make fozziesov a mesh between structure and elink grind.
make it so you use the elink to reinforce the 1st time then you have to use elinks for the 1st capture event.
this then would cause the second reinforce which would then disable the shields and allow the structure to be shoot at.
so now you can put your capitals to work and attack the structure...
but even though the structure is vulnerable you can also choose to capture the annoms spread throughout the consultation.
This would be my preference - the freedom to choose how to capture and defend sov. Small gangs can go the anom route while others who choose do to so can still use the grunt of their big ships. The biggest problem with domsov was capital imbalances, but instead of addressing them a new system was built to exclude them entirely.
Rebalance caps, depower supercaps and allow for this blend of styles in aegis sov.
"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:02:57 -
[115] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:Allawa Phantom wrote:I Smell MOA Tears
Its really ironic how the entities who say this system is brilliant is the trolls who run around and entosis stuff then run at the first sight of danger We are not trolls, we fight CFC every day with great success and you know it. It's bad enough that the blob of garbage forces it's pvp style on so many players but the political bullshit going even into game design is a danger to Eve as a product.
You what mate?
We all have read Gen Eve's and MASSADEATH's alliance wide evemails, advising line members to avoid fighting while trolling with Entosis links. And we have not termed this trolling, it is your FCs that named it so and ordered you to avoid fights at all costs.
You are just embarrassing yourself with the fairy tale that is your forum post.
Now, no PvP in their right mind believes your inner propaganda about how MoA is proficient at PvP. If you notice, the reaction such claims have been getting in every community medium is mockery of MoA.
So, it is in your best interests to save yourself further embarrassment under this thread. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2268
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:08:04 -
[116] - Quote
Old farts still scared of 1v1s in small ships.
Bitter vets still think the once a year fight in 10% TiDi is the what people really want.
The vocal minority and their failed old ways still think they speak for the silent majority.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
842
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:08:13 -
[117] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:NO FOZZY !
NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
You are being told a fairy tale!
We have taken a couple of systems (and lost them again) but never due to a single 'trolling' ship.
Hmm, I don't see any of your Ihubs in those systems. Just a pretty flag that doesn't mean you actually control those systems.
"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves."
The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
|
Baku Saissore
Running with Dogs
Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:08:26 -
[118] - Quote
i cant believe the whining is still continuing!! You got what you wanted - f1 blobs are back!! with defense multipliers down to 24 minutes max , an attacking fleet doesn't have to worry too much about defenders - just bring a blob.
in particularly whats annoying is the whining re 4k speed limit. Have you never heard of a ceptor? .... you lazy F1 monkeys... |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
333
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:12:38 -
[119] - Quote
Baku Saissore wrote:i cant believe the whining is still continuing!! You got what you wanted - f1 blobs are back!! with defense multipliers down to 24 minutes max , an attacking fleet doesn't have to worry too much about defenders - just bring a blob.
in particularly whats annoying is the whining re 4k speed limit. Have you never heard of a ceptor? .... you lazy F1 monkeys...
Well, maybe if you actually played this game under sov scenario related PvP fights instead of struggling with your keyboard to spell English words out correctly here, you would have already known that the 4000 m/s is more than enough in any ship equipped with an Entosis link to simply align away from the sov module the moment a hostile pops up in local to break grid (or burn such an amount of distance from the sov structure that any attempt to catch will be futile) and reach complete safety.
|
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
SONS of BANE
384
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:12:56 -
[120] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:[quote=Allawa Phantom]
... the political bullshit going even into game design is a danger to Eve as a product.
/sign |
|
|
Karer II
Legion of xXDEATHXx Support
Legion of xXDEATHXx
463
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:13:45 -
[121] - Quote
This is incredible!
What is fix in mind of CCP? Generally make nothing and give trolls ability to reinforce even defended systems faster? Now I can buy garbage frigate for 2kk isks, fit entosis and reinforce structure in system with index 4 in 20 minutes? Two times faster with zero cost? So greate fixes.
Do not be surprised if on next excursion to Jita will arrive MUCH more players after this job by feedback. |
bootmanj
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:16:23 -
[122] - Quote
Fozzie sov = eves death |
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development
Sev3rance
112
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:16:32 -
[123] - Quote
RatKnight1 wrote:So, we can still fly trollceptors?
Yeah.
A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.
Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game.
I've only really experienced issues with catching CRUISERS running the t2 link (though chasing them away or breaking their lock is still easy). A short orbit range on an interceptor which can't warp out makes it very susceptible to, say, a Rapier with dual webs (don't need a point when the target is held on grid by their own module). I've ganked multiple inties and a dictor running t1 links with such a setup.
Now with a 4k m/s top speed limiting ability to simply kite away from other predators? Light drone swarm, anyone? |
Baku Saissore
Running with Dogs
Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:19:12 -
[124] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Baku Saissore wrote:i cant believe the whining is still continuing!! You got what you wanted - f1 blobs are back!! with defense multipliers down to 24 minutes max , an attacking fleet doesn't have to worry too much about defenders - just bring a blob.
in particularly whats annoying is the whining re 4k speed limit. Have you never heard of a ceptor? .... you lazy F1 monkeys... Well, maybe if you actually played this game under sov scenario related PvP fights instead of struggling with your keyboard to spell English words out correctly here, you would have already known that the 4000 m/s is more than enough in any ship equipped with an Entosis link to simply align away from the sov module the moment a hostile pops up in local to break grid (or burn such an amount of distance from the sov structure that any attempt to catch will be futile) and reach complete safety.
Instead of concentrating on my grammar learn how to play this game!!! Get a ceptor and undock instead of hiding behind an FC and press F1 and do check killboards before commenting nonsense. Even a basic ceptor can do over 4 k and even under current rules i caught over 20 entosis ceptors in the last month.
Seriously grow a pair or just quietly press F1 and leave the ones who actually like pvp to get on with it. |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2098
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:19:15 -
[125] - Quote
Galphii wrote:MeBiatch wrote:
ill say it again make fozziesov a mesh between structure and elink grind.
make it so you use the elink to reinforce the 1st time then you have to use elinks for the 1st capture event.
this then would cause the second reinforce which would then disable the shields and allow the structure to be shoot at.
so now you can put your capitals to work and attack the structure...
but even though the structure is vulnerable you can also choose to capture the annoms spread throughout the consultation.
This would be my preference - the freedom to choose how to capture and defend sov. Small gangs can go the anom route while others who choose do to so can still use the grunt of their big ships. The biggest problem with domsov was capital imbalances, but instead of addressing them a new system was built to exclude them entirely. Rebalance caps, depower supercaps and allow for this blend of styles in aegis sov.
take hero vs pl in catch with this version of sov... now every time pl would drop thier super cap blob hero would have been able to beat pl to the punch by wining the capture annoms.
This would have then forced pl to focus on sub cap doctrines which would have made them vulnerable over a constellation wide fight.
A counter to this could be a combined attack on the cfc by a noob friendly alliance and a supercapital heavy alliance.
lets say with the new aegis/dominion combined sov instead of pl/nc and hero fighting they decided to invade the cfc.
in theory they could pull off sub capital and capital dominance and put up a actual threat to the cfc...
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Baku Saissore
Running with Dogs
Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:21:08 -
[126] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:
Well, maybe if you actually played this game under sov scenario related PvP fights instead of struggling with your keyboard to spell English words out correctly here, you would have already known that the 4000 m/s is more than enough in any ship equipped with an Entosis link to simply align away from the sov module the moment a hostile pops up in local to break grid (or burn such an amount of distance from the sov structure that any attempt to catch will be futile) and reach complete safety.
Lol you havent undocked since May and think you know something about Fozzie? yeah... |
Zxyxcana
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:23:24 -
[127] - Quote
Ultima Online - Trammel/Felucca Patch
Dark Ages of Camelot - Trails of Atlantis Patch
World of Warcraft - Wrath of the Lich King Patch
Eve Online - Fozzie SOV
RIP
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2268
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:23:30 -
[128] - Quote
bootmanj wrote:Fozzie sov = eves death
Bit late to the party are we? Goons already killed eve and only radical change can save it.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Arthur Aihaken
Perkone
Caldari State
4593
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:25:06 -
[129] - Quote
The only real question I have is this: How does one get in on the next Jita riot?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Star Bellatrix
Ubiquitous Hurt
The WeHurt Initiative
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:28:12 -
[130] - Quote
RatKnight1 wrote:So, we can still fly trollceptors?
Yeah.
A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.
Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game.
You can go 5 km/s with a 6 million isk atron. |
|
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
336
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:28:18 -
[131] - Quote
Here are my thoughts about the set of 'tweaks' that Fozzie announced:
They are simply amazing.
They absolutely manage to touch and correct almost none of the issues that the majority of null players were pointing out very vocally.
Node reductions might be pointed out as a positive change, but the tweak on them is so light that is suspiciously looks like to me an attempt to damage control after the overwhelmingly negative feedback that has been addressed to Fozzie & the team.
With these levels of excellence at the inability to comprehend the basic demands of the null sov players, I can easily foresee EVE Online going F2P in short to medium term with the current trends of concurrent logins and subscription numbers rapidly bleeding out.
Well done Fozzie, now please do pen a dev blog about how you succeeded on placing the game on life support and prevented the death. Meanwhile, we'll be throwing soil on EVE's casket and saying our prayers in the grim cemetery of reality.
Reagalan made an excellent post about why your ideas and insistence on shoving a certain playstyle down the nullseccers collective throats is a bad idea. You might want to read that several times. |
Yen Thara
Trademarque
Alternate Allegiance
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:28:44 -
[132] - Quote
Allawa Phantom wrote:I Smell MOA Tears
Its really ironic how the entities who say this system is brilliant is the trolls who run around and entosis stuff then run at the first sight of danger
So what you're saying is that you successfully stopped them from taking your system because you showed up and the interceptors left. If all you have to do is show up to stop the ceptor from taking your space that should be pretty easy right? Sounds too me like ceptors aren't an issue, you being lazy and not wanting to show up for a troll is the issue. Sounds like a good strategy to me, send out a bunch of trolling ships until the entity stops showing up thinking you're trolling then taking their space because of their laziness. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:29:13 -
[133] - Quote
CCP please don't cater to gewn tears again. Some changes there are really toxic and gewnspired. Please reconsider. |
Trinity Windu
Dead Man Ops
Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:31:05 -
[134] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:
Well done Fozzie, now please do pen a dev blog about how you succeeded on placing the game on life support and prevented the death. Meanwhile, we'll be throwing soil on EVE's casket and saying our prayers in the grim cemetery of reality.
Reagalan made an excellent post about why your ideas and insistence on shoving a certain playstyle down the nullseccers collective throats is a bad idea. You might want to read that several times.
This |
Sadus
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:31:41 -
[135] - Quote
I could not agree with 95% of this more!
|
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Eternal Pretorian Alliance
164
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:33:02 -
[136] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Meanwhile, we'll be throwing soil on EVE's casket and saying our prayers in the grim cemetery of reality.
http://cdn.meme.am/instances2/500x/1446846.jpg
|
Assamita Enaka
SPANI
The Initiative.
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:35:17 -
[137] - Quote
Change the SOv because now need unodock to def the sov, really if you have a system use it, if you no use it, you no need the system and people can pick them, only cry because you now need play and do more than wait for the ping to use the capitals... very bad ccp, follow the crys never go good |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
336
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:35:50 -
[138] - Quote
Baku Saissore wrote:Alp Khan wrote:
Well, maybe if you actually played this game under sov scenario related PvP fights instead of struggling with your keyboard to spell English words out correctly here, you would have already known that the 4000 m/s is more than enough in any ship equipped with an Entosis link to simply align away from the sov module the moment a hostile pops up in local to break grid (or burn such an amount of distance from the sov structure that any attempt to catch will be futile) and reach complete safety.
Lol you havent undocked since May and think you know something about Fozzie? yeah...
Haven't, not havent.
I do own and keep subscribed more accounts than the min. number of minutes you need to spell a simple English word out correctly, so you will have to excuse me while I laugh at your reply. |
Wilhelm Knicklicht
Licence To Kill
Mercenary Coalition
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:36:44 -
[139] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end.
TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.
system working as intended.
|
Baku Saissore
Running with Dogs
Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:38:42 -
[140] - Quote
[/quote]
Lol you havent undocked since May and think you know something about Fozzie? yeah... [/quote]
Haven't, not havent.
I do own and keep subscribed more accounts than the min. number of minutes you need to spell a simple English word out correctly, so you will have to excuse me while I laugh at your reply.[/quote]
Just press F1, thats all you and your lot can do ... it's getting quite pathetic now |
|
|
Wulfy Johnson
NorCorp Security
80
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:40:48 -
[141] - Quote
6 more weeks of vacation.. See you later bois.. Good work lads at hq, but not good enough.. |
MrQuisno
Perkone
Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:42:35 -
[142] - Quote
More changes will take time .. American wasn't built overnight ... Any new features take time ... |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
338
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:42:41 -
[143] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended.
I suppose you will edit your post out when a bright crayon in your box points it out to you that Reagalan is not some "average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1" which, quite literally only exists in the collective imagination of the GRR GON crowd and instead is a bloc level FC that often deals with strategic fleets.
I will give you bonus points if you turn out to be some backwater wormholer or a high-sec salvager, because you do certainly demonstrate the prerequisite mental faculties for being either of the two. |
Arkady Romanov
Hole Violence
Whole Squid
599
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:44:01 -
[144] - Quote
I am curious about something.
Why has CCP decided that the minimum barrier to entry as a Sov holding entity is a 50 mill, T2 frigate?
Dominion sov was flawed. The investment required to be a player in the Sov game at that time was a massive super fleet, and the logistic acumen of a real life medium sized business. This was absolutely unsustainable and needed to change. I don't think too many people would disagree.
It did have some advantages however. Wars required commitment, both in time and assets. The wars and politics were unlike anything any other game has offered. They were in many ways, EVE's unique selling point. They were the narrative for the history of the game. They gave the game a prestige. That's gone now. You can obtain Sov using an unarmed ship.
To me, contesting sov should be a game of thrones. Sov wars should require commitment to initiate. 50 mill of T2 frigate is not a commitment. My corp, which doesn't live in null, should not have been able to take sov just for yuks.
Dominion had limited life left in it because there were only a finite number of entities that could reasonably contest it. It had to change, but I think it was a mistake to abandon everything learned from it. There is no sense of occasion in fozzie sov. There is no sense of loss when a system changes hands or accomplishment when it is taken. Somewhere, between the obscene commitment of dominion and the laughable execution of fozziesov must be a happy medium.
Bring back the game of thrones. Bring "epic" back.
Whole Squid: Get Inked.
|
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
189
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:47:15 -
[145] - Quote
Fozzie.
What if ppl STILL won't come to TAKE the Sov effectively? Because they won't. WHY in the blue hell would you expose yourself to trolling, and spend a LOT of isk too, if you can be the troll, and this for peanuts?
http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
This speaks for itself.
You still think your game is kept alive by 2 trolling small gang runners? Or 2-3 forum yellers? or they are just a convenable way to justify bad decisions/total lack of imagination?
....saw a lot of imbecility in corporate ranks. A great lot. But this batch beats them all. I suppose this is because they had ENOUGH things to destroy. And the corporation owners do not give a **** about it.
Once again: there is absolutely no real reasons to fight except the economical ones. Or trolling ones. EVERYBODY knows Sov is work, and will be actually worser after all this ****. THIS is a GAME, not a JOB.
WE all know you CCP boyz are out of ideeas. Presuming you had some back in time. Ok, HIRE someone able to fix the sandbox. It does cost? Stupidity does cost a lot. CCP lost already more than a good team of Devs does cost. It's already REALLY close to a point of no return, for this game. Every change is fun for exactly 3 days here, like the orthodox wonders. Hallelujah!
 |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
340
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:47:50 -
[146] - Quote
Baku Saissore wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Baku Saissore wrote:i cant believe the whining is still continuing!! You got what you wanted - f1 blobs are back!! with defense multipliers down to 24 minutes max , an attacking fleet doesn't have to worry too much about defenders - just bring a blob.
in particularly whats annoying is the whining re 4k speed limit. Have you never heard of a ceptor? .... you lazy F1 monkeys... Well, maybe if you actually played this game under sov scenario related PvP fights instead of struggling with your keyboard to spell English words out correctly here, you would have already known that the 4000 m/s is more than enough in any ship equipped with an Entosis link to simply align away from the sov module the moment a hostile pops up in local to break grid (or burn such an amount of distance from the sov structure that any attempt to catch will be futile) and reach complete safety. Instead of concentrating on my grammar learn how to play this game!!! Get a ceptor and undock instead of hiding behind an FC and press F1 and do check killboards before commenting nonsense. Even a basic ceptor can do over 4 k and even under current rules i caught over 20 entosis ceptors in the last month. Seriously grow a pair or just quietly press F1 and leave the ones who actually like pvp to get on with it.
And where are those mythical entosis trollceptors that were all successfully caught by the PvP rockstar and god Baku Saissore instead of blasting away to ultimate safety by aligning out the second they saw a hostile pop up in local?
If you are going to lie, at least spend some effort to do so and put some thought in it. |
Baku Saissore
Running with Dogs
Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:50:51 -
[147] - Quote
[/quote]
And where are those mythical entosis trollceptors that were all successfully caught by the PvP god Baku Saissore instead of blasting away to ultimate safety by aligning out the second they saw a hostile pop up in local?[/quote]
It seems your typing skills extend only as far as pressing F1 goes, so let me give you a helping hand.
https://zkillboard.com/character/94944579/solo/ |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Mercenary Coalition
1727
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:51:25 -
[148] - Quote
My Lap wrote:Reagalan wrote:I'm saying this as nicely as possible. Fozziesov is a broken and fundamentally flawed system. No amount of tweaking will ever make it work as well as either of the two previous sov systems.
...
The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system. Truer words are seldom spoken as this. I doubt Fozzie will take the time to comment on this but it would be nice.
Only if he comments by showing him a gif of spitting out a glass of milk from laughing so hysterically.
If you though Dominion was good or even "proven" you're playing a different game than the rest of us have been for the past 5 years.
Hero of the CSM
Alek the Kidnapper
"Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."
-Arydanika, Voices from the Void
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
189
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:56:41 -
[149] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. With vacation season winding down here in Iceland, we're fast approaching the first release since the Aegis Sovereignty deployment: Galatea on August 25th. Galatea will contain the first (and definitely not the last) set of updates to the sov capture system released in Aegis, thanks in large part to your excellent feedback and observations we've made of the first few weeks of the new system on Tranquility. This first set of adjustments is focused on the capture times and maximum number of Command Nodes, as well as some tweaks to the Entosis Link penalties itself. The first and most significant change in this release is that we are reducing the base capture time of Structure Command Nodes from 10 minutes to 4 minutes, and Station Services from 5 minutes to 4 minutes. This means the capture times for these structures will range from a minimum of 4 minutes (for defenders and when the multiplier is at its base of 1) to a maximum of 24 minutes (for attackers against a 6x multiplier structure). This change only applies to Command Nodes and Station Services, NOT to the initial reinforcement of a sov structure (which keep their current base capture time of 10 minutes).To help ensure that defenders maintain a robust but fair advantage, we are also starting the defending alliance off with 60% control in the overall event tug of war when nodes start spawning. This means that an uncontested defense will now require capture of 8 nodes at 4 minutes (plus warmup) a piece, down from 10x10 before. In total, the fastest possible defense would require 4 players and 12 minutes post-Galatea, compared to 5 players and 24 minutes pre-Galatea. To help reduce the clutter that builds up in lower value systems when capture events are left for extended periods of time uncontested, we are also reducing the cap on total nodes that can spawn per structure from 20 to 10. We are also reducing the spawn rate of randomly appearing extra nodes by approximately 50% (this second part only applies to the randomly spawning extra nodes, not the the nodes that spawn instantly when old ones are completed). We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty. We are also releasing the first batch of Sov UI little things, which CCP Punkturis and CCP Sharq sourced from your feedback in this thread. These changes include an overview of sov data in the constellation show-info window, direct access to the default vulnerability timer and a new region column in the sov dashboard and improved tooltips in the infrastructure hub UI. Punkturis is continuing to work on improving the sov UI and we encourage people to keep posting their requests in the little things thread. Finally this release also contains a number of bug fixes, some of which are quite visible (Alliance logos once again appearing in space on the TCU) and others which improve handling of rare edge cases (such as alliances disbanding mid-fight) and back-end code. The Galatea is just the beginning of our commitment to iterating and improving nullsec and sov. We are hard at work on the changing coming in future releases, including formal methods for dropping sov, the ability to turn IHub upgrades on and off, updates to the formula for calculating activity defense multipliers, new PVE experiences for sov nullsec and much more. Nullsec and Sov remain our focus here at Team Five 0 and we'll be continuing to update you on progress as we go forward. We are listening to your feedback and continuing to observe the results of our changes as we make them. These Galatea changes will also obviously not be the final changes to the capture mechanics themselves. We have some changes we know we want to make (like partially captured structures returning to defender control at a slow constant regeneration pace to reduce the need for "maintenance linking") and others that we don't want to rule out but that also need more investigation and internal/external discussion before making final decisions (such as ship restrictions on Entosis Links). Thanks to everyone who's been providing constructive feedback so far, we hope you'll continue. Thanks everyone, and good hunting!
YAY!!!! A whole fleet of 4 to capture Sov! Massive Multiplayer Game.. Officially Nerfed.. EVE Online Officially Minimal Multiplayer Online Game... A new Classification for the RPG Genre. At least I can stop bringing friends into the game now. Small corp is nuff to take sov, why bring more! Thanks Fozzie Sov... Taking the Massive out of Multiplayer since his start |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
341
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:56:53 -
[150] - Quote
Baku Saissore wrote:It seems your typing skills extend only as far as pressing F1 goes, so let me give you a helping hand.
Forgive me because it seems I made a grave mistake by assuming you could count properly. It is all very clear to me that you can't do that either, because there aren't "more than 20 entosis trollceptor killmails" on your KB as you have previously claimed. Please enlighten us on what other basic tasks you aren't able to conduct successfully.
Now that we have established without a doubt that you can't effectively count as well as being unable to spell out English words correctly, I would like you to take the helping hand you've kindly offered before and put it to certain other uses.
The best one would be using your fingers to help you count. If you use all your fingers on your hands in two sets, you'll be able to count up to a staggering high of 20.
You're welcome. |
|
|
Lincoln Fleet
Rokafeller Umbrella Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 01:57:45 -
[151] - Quote
A nice try, but you're not really fixing the true problems. Aegis sov creates a situation where the attacker can aggravate and disrupt the current sov holder with little-to-no risk, which not only weaponizes boredom but opens the door to trolling attacks that have no intention of actually taking part in the sov system. This massive source of annoyance and disruption makes the ownership of sov space more of a burden than a boon to those who truly want to take part in the system. The result is that sov alliances feel less like they own something meaningful and more like a sad carnival worker sitting on the break-away seat above a tank of water, getting dunked by every little snot-headed kid that has 25 cents and a taste for human suffering.
The lone entosis-fitted interceptor is a nearly unstoppable scourge. Even at 4km/s it is highly effective because of its size, agility and nullification, and its existence prevents the Aegis sov system from achieving its goals. Modifying the time that someone has to orbit the structure is also pointless, especially considering that one of the stated purposes of the new system is to reduce time spent shooting structures.
Instead, what if an increased system level meant that multiple entosis links were needed to attack a structure? If someone really wants to attack a sov system, at least make them bring a fleet. Not only does this give the defender a better chance to actually defend but it requires some basic coordination from the attackers, which (hopefully) would be enough of a barrier-to-entry to deter a large portion of the trolls whose only goal is to create boring, meaningless tasks for the owners. |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Mercenary Coalition
1727
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:01:51 -
[152] - Quote
The only thing proven about Dominion is that's been slowly but surely killing EVE's fun and subscriber count since launch.
Hero of the CSM
Alek the Kidnapper
"Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."
-Arydanika, Voices from the Void
|
Baku Saissore
Running with Dogs
Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:04:18 -
[153] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:And where are those mythical entosis trollceptors that were all successfully caught by the PvP god Baku Saissore instead of blasting away to ultimate safety by aligning out the second they saw a hostile pop up in local?
It seems your typing skills extend only as far as pressing F1 goes, so let me give you a helping hand.
https://zkillboard.com/character/94944579/solo/ [/quote]
Forgive me because it seems I made a grave mistake by assuming you could count properly. It is all very clear to me that you can't do that either, because there aren't "more than 20 entosis trollceptor killmails" on your KB as you have previously claimed. Please enlighten us on what other basic tasks you aren't able to conduct successfully.[/quote]
seriously it's getting pathetic now... you are unable to look through zkillboard and want me to prove something thats on there in black and white? :) I linked the solo killboard to help your F1 mind understand things better but it seems you cant master anything beyond a singular click or press of a button ( the button being F1 ofcourse).
a hint - there is more than one tab on that website, so dont be scared, click it and have a look. Make sure you dont press F1, i know it's hard but please try as it is likely you will learn something new about this game. if you follow my instructions. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew
The Night Crew Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:05:23 -
[154] - Quote
dancing ninja wrote:
I would still like to see some kind of spreading system index. If you max the index in your system the extra mining/ratting/sov should spread to a nearby system you control. Have it spread with a exponential loss so that it only goes 2-3 systems. It fixes the problem of trolls hitting the systems that you use often but cant safely rat/mine in because of location or low true sec.
If this helps sov holders to control 5 or 10 systems for every one they rat and mine in, then it is pretty much contrary to the whole point of recent changes, isn't it?
Marech. |
Amy Garzan
Northstar Cabal
Tactical Narcotics Team
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:05:27 -
[155] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended.
News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?
Think that over. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
103
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:06:17 -
[156] - Quote
I would like to have an honest answer on how under the new system a fight of over 500 people would take place? I am not talking over a POS I am talking about structures there will never be a massive fight in eve if the current system is kept as it is. |
Athryn Bellee
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:08:02 -
[157] - Quote
Are there any plans to the indefinitely long timers that the current system creates if no one shows up after a structure has been reinforced? There are currently timers for structures from July 27 still.
http://timerboard.net |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
341
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:09:56 -
[158] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Entosis active should reduce speed to ZERO. DOUBLE the mass. Reduce number of control nodes further, they are still AIDS. Also, this. With the new 'local' model in null and requisite defensive posture of entities to hold what they take, a much needed content-generating land-rush of new entrants won't happen until the elephant in the room of 72% calling hisec home is addressed substantively It's time. F
Good suggestions overall. Would stop trolling and ensure some amount of actual commitment to the sov events. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
103
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:11:10 -
[159] - Quote
Marech Bhayanaka wrote:dancing ninja wrote:
I would still like to see some kind of spreading system index. If you max the index in your system the extra mining/ratting/sov should spread to a nearby system you control. Have it spread with a exponential loss so that it only goes 2-3 systems. It fixes the problem of trolls hitting the systems that you use often but cant safely rat/mine in because of location or low true sec.
If this helps sov holders to control 5 or 10 systems for every one they rat and mine in, then it is pretty much contrary to the whole point of recent changes, isn't it? Marech.
While I agree with what you are saying the idea would also cause conflict as if the influence from your neighbors next door were effecting your system on a daily basis then there might be fights that pop up to bring it back down.
Imagine if you are living next to a blue neighbor that lives the next system from you but they are using their system more then you are so they start to turn of features of your IHUB or get a portion of the taxes generated by your system. After a time you are going to get fed up and either move or do something to effect the neighboring system to bring it back down to a level where it is not cutting into your "profit" |
Arkady Romanov
Hole Violence
Whole Squid
606
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:11:14 -
[160] - Quote
Amy Garzan wrote:News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?
Think that over.
Why, the unwashed masses of pubbies, free from the threat of goon imperialism will bubble out of highsec in their officer fit incursion ships to take up all the space left behind. Not only that, they'll invite all of their friends to join the game and mine and rat their little pigeon brains out with them! It'll save EVE!
Whole Squid: Get Inked.
|
|
|
Star Bellatrix
Ubiquitous Hurt
The WeHurt Initiative
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:14:15 -
[161] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:I would like to have an honest answer on how under the new system a fight of over 500 people would take place? I am not talking over a POS I am talking about structures there will never be a massive fight in eve if the current system is kept as it is.
The problem with people fighting for space has nothing to do with the mechanics.
the mechanics are only there to judge who actually owns the system (or the grid).
Conflict drivers are a different issue that ccp needs to address at some point. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
343
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:15:53 -
[162] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners.
You mean you will send out in game evemails to your pilots, instructing them to just sov troll and avoid fights while doing entosis runs? I'm looking forward to read your posts when the ability to avoid fights on sov offensives is curbstomped.
Not to mention your own forum posts advising to avoid entosis fights at all in MoA forums, but hey, please do continue to act and pretend as if MoA is able to do actual PvP here, it's our pride and joy and we actually do enjoy good comedy.
(We also don't use ratting ships and industrials as our strategic PvP doctrines, so you will find that you are unable to function just as you weren't able to before and get wiped out of the grid -that is if you aren't able to run away the moment your scout tells you about an incoming Goon fleet several jumps away -) |
Reagalan
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
166
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:16:17 -
[163] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:Dominion sov was flawed. The investment required to be a player in the Sov game at that time was a massive super fleet.....
This is mostly true, and was a major issue in Dominion, however, multiple exceptions exist.
A great many entities were able to hold space in Dominion sov without the use of supercaps, or even regular caps. They held their space by leveraging comparative advantages or by following strategies other than simple "shooting things". This gave the system very deep and emergent gameplay.
Diplomacy was one of the largest factors. Prior to the rise of the rental empire, the majority of smaller entities got their foot in the door by joining up with established entities, or forming coalitions to challenge established powers. The inherent need to organize such campaigns meant those who put in the effort would reap the rewards. Examples exist throughout the Dominion period. Intrepid Crossing took and held Cobalt Edge due to deals with the old DRF. Parallels exist between the "guests" of the old Northern Coalition and many members of the earlier incarnations of N3. TEST originally was granted Fountain via a diplomatic exchange. Provibloc holds it's space via diplomatic means. The Imperium has always put a high value of diplomacy. Even BRAVE was able to take Catch due to diplomatic relations with N3.
The problems came about because of the rise of the rental empire. Rental empires, however, were a symptom of a much deeper problem. Rental empires did run counter to diplomacy, and worked actively against the ability of smaller entities to leverage diplomatic means to gain sov. Why would you treat with these smaller entities when you can just force them into your rental empire?
Rental empires, however, require an overwhelming military advantage to work. The owners of the space must be able to easily crush any possible opposition that might come against it, without losing too much in the war to make holding and renting the space unprofitable.
This is where the issue comes from. The game provided the means by which an entity could easily make such a war happen. Without these means, rental empires would never have become a thing.
These means, the issue, that has plagued Eve since 2009, has been, and remains, the overwhelming concentration of wealth and power in the form of supercarriers and titans.
Every single issue with Dominion sov, the stagnation, the reliance on supercaps, the rental empires, "power projecion", were all symptoms of the underlying cause: the overwhelming wealth and power concentration in the form of supercaps and titans.
Had this issue been tackled in November 2014, instead of the red-herring problems of "power projection" and the sov system, we would not be in the scenario we are today. The massive collateral damage of both Fatigue and Fozziesov would never had occurred. |
MrQuisno
Perkone
Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:28:07 -
[164] - Quote
they need to remove the x5 off the capitals.. why ? they can't get remote repairs and they are looking for a fight ...
I don't see how this would be unfair here.... if they wanted to do it now they could just takes more time? |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
342
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:29:52 -
[165] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.
Ah yes. Where goons reigned supreme with the Blob or GTFO tactics on, well on everything. How about no. |
Arkady Romanov
Hole Violence
Whole Squid
611
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:37:21 -
[166] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system. Ah yes. Where goons reigned supreme with the Blob or GTFO tactics on, well on everything. How about no.
In case you haven't noticed; we still do.
Whole Squid: Get Inked.
|
Tuzy Naranek
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:37:28 -
[167] - Quote
Zxyxcana wrote:Ultima Online - Trammel/Felucca Patch
Dark Ages of Camelot - Trails of Atlantis Patch
World of Warcraft - Wrath of the Lich King Patch
Eve Online - Fozzie SOV
RIP
Star Wars Galaxies - New Game Enhancements Patch |
Wilhelm Knicklicht
Licence To Kill
Mercenary Coalition
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:39:27 -
[168] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended. I suppose you will edit your post out when a brighter crayon in the box you are in points it out to you that Reagalan is not some "average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1" I will give you bonus points if you turn out to be some backwater PvE wormholer or a high-sec Noctis salvager, because you do certainly demonstrate the prerequisite mental faculties for being either of the two.
no need to get your feathers in a ruffle, mr. bloc level fc. i'm not even talking about you. i'm merely paraphrasing what you wrote yourself about *the* average fleet member, which i assume meant *your* average fleet member.
so if you think that the way to improve eve is to *not* install a system that incentivizes individual, competent piloting and decision-making, you haven't been paying attention.
as to my mental faculties, thanks for the vote of confidence regarding wormhole pve. not a bad playstyle compared to sitting in a fleet twiddling thumbs and watching the blinkenlights.
|
Tyrone Cashmoney
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
109
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:48:05 -
[169] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:no need to get your feathers in a ruffle, mr. bloc level fc. i'm not even talking about you. i'm merely paraphrasing what you wrote yourself about *the* average fleet member, which i assume meant *your* average fleet member.
That isn't the block level FC you are replying to. Reagalan is the bloc level FC.
|
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Prolapse.
2703
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:51:51 -
[170] - Quote
What does a 4km/s speed limit on atrollceptor actually mean?
You can ECM the ceptor using a 16M ISk Dragoon and break his lock, scuppering his warm-up timer.
Quote:[Dragoon, test]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
5MN Microwarpdrive II
Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Drone Link Augmentor II
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Hornet EC-300 x 5
So, yeah, the counter to a trollceptor is a trolldessie. What a great place for the game of sov warfare to devolve to - ECM drone attacks on small ships to defend against borefare with alts.
I have no idea why anyone would get involved in this crap. There's no need to control a grid to have a fight and win a contest - just keep poking day after day after day, eventually people will get sick of having to defend even the slimmest of windows, and you will win.
Again, just because CCP seems dumb:
- no fitting Entosis links on ceptors or anything with nullification
- bring back *some* EHP
- read my comments on the Citadel devblog thread; your Citadel system in illogical and flawed
I would rather see, as suggested above, sov laser crap spawn ten nodes with 100K-1M EHP each, that you had to shoot through. No one can do one million EHP in 24 minutes using a ceptor - you'd have to bring actual ships. Sure, you'll have gangs of catalysts orbiting stupid capture beacons and doing 650 DPS each. But they can be bombed, shot, bubbled, whatever. people would have to commit to a fight and bring a ship with a gun. This? This is stupid borefare.
I regret not cancelling my autorenewal.
Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob
We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
|
|
Peronec
Black Core Federation
Black Core Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:51:51 -
[171] - Quote
Good job CCP. We don't have to spend 90 minutes fixing our reinforcement timers and we can easly catch troll cepters now. *high-five* total win now! :D
I still think the entosis link should just disable prop mods. *shruggs* |
Tuzy Naranek
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:53:44 -
[172] - Quote
Remove interdiction nullification from Interceptors. Just give it up Fozzie. Admit you were wrong and make the change. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2271
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 02:54:55 -
[173] - Quote
Amy Garzan wrote:
News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?
Think that over.
I look forward to the 20% drop in PLEX prices and Mittens at the unemployment office. Now here's some warm milk and a cookies for you.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14212
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:01:05 -
[174] - Quote
I just realized what the problem is. 
Since the T20 scandal, CCP employees have been forbidden to join sov holding alliances, right? So, as far as sov is concerned, they literally don't play their own game, and they haven't for years.
Anyway, as to the changes themselves. I'm reminded of that scene in Aladdin, where the genie keeps snapping his fingers and changing the monkey into a huge variety of animals, because he doesn't actually know what he wants.
"not enough... *snap* still not enough! *snap snap snap snap*..."
This won't be the last change, at least hopefully it won't be, because it absolutely does nothing to address the underlying problem with the entosis system.
"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.
|
PopplerRo
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:01:15 -
[175] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:What does a 4km/s speed limit on atrollceptor actually mean? You can ECM the ceptor using a 16M ISk Dragoon and break his lock, scuppering his warm-up timer. Quote:[Dragoon, test]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
5MN Microwarpdrive II
Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Drone Link Augmentor II
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Hornet EC-300 x 5
..
while the idea is sound that fit is plain stupid.
1.You have no active ecm mod, and those rigs don't work on the drones.
2. The drones are too slow to even catch up to jam the target.
For the cost just use a griffin, or an instawarp 'ceptor with active jams in the mids. Land, jam, warp out.
Troll 'ceptors with even more cancerous ones |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1078
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:09:29 -
[176] - Quote
MrQuisno wrote:they need to remove the x5 off the capitals.. why ? they can't get remote repairs and they are looking for a fight
So we could do all the entosising with titans and have remote-rep fleets available to jump in from a central location while they turn off their 2-minute cycling T2 link?
Really, the multiplier on caps is a good thing. |
JetStream Drenard
Black Fox Marauders
Spaceship Bebop
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:22:10 -
[177] - Quote
Maybe CCP should just take away sovereignty altogether. Just saying. They are gonna ***** no matter what, while they play nullsec farmville and follow the Imperium code of warfare.
You know what would be hilarious? Make their moons run out of goo and have the resource randomly respawn on a different moon somewhere else. Then set true sec status to fluctuate based on ratting behavior and anoms spawn based upon that instead of some silly upgrade. Less ratting = lower trusec/better anoms and vice versa. Watch them scramble around the map trying to stay ahead of the competition.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:27:30 -
[178] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:Maybe CCP should just take away sovereignty altogether. Just saying. They are gonna ***** no matter what, while they play nullsec farmville and follow the Imperium code of warfare.
You know what would be hilarious? Make their moons run out of goo and have the resource randomly respawn on a different moon somewhere else. Then set true sec status to fluctuate based on ratting behavior and anoms spawn based upon that instead of some silly upgrade. Less ratting = lower trusec/better anoms and vice versa. Watch them scramble around the map trying to stay ahead of the competition.
Sensors have detected a person who has never probed moons before.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:28:31 -
[179] - Quote
Also, if you think the majority of our income is from moongoo in TYOOL 2015, you're dreaming.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
55
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:29:17 -
[180] - Quote
Not the changes I expected for first iteration, but I'll take it. I'm glad that the number of nodes have been reduced, should help with clearing out the various dead pockets of sov. Before it took way too much of a time commitment to take down a single no-name abandoned system in ass-crack Delve. I'm looking forward to testing it out, should be less of a hassle. The speed cap was a bit of a surprise to be honest; however, I generally like the concept. I think 4k may still be a BIT too fast, but I'm willing to give it a chance. All in all, a solid first step... let's see where it leads us.
|
|
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:29:58 -
[181] - Quote
Querns wrote:JetStream Drenard wrote:Maybe CCP should just take away sovereignty altogether. Just saying. They are gonna ***** no matter what, while they play nullsec farmville and follow the Imperium code of warfare.
You know what would be hilarious? Make their moons run out of goo and have the resource randomly respawn on a different moon somewhere else. Then set true sec status to fluctuate based on ratting behavior and anoms spawn based upon that instead of some silly upgrade. Less ratting = lower trusec/better anoms and vice versa. Watch them scramble around the map trying to stay ahead of the competition.
Sensors have detected a person who has never probed moons before.
Probing moons is more fun and rewarding than fozzie sov. |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
55
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:30:23 -
[182] - Quote
Querns wrote:JetStream Drenard wrote:Maybe CCP should just take away sovereignty altogether. Just saying. They are gonna ***** no matter what, while they play nullsec farmville and follow the Imperium code of warfare.
You know what would be hilarious? Make their moons run out of goo and have the resource randomly respawn on a different moon somewhere else. Then set true sec status to fluctuate based on ratting behavior and anoms spawn based upon that instead of some silly upgrade. Less ratting = lower trusec/better anoms and vice versa. Watch them scramble around the map trying to stay ahead of the competition.
Sensors have detected a person who has never probed moons before.
Probing moons is a terrible experience. I've done a few regions, not fun at all.  |
Alundil
Isogen 5
999
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:31:51 -
[183] - Quote
PopplerRo wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:What does a 4km/s speed limit on atrollceptor actually mean? You can ECM the ceptor using a 16M ISk Dragoon and break his lock, scuppering his warm-up timer. Quote:[Dragoon, test]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
5MN Microwarpdrive II
Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Drone Link Augmentor II
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Hornet EC-300 x 5
.. while the idea is sound that fit is plain stupid. 1.You have no active ecm mod, and those rigs don't work on the drones. 2. The drones are too slow to even catch up to jam the target. For the cost just use a griffin, or an instawarp 'ceptor with active jams in the mids. Land, jam, warp out. Troll 'ceptors with even more cancerous ones
Couple points on your points:
1. The Dragoon is a drone dessie. It needs no ECM mods. The rigs aren't there to affect the drones, they allow the Dragoon to target out to 124km.
2. EC-300 drones on the Dragoon can travel up to 5k/s so more than fast enough to catch the magicsovwandingceptors after Galatea.
As an aside - the b|tching and moaning taking place in the first 9 pages is already increasing the risk of cardiovascular disease in the playerbase.
Ease up folks. Ease up. This set of changes isn't the "sky is falling" moment either. FFS.
I'm right behind you
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:34:52 -
[184] - Quote
Zxyxcana wrote:Ultima Online - Trammel/Felucca Patch
Dark Ages of Camelot - Trails of Atlantis Patch
World of Warcraft - Wrath of the Lich King Patch
Eve Online - Fozzie SOV
RIP
TheMittani.com - Site Design Patch
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Inslander Wessette
Killers of Paranoid Souls
Universal Paranoia Alliance
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:35:32 -
[185] - Quote
Why are we removing mass addition ?
Keep both addition of mass and 4 k speed limit . |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:43:08 -
[186] - Quote
Inslander Wessette wrote:Why are we removing mass addition ?
Keep both addition of mass and 4 k speed limit .
Agreed -- it was technically possible, with the mass addition, to maybe catch an interceptor. Maybe. If you live in England, have a crapton of scan res, and snort a big ol' line of coke as they jump in. Now interceptors can run around with their <2s align fits and an online entosis link.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
189
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:43:36 -
[187] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:Maybe CCP should just take away sovereignty altogether. Just saying. They are gonna ***** no matter what, while they play nullsec farmville and follow the Imperium code of warfare.
You know what would be hilarious? Make their moons run out of goo and have the resource randomly respawn on a different moon somewhere else. Then set true sec status to fluctuate based on ratting behavior and anoms spawn based upon that instead of some silly upgrade. Less ratting = lower trusec/better anoms and vice versa. Watch them scramble around the map trying to stay ahead of the competition.
Yup, they could do that. And exactly this would happen. Till they would quit. Then you and some other useless imbeciles would have to quit too, because if there are no ratters left, and there's no easy prey for you, handed over by CCP by mechanics.
There's some real pvp-ers in this game. Saw noone of them whinning about invincible mechanics being removed. About risk. About no ****. Ratters find content. Others rely on CCP to offer them content by exposing others. Hilarious, but who looks more stupid? |
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise
105
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:45:01 -
[188] - Quote
I don't have plans for SOV expansion anytime soon, but these look good for now.
I can't say your release time of some game aspects is the best, but keep up the hard work.
xoxo
Amarisen Gream
|
MukkBarovian
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Legion
42
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:48:39 -
[189] - Quote
Decent changes. 6/10. Would rate higher if you took the situation more seriously. Slow and steady won't win the race when the clock is ticking its final beats.
|
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
76
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:50:54 -
[190] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system. And here I thought it was really encouraging that the biggest problems Team Five-0 figured they had to address to tweak the new Sov system weren't even problems.
Even all the stuff (in your rather wall-of-text rant) is either untrue, or not a problem.
You talk Sov not encouraging bigger fights, but earlier in the same post talk about chasing off interceptors with larger forces.
You complain about empire size based on military pressure, as if Sov doesn't do that right now.
Or complaining about imaginary meta behind node capture, seemingly just annoyed that .... there is a preferable strategy?
Or, and I can't believe you put this in an actual post, complaining that Sov sucks because it's possible to regain systems.
|
|
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
2566
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:54:03 -
[191] - Quote
I'd like to see something done about junk sovereignty. With the new Entosis system, it will certainly be changing hands now, but I'd like to see it possible to lose unused sovereignty even without player intervention. There's not enough life in nullsec to have sovereignty everywhere, there should be areas with just plain unclaimed space.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Wilhelm Knicklicht
Licence To Kill
Mercenary Coalition
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:54:08 -
[192] - Quote
Amy Garzan wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended. News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills? Think that over.
the bills will be picked up by the next generation of new players who will actually keep playing the game because there's actually fun to be had even without owning titans. next question. |
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
189
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 03:59:04 -
[193] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Amy Garzan wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended. News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills? Think that over. the bills will be picked up by the next generation of new players who will actually keep playing the game because there's actually fun to be had even without owning titans. next question.
http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
...this can be seen by the enormous number of new accounts created, isn't it? (presuming i won't consider that there's a 8/2 ratio of alts/new players in that statistic ;) ) |
Wilhelm Knicklicht
Licence To Kill
Mercenary Coalition
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:01:12 -
[194] - Quote
MukkBarovian wrote:Decent changes. 6/10. Would rate higher if you took the situation more seriously. Slow and steady won't win the race when the clock is ticking its final beats.
confirm we're all doomed. eve is kill. it's been kill since 2006, but this time it's for real. really.
***apologies for the salt. it's a salty day. you're still overdoing it, though.*** |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:03:00 -
[195] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:Dominion sov was flawed. The investment required to be a player in the Sov game at that time was a massive super fleet.....
The problems came about because of the rise of the rental empire. Rental empires, however, were a symptom of a much deeper problem. Rental empires did run counter to diplomacy, and worked actively against the ability of smaller entities to leverage diplomatic means to gain sov. Why would you treat with these smaller entities when you can just force them into your rental empire? Rental empires, however, require an overwhelming military advantage to work. The owners of the space must be able to easily crush any possible opposition that might come against it, without losing too much in the war to make holding and renting the space unprofitable.This is where the issue comes from. The game provided the means by which an entity could easily make such a war happen. Without these means, rental empires would never have become a thing. These means, the issue, that has plagued Eve since 2009, has been, and remains, the overwhelming concentration of wealth and power in the form of supercarriers and titans. Every single issue with Dominion sov, the stagnation, the reliance on supercaps, the rental empires, "power projecion", were all symptoms of the underlying cause: the overwhelming wealth and power concentration in the form of supercaps and titans. Had this issue been tackled in November 2014, instead of the red-herring problems of "power projection" and the sov system, we would not be in the scenario we are today. The massive collateral damage of both Fatigue and Fozziesov would never had occurred.
I'm bad with big speeches but here goes...
I like how your spinning your narrative directly blaming the N3 coalition for the stagnation of Dominion Sov. It was not the 40k+ coalition on the other side of the walls fault at all. In reality, the N3 coalition was a smaller, much less organized group than The Imperium (CFC). They didn't have the income sources of moons, taxes, etc.. so they leveraged what they had plenty of, which was sov. This allowed N3 to be more competitive against its much larger rival, though it could never truly win a extended campaign against the Imps due to the N+1 complex that Dominion sov drove.
Anyways... we have plenty of reddit discussions, so you know I generally don't agree with much of what you say. I utterly respect you opinions, but I think the mega-coalition play style of mega-blobs and abusing mechanics to bore/crush their opponents is more flawed than most anything that fozzie sov has rolled out. Sure the system isn't perfect, but I'm willing to give it a real shot... I believe you mega-coalition is living in the past, a overly large collection of old bitter vets that doesn't want to evolve because they are afraid of what the future has in store. The most fun way to play the game now isn't to hide by a giant blue list, but to live in smaller groups, taking the good fight to your borders and slaying your foes. The new big fights are more managble and generally more enjoyable for the people involved (see below) The utterly unfun play style of 2k vs 2k in 10 percent tidi is gone, and a large portion of the community happy about it, except for the one group that can still swing those ridiculously insane numbers!
Just look at Catch, or Insmother, or Immensea. Fozzie haters may try to ignore it, but there is plenty of quality content going on. Amazing pitch battles that have plenty of loss and enjoyment for BOTH sides (using battleships!!!). Just the other day my bros over at GCLUB had a great fight against Imperium foes INIT and Razor. Excellent fight that revolved around defending a station timer in Northern Immensea. Hell, Tri is fighting RED for various moon and land resources... each battle costing billions of isk and using hundreds of pilots. As we have discussed, I understand that this isn't the kind of content you crave... but with the system that is in place now and the political environment that has evolved since the dismantling of N3 by your own hands, mega-collation warfare is now a thing of the past and your group needs to accept that. Huge groups that despise you and want to go after the assets of a mega-coalition that wants to destroy you using every tool in their arsenal, inside and out of the game is NOT FUN and is utterly bull that it existed in the first place.
In the end of that day, my point is perhaps give it a shot? Try some crazy things, maybe you'll end up liking the game a whole lot more. After all... isn't that what Endie wanted? To ultimately shrink the last great empire and to have top quality content (content = large battles) in great North? |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:04:51 -
[196] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:Fozzie. What if ppl STILL won't come to TAKE the Sov effectively? Because they won't. WHY in the blue hell would you expose yourself to trolling, and spend a LOT of isk too, if you can be the troll, and this for peanuts? http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
This speaks for itself. You still think your game is kept alive by 2 trolling small gang runners? Or 2-3 forum yellers? or they are just a convenable way to justify bad decisions/total lack of imagination? ....saw a lot of imbecility in corporate ranks. A great lot. But this batch beats them all. I suppose this is because they had ENOUGH things to destroy. And the corporation owners do not give a **** about it. Once again: there is absolutely no real reasons to fight except the economical ones. Or trolling ones. EVERYBODY knows Sov is work, and will be actually worser after all this ****. THIS is a GAME, not a JOB. WE all know you CCP boyz are out of ideeas. Presuming you had some back in time. Ok, HIRE someone able to fix the sandbox. It does cost? Stupidity does cost a lot. CCP lost already more than a good team of Devs does cost. It's already REALLY close to a point of no return, for this game. Every change is fun for exactly 3 days here, like the orthodox wonders. Hallelujah!
This is really bad posting, but I have to say it: Delicious subgewn tears.
Less bot/multicast accs being bad? No, except if you're gewn, then yes.
If holding sov makes you cry, you should not hold sov. Fairly obvious, unless your density is in "gewn or worse" range.
If you think the troll has it so nice, why aren't you trolling yet?
If a gewn/subgewn quits, good riddance.
Can I have your stuff? |
Kaal Redrum
Calamitous-Intent
Feign Disorder
45
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:07:18 -
[197] - Quote
MukkBarovian wrote:Decent changes. 6/10. Would rate higher if you took the situation more seriously. Slow and steady won't win the race when the clock is ticking its final beats.
Oh Mukk, you eloquent pirate you. Constructive and positive as always!
Good changes Fozzie. CCP genuinely now needs to answer the question - 'Why'
- Why should an alliance hold Sov in a system. It's obvious for the first system, which as your Capital is easy to increase ADM of, easy for sov alliances to use/defend/live-in (relatively). Why should anyone own the next system?
- Why should an alliance defend Sov, again defending your capital/heavily used/station systems is somewhat clear, why the edge systems?
- Why should an alliance Attack another's sov system. Again, attacking a capital/heavily used/station system is somewhat clear, why should we bother about attacking the majority of unused space that fills nullsec.
The number of unclaimed systems, undefended nodes, 50% 'campaigns' no one is bothering to contest, this data should be easily available and point to a core problem - the reason to own/defend/invade sov isn't strong and clear enough.
Personally speaking, CCP needs to adhere to the core principle of 'the owner of the land, gets the bounty off the land', and that just isn't true currently. Moon income, PI income along with the ratting/mining/industrial income needs to be coupled to Sov. Do that and give people a reason to want to own x+1 systems, and you will create content for many more.
Something like benefits for holding a Constellation, needs to be explored. Both carrot and stick. 7 years of playing eve and I've never bothered about the constellation. With node battles you made constellations very intrinsic to the game of sov. Take it further. Something like the board game Risk. You need a reason to conquer, Attack and defend a system/territory - here it is. Constellations. |
Pancocco
Honestly We didnt know
Unsettled.
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:07:39 -
[198] - Quote
Fozzie, you should have reintroduced everyone to the daredevil and explained how easily it catches a trollceptor.
On a serious matter this kinda removes legit speed doctrines from being a thing in entosis fights |
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
189
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:08:57 -
[199] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:I like how your spinning your narrative hear to directly blame the whole N3 coalition for the problems of Dominion Sov. It was the 40k+ coalition on the other side of the walls fault at all. In reality, the N3 coalition was a smaller, much less organized group that The Imperium (CFC). They didn't have the income sources of moons, taxes, etc.. so they leverage what they had plenty of, which was systems. This allowed N3 to be more competitive against its much larger rival, though it could never truly win a extended campaign against the Imps due to the N+1 complex that Dominion sov drove. You and I have plenty of reddit discussions, so you know I generally don't agree with much of what you say. I utterly respect you opinions, but I think the mega-coalition play style of mega-blobs and abusing mechanics to bore/crush their opponents is more flawed than most anything that fozzie sov has rolled out. Sure the system isn't perfect, but I'm willing to give it a real shot... I believe you mega-coalition is living in the past, a overly large collection of old bitter vets that doesn't want to evolve because they are afraid of what the future has in store. The most fun way to play the game now isn't to hide by a giant blue list, but to live in smaller groups, taking the good fight to your borders and slaying your foes. The new big fights are more managble and generally more enjoyable for the people involved (see below) The utterly unfun play style of 2k vs 2k in 10 percent tidi is gone, and a large portion of the community happy about it, except for the one group that can still swing those ridiculously insane numbers! Just look at Catch, or Insmother, or Immensea. Fozzie haters may try to ignore it, but there is plenty of quality content going on. Amazing pitch battles that have plenty of loss and enjoyment for BOTH sides (using battleships!!!). Just the other day my bros over at GCLUB had a great fight against Imperium foes INIT and Razor. Excellent fight that revolved around defending a station timer in Northern Immensea. Hell, Tri is fighting RED for various moon and land resources... each battle costing billions of isk and using hundreds of pilots. As we have discussed, I understand that this isn't the kind of content you crave... but with the system that is in place now and the political environment that has evolved since the dismantling of N3 by your own hands, mega-collation warfare is now a thing of the past and your group needs to accept that. Huge groups that despise you and want to go after the assets of a mega-coalition that wants to destroy you using every tool in their arsenal, inside and out of the game is NOT FUN and is utterly bull that it existed in the first place. In the end of that day, my point is perhaps give it a shot? Try some crazy things, maybe you'll end up liking the game a whole lot more. After all... isn't that what Endie wanted? To ultimately shrink the last great empire and to have top quality content (content = large battles) in great North?
Reasonable. |
Siaka Stevens
I'm Fine and You
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:09:39 -
[200] - Quote
Here are my thoughts.
What I feel could have been perhaps a better change was tweaking fitting requirements then giving role bonuses reducing fitting to certain ships.
For example, make the Entosis Link I require 2000 PG and 32 CPU with Entosis Link II requiring 2250 PG and 40 CPU. So, this would easily fit on a battleship.
For battlecruisers/command ships you get a 91.25% PG requirement reduction and a 50% CPU requirement reduction reduction, making it fit pretty easily, though you may have to sacrifice some offensive capability.
To give some love to lower SP/less wealthy groups and Assault Frigates, AFs would get a 99.6% reduction in PG and a 75% reduction in CPU to make them fit on those. Though it would be a bit of a pain to catch 3.4km/s+ jaguars/wolfs their non-nullifiedness helps a bit.
(yes I went off of neut fitting requirements for this example - I just thought of it and thought neuts would be a good comparison.) |
|
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:09:51 -
[201] - Quote
Pancocco wrote:Fozzie, you should have reintroduced everyone to the daredevil and explained how easily it catches a trollceptor.
On a serious matter this kinda removes legit speed doctrines from being a thing in entosis fights
Nah, 4k is plenty to make speed kite doctrines still work. Just keep a bit closer to the entostis bait.  |
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
189
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:11:13 -
[202] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:OldWolf69 wrote:Fozzie. What if ppl STILL won't come to TAKE the Sov effectively? Because they won't. WHY in the blue hell would you expose yourself to trolling, and spend a LOT of isk too, if you can be the troll, and this for peanuts? http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
This speaks for itself. You still think your game is kept alive by 2 trolling small gang runners? Or 2-3 forum yellers? or they are just a convenable way to justify bad decisions/total lack of imagination? ....saw a lot of imbecility in corporate ranks. A great lot. But this batch beats them all. I suppose this is because they had ENOUGH things to destroy. And the corporation owners do not give a **** about it. Once again: there is absolutely no real reasons to fight except the economical ones. Or trolling ones. EVERYBODY knows Sov is work, and will be actually worser after all this ****. THIS is a GAME, not a JOB. WE all know you CCP boyz are out of ideeas. Presuming you had some back in time. Ok, HIRE someone able to fix the sandbox. It does cost? Stupidity does cost a lot. CCP lost already more than a good team of Devs does cost. It's already REALLY close to a point of no return, for this game. Every change is fun for exactly 3 days here, like the orthodox wonders. Hallelujah! This is really bad posting, but I have to say it: Delicious subgewn tears. Less bot/multicast accs being bad? No, except if you're gewn, then yes. If holding sov makes you cry, you should not hold sov. Fairly obvious, unless your density is in "gewn or worse" range. If you think the troll has it so nice, why aren't you trolling yet? If a gewn/subgewn quits, good riddance. Can I have your stuff?
Actually, i don't ratt or bot. Or PvE. And yes, maybe you can BUY my stuff.
Ooooops, can't afford it? See, there's where the real tears are.
|
Kaal Redrum
Calamitous-Intent
Feign Disorder
45
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:12:26 -
[203] - Quote
Pancocco wrote:On a serious matter this kinda removes legit speed doctrines from being a thing in entosis fights
Please show me your 'doctrine' that does over 4kms. You meant a swarm of **** fit trollcepters/other frigs, didn't you? :D |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:17:39 -
[204] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:OldWolf69 wrote:Fozzie. What if ppl STILL won't come to TAKE the Sov effectively? Because they won't. WHY in the blue hell would you expose yourself to trolling, and spend a LOT of isk too, if you can be the troll, and this for peanuts? http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
This speaks for itself. You still think your game is kept alive by 2 trolling small gang runners? Or 2-3 forum yellers? or they are just a convenable way to justify bad decisions/total lack of imagination? ....saw a lot of imbecility in corporate ranks. A great lot. But this batch beats them all. I suppose this is because they had ENOUGH things to destroy. And the corporation owners do not give a **** about it. Once again: there is absolutely no real reasons to fight except the economical ones. Or trolling ones. EVERYBODY knows Sov is work, and will be actually worser after all this ****. THIS is a GAME, not a JOB. WE all know you CCP boyz are out of ideeas. Presuming you had some back in time. Ok, HIRE someone able to fix the sandbox. It does cost? Stupidity does cost a lot. CCP lost already more than a good team of Devs does cost. It's already REALLY close to a point of no return, for this game. Every change is fun for exactly 3 days here, like the orthodox wonders. Hallelujah! This is really bad posting, but I have to say it: Delicious subgewn tears. Less bot/multicast accs being bad? No, except if you're gewn, then yes. If holding sov makes you cry, you should not hold sov. Fairly obvious, unless your density is in "gewn or worse" range. If you think the troll has it so nice, why aren't you trolling yet? If a gewn/subgewn quits, good riddance. Can I have your stuff? Actually, i don't ratt or bot. Or PvE. And yes, maybe you can BUY my stuff. Ooooops, can't afford it? See, there's where the real tears are.
Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaase. You're SMA, you do nothing but ratting, botting or PvE, because when you try to PvP it inevitably turns into entertainment for everyone seeing the battle reports.
And it is indeed hilarious knowing I can afford both your stuff and probably your butt.
Keep the tears coming please, chef! Delicious! |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:18:55 -
[205] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:Hendrink Collie wrote:
Words
Reasonable.
Thanks, I was trying to come across reasonable and not too grr gewn, hat gewn. At the end of the day, I want what any reasonable person wants... an active, healthy null environment. We just have different opinions on how to get there. |
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
189
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:20:45 -
[206] - Quote
[/quote]
Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaase. You're SMA, you do nothing but ratting, botting or PvE, because when you try to PvP it inevitably turns into entertainment for everyone seeing the battle reports.
And it is indeed hilarious knowing I can afford both your stuff and probably your butt.
Keep the tears coming please, chef! Delicious![/quote]
...why so loud then, dude? Send me the cash. |
Wilhelm Knicklicht
Licence To Kill
Mercenary Coalition
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:24:43 -
[207] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Amy Garzan wrote:
News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?
Think that over.
the bills will be picked up by the next generation of new players who will actually keep playing the game because there's actually fun to be had even without owning titans. next question. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
...this can be seen by the enormous number of new accounts created, isn't it? (presuming i won't consider that there's a 8/2 ratio of alts/new players in that statistic ;) )
of course it would be nice to see player numbers quadruple over night. but that would not be a realistic expectation. dominion sov has been in place for six years. aegis not even six weeks. give it some time...
|
twit brent
Black Anvil Industries
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:36:50 -
[208] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners.
So you are saying that someone who responds to attack then controls the grid shouldn't be able to defend their space? Maybe you are whats wrong with eve. |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
295
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:41:01 -
[209] - Quote
Troll-ceptor argument (generally) vindicated = Check
Also, very awesome idea for eliminating Defender Entosis maintenance.
Concerned about reference to ship limitations on Entosis Link, sounds like Capital Ship discrimination in the making :tinfoil:
CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
|
Marcus Covinus
The Blood Ankhs
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:46:12 -
[210] - Quote
A swing and a miss indeed!
Sov requires that you put some skin in the game. Let's review what it took to take sov away from someone through the ages of eve.
***
Iteration 1: Tower Sov
Implementation: You had to have a higher percentage of moons towered in the system than anyone else to hold sov.
What did it take to capture: A fleet of battleships or dreads to go through each moon to strip/reinforce each tower. You couldn't do it with frigates as the tower would shred you.
Value at Risk: Billions
***
Iteration 2: Dominion Sov
Implementation: You need a TCU anchored and online in the system.
What did it take to capture: 51% of the gates in had to have a Sovereignty Blockade Units on them in order to make the system vulnerable and then you had to field enough DPS to take the structures down..
***
Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov
Implementation: TCU anchored and online in the system.
What does it take to capture: An interceptor with an entosis link.
***
Now do we see a problem here? You've gone the route of World Of Warcraft by slowly pandering to the lowest common denominator. You see smug bullsh*t like https://eveskunk.com/e/353067497 where the sole goal is to troll sov and create nodes with no intention of capture. (Yes I am calling MOA lowest common denominator)
Recommendation: Entosis Link fits on Cruiser or larger hull only. Like a cyno, it restricts your movement. You've stated yourself.
Quote:You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie |
|
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:48:56 -
[211] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:OldWolf69 wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Amy Garzan wrote:
News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?
Think that over.
the bills will be picked up by the next generation of new players who will actually keep playing the game because there's actually fun to be had even without owning titans. next question. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
...this can be seen by the enormous number of new accounts created, isn't it? (presuming i won't consider that there's a 8/2 ratio of alts/new players in that statistic ;) ) of course it would be nice to see player numbers quadruple over night. but that would not be a realistic expectation. dominion sov has been in place for six years. aegis not even six weeks. give it some time...
With the way player subscription numbers are dropping, we're more likely to see 1/4 of the old player base before we see 4x the old player base.
But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights. |
Desaude
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:54:34 -
[212] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:[quote=Wilhelm Knicklicht][quote=OldWolf69][quote=Wilhelm Knicklicht][quote=Amy Garzan]
But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.
The best part of this is that no matter how many times we talk at the walls, we still expect a response... |
Cyonsiaros StrawHat
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:57:54 -
[213] - Quote
Can you make it so big fat ships capture nodes more quickly and small ships capture at a slower pace? ; Could that be the balance implemented so a quick cap has inheriently more risk and a cap by non-threatening small ships takes longer?
Maybe let ships be supported while entosising and allow select escalations. Even small entities have access to fat ships, even if they don't have bodies to fill hundreds. my concern is escalating loses its rhyme and reason; but if one attack had fat ships and was higher priority it might allow eve to retain that property.
At its root; the current state of the system implemented in theory would break up large fleets into smaller wings requiring many fc's or many chickens running around without heads. But that to me does not translate into the small gang conflicts and pvp that most players enjoy. The infrastructure alliances and corps small and large have built over the years typically supports large fleets with a hand full of individuals pulling the strings and using many ships as an extension of their mind as to be a general at war.
I understand that in theory smaller entities are supposed to claim a single plot in null and have odds of keeping it - but I don't know how much that will actually happen. For instance in my alliance there is many many fresh bodies who can act and react to the stimulous of an attack - as part of a numbers game. it is also well divded into various land parcels by corp which can make things easier and the SIG structure allows many operations to occur simultaneously throughout eve with enough bodies in the corporation home systems to react to stimulous.
Rather I don't see entosis as a threat; the preparation months prior and continued direction of my alliance makes any sov a non issue. On the other hand I could imagine the less than recent provi-bloc conflicts would have eneded very differently under entosis based gameplay in favor of Brave - which is interesting to think about in that fight on the other end of EVE.
I also think; someone with an idea; a method, an ambition who can rouse troops can start an entitity and make an impact under entosis. A large upstart could turn into an empire now more than ever; but they won't rest on their laurels; they will fight tooth and nail to keep it.. ( That is an interesting Idea and why sov changes can be healthy for the game )
But who wants to hire Black legion or Pandemic Legion frigates?
I am looking forward to a balance in the game and hope ccp can find one where escalations exist, new upstarts have a chance to fulfill their dreams and EVE players, who are all susceptible to burnout (due to the most inherently passive game ever) will be able to continue playing without growing disdain.
I don't claim my ideas or feelings reflect anyone elses thoughts other than my own theories. People dislike the current state of affairs for differing reasons; people have different observations and visions of where the game should be. My observations come from a series of changes over the summer and not just from the most recent implementation.
|
Gessiel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 04:58:15 -
[214] - Quote
There are rare battles, but only for people looking for good fights. Putting a patch on this worthless FozzieSov is like putting a bandage on a migrane. Worthless.
Have you noticed all prices are escalatinng downwards? Why even mine? When there were great battles, great ship loss, the hi sec people kept busy mining and manufacturing to replace them. But now........pffft.
I'm not a dev, but can't you see you are driving people away from the game with this? People want fights, people in null sec want to use big ships, we've been training them for ever. We want to go on deployments, but NO, keep those indexes up. We want to roam and get into battles, sov or no sov......but I've scoured 25 systems and not red/neut to be found.
Sad day. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2273
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:04:10 -
[215] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:
But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.
From a sound business standpoint you'd want new people paying subs and having fun, not old, mostly offline players, drowning in ISK and in their own tears.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:10:39 -
[216] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Kystraz wrote:
But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.
From a sound business standpoint you'd want new people paying subs and having fun, not old, mostly offline players, drowning in ISK and in their own tears.
Games that are being abandoned en mass by the old players who were told they were playing the game wrong are totally the first ones new players are attracted to. |
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:15:21 -
[217] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Kystraz wrote:
But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.
From a sound business standpoint you'd want new people paying subs and having fun, not old, mostly offline players, drowning in ISK and in their own tears.
I don't think you realize that every sub is money in CCP's pockets be it $15 a month or buying a plex on the market since someone had to pay CCP for that plex. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
696
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:29:03 -
[218] - Quote
Quote:You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie Clearly someone hasn't been paying attention as to how Entosis links are being used.
Your little speed nerf is just that - Little.
Entosis link drawback - Unable to active prop mods, speed limited to 100 m/s (A bit harsh? Sure but so is what Entosis links can do)
The only way Entosis link use can be balanced is to actually balance it, you don't do that by pandering to the existing meta. As long as bubble immune speedster ceptors can fit Entosis links without any real drawback, sov will be nothing more than troll central.
You stated you listened to feedback, you omitted to add you also chose to ignore it.
-- - -- - -- - -- - -- - --
Entosis links SHOULD have ship restrictions.
They are without doubt the strongest command link in the game and so should be restricted to ships that can by design fit command links. Battle cruisers (T1 entosis link), Command ships (T2 Entosis link).
This would actually serve 2 outcomes, 1 would be making Battle cruisers a valid ship class to use, 2 force those who want to grief/troll sov to commit more than a solo ceptor.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
77
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:31:21 -
[219] - Quote
Marcus Covinus wrote:
Iteration 1: Tower Sov
***
Iteration 2: Dominion Sov
***
Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov
I think what you've missed is that in each iteration, there were two bars to pass.
One was the mechanical. As you stated, you couldn't take down a tower with an Interceptor.
The other though, was the defence. You also needed enough ships to take down the sov holder.
Sov has just lowered the mechanical bar - it hasn't touched the defence. For all the whining about absentee attackers, it doesn't get pointed out enough that Aegis has removed the opposite: absentee defenders no longer require a Dread fleet investment to take down some arbitrary millions of HP. |
TrickyBlackSteel
Russia Caldari
RUCA Emperor
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:51:48 -
[220] - Quote
**** you all and your patch! |
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:57:27 -
[221] - Quote
troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
if each system the alliance owns actually had someone there for the duration of the vuln. window, then nobody would try and troll in a ceptor.
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.
|
TrickyBlackSteel
Russia Caldari
RUCA Emperor
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 05:58:57 -
[222] - Quote
ccp mode troll online |
Carribean Queen
Vadimus Quarrier Works
The Big Dirty
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:13:51 -
[223] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
if each system the alliance owns actually had someone there for the duration of the vuln. window, then nobody would try and troll in a ceptor.
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.
^ THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS^
Also reading about 'barrier of entry into a trollceptor', 70 to 90 days? Crying about that on reddit... And yet the barrier of entry into a max skilled Catalyst pilot for ganking is... a LOT LESS than that. Yes, less nodes and this iteration is better. However if these crybabies can't get off their lazy butts and learn how to do more than be just a bunch of F1 monkeys, then Trollceptor away with your 3 month barrier of entry. CCP would do a lot more good rebalancing a few things to prevent all the people rage quitting over gankfreighterfest that EVE has turned into. It's basically ganks online and nullsec tears ragequit online.
Luckily I invested heavily in popcorn, all this salt is gonna give me a heart attack though. |
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
Chao3 Alliance
281
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:18:43 -
[224] - Quote
Congratulation on the choice of changes for Galatea, they are reasonable and measured.
It shows that CCP truly listen to all sides.
Good job!
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope...
|
TWISTED TRANZISTOR
Blood Mad Penguins
RED University
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:21:09 -
[225] - Quote
This is similar to a crutch. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
522
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:23:48 -
[226] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Here are my thoughts about the set of 'tweaks' that Fozzie announced:
They are simply amazing.
They absolutely manage to touch and correct almost none of the issues that the majority of null players were pointing out very vocally.
Node reductions might be pointed out as a positive change, but the tweak on them is so light that is suspiciously looks like to me an attempt to damage control after the overwhelmingly negative feedback that has been addressed to Fozzie & the team.
With these levels of excellence at the inability to comprehend the basic demands of the null sov players, I can easily foresee EVE Online going F2P in short to medium term with the current trends of concurrent logins and subscription numbers rapidly bleeding out.
Well done Fozzie, now please do pen a dev blog about how you succeeded on placing the game on life support and prevented the death. Meanwhile, we'll be throwing soil on EVE's casket and saying our prayers in the grim cemetery of reality.
Reagalan made an excellent post about why your ideas and insistence on shoving a certain playstyle down the nullseccers collective throats is a bad idea. You might want to read that several times.
The majority of nullsec hasn't pointed to anything. A loud minority, consisting mostly of your alliance is crying and pointing at all the wrong things, rest of the playerbase and devs laugh at your futile mongering. You're wrong, suck it up or just gtfo- there''s literally nobody that cares whether you unsub or not, but at least have the decency to shut up.
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
174
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:24:48 -
[227] - Quote
Galphii wrote:Consider prohibiting microwarpdrive use while entosis links are running
I like this.
4km/s hard limit seems really random to me. What next? 100k EHP hard limit for T3 cruisers? 150km drone control range? 500 GJ/s capacitor regen when in triage? |
Vacant Glare
Ghost Recon Inc
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:27:47 -
[228] - Quote
Finally some feedback from AFK CCP
1: Speed needs to be severely limited when an Entosis Link is online(block Entosis and MWD running concurrently).
2: Remove ability from ALL nullified ships to fit a Entosis Link.
3: Make cloaks and the Entosis Link mutually exclusive to each other.
Unfortunately, we are seeing the ishtar tweak approach here. Hint the game and especially the new SOV system will not survive ice-cube tweaks it badly needs a Titanic sized ice-BERG to fix this.
The speed limitation does nothing to fix the 'trollceptor' and still doesn't address the issue of when systems are attacked with "Trollceptors" but never following up on, this is making SOV ownership worthless.
Make command nodes appear 1 or 2 appear at a time so that combat has to occur if contested. If no contest then have the nodes revert to sov owner over time but pretty fast say 2 hours. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
522
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:35:13 -
[229] - Quote
Marcus Covinus wrote:Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov Implementation: TCU anchored and online in the system. What does it take to capture: An interceptor with an entosis link. *** Now do we see a problem here? You've gone the route of World Of Warcraft by slowly pandering to the lowest common denominator. You see smug bullsh*t like https://eveskunk.com/e/353067497 where the sole goal is to troll sov and create nodes with no intention of capture. (Yes I am calling MOA lowest common denominator) Recommendation: Entosis Link fits on Cruiser or larger hull only. Like a cyno, it restricts your movement. You've stated yourself. Quote:You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie
If one can use an interceptor to take your sov, that means you've lost the field. You have no military control on grid. How does it feel to lose to one cheap frigate?  |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
176
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:49:07 -
[230] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
...
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.
While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing.
This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.
People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin. |
|
|
Jaxel Devren
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 06:56:08 -
[231] - Quote
You like feedback from real players CCP? My accounts are slowly going inactive 1 by 1 and now I play Elite Dangerous. |
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus
S I L E N T.
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:05:24 -
[232] - Quote
Balthusdire Dominus wrote:The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work.
If you can't kill a 4km/s ceptor that cannot warp, the issue is with you not the system... |
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus
S I L E N T.
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:06:55 -
[233] - Quote
Lim Yoona wrote:I'm gonna vote with my wallet on this one and cancel my subs. This used to be a good game maybe one day it'll get better.
After this crop of small gang devs goes to Riot.
Thank you. You won't be missed. |
Sigras
Conglomo
1051
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:07:52 -
[234] - Quote
I understand that one of your stated design goals was to have as little effect on the ships that people brought to a fight as possible. I understand the reason for that desire and I respect it, but I believe I that goal isnt a good goal to have.
People dont want an actual fight, they want to show up and massacre their opponents or run away which is the cause for all of this frustration and these super risk averse fleets. This has always been the case, and the new sov system is just the latest way these people are baiting fights.
Contesting sov should be just that, an actual attempt to contest sov, not just an attempt by a roaming group to bait a quick fight, or troll the holding alliance with uncatchable ships never truly meant to contest the space. In light of that philosophy, I suggest the following three changes
1. Change the entosis link to a 5 minute (300 second) duration.
2. Change Mass Increase on the entosis link to 7,500,000 for the T2 and 1,000,000 for the T1
3. Change the range of the T2 entosis link to 225 km
These three small changes will make disengaging from a fight far more difficult and I believe they will result in better fights and fewer troll attempts.
Thoughts? |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:09:56 -
[235] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Warmeister wrote:troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
...
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own. While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing. This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin.
i didn't say null sec is not worth living in. you don't see people evacing their assets and dropping sov, so obviously it is worth it. especially considering the stupid amount of money people make from rental empires and the fact that there are people willing to pay that money.
what i said is that people capture sov but don't intend to live in it. the sole purpose of it is so they can see a big spot on the map with their name so when someone comes and tries to take it away from them, instead of showing up to protect this space, they cry to CCP about broken mechanics.
|
SpaceSaft
Capts Deranged Cavaliers
Gentlemen's.Club
157
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:11:47 -
[236] - Quote
I'm not exactly sure why the entosis modules need these crazy ranges but w/e.
The real issue is that you're basically fighting your other game mechanics. The only way to deal with gate camps is jump, mwd trick and cloak, hope they don't lock you at all, or to fly an interceptor.
That situation means ceptors have to be hard to catch close up.
The new sov situation is the opposite, you can sit anywhere in a very large radius, removing the spatial constraint you had previously, but ceptors and other fast ships are still allowed to do be in this situation.
That's only a problem because there is simply no way to catch up to someone like that at all. It's also true for a sov node 'fight' but the problem originates in the basic design of combat that you can't engage someone faster than you if he doesn't want to fight.
You have the same problem with various fast cruisers that are effectively too fast to be probed down. If they want to troll you, in your system, for indefinite amounts of time, they can. No restrictions. Same applies to afk cloakers.
There are no chocke points inside systems or here on sov node grids, there is no fuel they could run out of thus removing their advantage, there is no way to outplay someone going faster than you or cloaking at all, ever, in any way, with any ship or module or gun or number of people.
THIS actual issue, I'd very much like to see solved and I'd be very curious to see your ideas and solutions to it, but I don't think you're going to touch it, because sov is the priority right now and I'm sure there are like 10 other things going on too.
Good luck! |
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Nulli Secunda
861
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:19:35 -
[237] - Quote
Remove it from ceptors all together.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Brave Collective
1954
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:24:17 -
[238] - Quote
"The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit"-á"
Finally! Something some of us having been asking for as long as it was possible.
More penalties for fast stuff, no useless penalty for everyone including slow doctrines.
You should reduce the limit to 3k5 though in my opinion. 4k cannot even be reached by all inties.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter
Absolute Zero.
1038
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:25:39 -
[239] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Galphii wrote:Consider prohibiting microwarpdrive use while entosis links are running I like this. 4km/s hard limit seems really random to me. What next? 100k EHP hard limit for T3 cruisers? 150km drone control range? 500 GJ/s capacitor regen when in triage?
Implying arbitrary limit prohibiting usage of buffer mods on T3s / DCLs / cap rechargers with triage would be better (which is what quoted idea amounts to when analogy with your examples is drawn).
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
7012
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:28:08 -
[240] - Quote
Looks like Fozzie SOV is here to stay.
Good luck to CCP and everybody involved. Hope it all works out in the end.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
|
|
Tish Magev
Nex Exercitus
Northern Coalition.
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:29:31 -
[241] - Quote
Well that was a waste of a wall of text.
Literally changes nothing.
I can't believe that ANY null sec dwelling player/corp/alliance/coalition likes FozzieSov, or finds it generates content in anyway, in fact I'm pretty sure they don't.
Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.
All the best CCP, let's see how much (positive) media attention EvE gets when no one's fighting anymore.
EvE, your PvP content isn't good enough to be ignoring the mass-PvP element of the game, this isn't WOW.
All nullsec alliances should just go back to highsec, cos well there isn't any content in null anymore anyway, let the scrubs that think fozziesov is a good idea deal with it for a while. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:34:06 -
[242] - Quote
Tish Magev wrote:
Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.
yeah, and before fozziesov there were sov wars left right and center, right? |
Sjugar02
Antwerpse Kerels
RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:34:28 -
[243] - Quote
Fozziesov is inherently flawed because it does not promote meaningful conflict. These changes do not change this.
But let's see how fozziesov holds up to it's intended goals
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
If fatigue is spaceaids ,~sovwands~ are cancer. It's not fun to attack, it's not fun to defend. People that like the new system might like the small gang fights but I doubt anyone enjoys stroking their wand for an hour.
Goal #2: Clarify the process of taking, holding and fighting over star systems
Maybe? Who cares anyway, I don't value one system over another on how easy it is to understand. I do understand that this is an internal goal for ccp.
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.
Being able to attack space with very little risk is a serious flaw of the new system. This is a flawed goal because it contradicts with one of the foundations of eve: risk vs. reward.
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.
6 hours per sov event :rip:
Goal #5: Provide significant strategic benefits from living in your space.
I have heard very little complaints about this, except that the industry index only incorporates mining, and it seems to be working pretty good. Fortress Deklein though.
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.
I still have to see how this plays out but there's very little reason to split up in small fleets. Just keep one fleet in a central location/on a titan and spread out sovwands in uncatchable ship.
Goal #7: Any new Sovereignty system should be adaptable enough to be rapidly updated and to incorporate future changes to EVE.
Let's hope so. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
1087
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:41:00 -
[244] - Quote
I think the changes are sensible and are trying to get the balance right , though troll interceptors are not the issue if you have people in system, if you do not use that system then you deserve to have it reinforced. I am so so with the speed reduction, but like many will just say OK and adjust. The other changes I agree with because if people do not turn up to take that system or remove the sov then make it easier to grab back.
Pure Blind is developing into a fun area, the border areas of large empires should be exactly what is happing in Pure Blind, I noticed that the poor systems in Estoria are actually having their ADM worked on, this is working as intended, this means in Stain we can pick off more of them without getting blobbed, the impacts of this system make it so people can not rush off on deployment without any cares, stick with it CCP because that and the large blobs of Supers and Titans destroyed your game.
Finally the impact of this new system should only be fully assessed with the new structure, so I would advise CCP not to over do these tweaks while waiting for the structures to arrive, that is the real deal at that point.
CCP you should also listen to MOA players who are harassing the Imperium, not trolling them, there is a big difference by the way!
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!!!!
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
177
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:44:18 -
[245] - Quote
About the interceptor.
It's intended role is - tackling. They are pretty decent in that role, no nerfs or buffs needed.
There is also another role, not really intended, rather a result or ~emergent~ gameplay. A shuttle.
Shuttle-fitted ceptor can carry you anywhere fast and safe. (I even scan through wormholes with ceptor.)
It can light a cyno. But other than that, it is not (it was not) combat-capable.
There is no general consensus if fast and safe travel is good or bad for nullsec, but we can live with that.
Now, there is a third role.
It becomes a tool in sov warfare. And a powerful tool. We all know really well that in a world of jabber pings and rage-formups the best tank you can fit is speed-tank. Does it have any drawbacks for performing that well in this role, like being expensive, or hard to skill? No.
Furthermore, it can be fitted to fulfill two roles at the same time - sov shuttle.
Do you remember why CCP nerfed capships? Because of power projection.
The interceptor is the new capital ship, but cheaper. Either power or projection should be taken away of it.
Diagnosis: OP.
Treatment: on top of suggested MWD-jamming feature of enthosis, maybe reducing its cargo and increasing strontium consumption on enthosis would do a trick. Tackling interceptor - yes, shuttle - yes, cyno-shuttle - no, sov-shuttle - no. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
524
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:44:58 -
[246] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Warmeister wrote:troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
...
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own. While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing. This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin.
So why people pay to live there, and fight for their sov then? I use jump bridges every day, all the time, and we and our enemies use capitals in PVP. Do we play the same game? |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
697
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:48:14 -
[247] - Quote
These are quite good changes i have to say.
Just don't diminish to much the number of nodes because ti really helps the blob, but on the other hand to big number of nodes it also helps it. I think this number of 10 nodes is actually really good. It still gives chances to defenders to work with their 6:1 faster node conquest advantage. 20 was really to much and heaven for the blobs and trolls. And ofc it doubles the chances of a fight to happen.
The timer of 4 mins will lessen some pain of sov maintenance. Although i am afraid when the true fight happens it will be quite hard for attackers to work around it.
But the change i don't like is the 4k limit. It does absolutely nothing.
The idea of Fozzie SOV is actually good but CCP 3 more things needs to happen to make FozzieSOV to really shine.
- Restrain Entosis link only for BCs to be able to equip it
- Partially captured structures returning to defender control at a slow constant regeneration pace
- And ofc better UI. But Punkturis is already on top of its game.
And a suggestion for the new structure "Obesrvatory array". Whoever has it installed in a constellation he get to see all places where the structures are installed, all the timers of the ongoing war and places and timers of all nodes. It will be a nice target to fight over.
BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
338
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:49:02 -
[248] - Quote
This is a good start! |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:51:57 -
[249] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:
Diagnosis: OP.
Treatment: on top of suggested MWD-jamming feature of enthosis, maybe reducing its cargo and increasing strontium consumption on enthosis would do a trick. Tackling interceptor - yes, shuttle - yes, cyno-shuttle - no, sov-shuttle - no.
it's only OP when no one shows up to defend.
if someone did show up, all they need is an entosis module to successfully prevent ceptor from capturing sov. |
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development
Sev3rance
115
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:53:41 -
[250] - Quote
Amy Garzan wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended. News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills? Think that over.
All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years? |
|
|
Kanzero
Virtus Crusade
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:55:47 -
[251] - Quote
Using an antosis module should either stop your ship completely or at least turn off any prop mods.
|
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development
Sev3rance
115
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:56:39 -
[252] - Quote
Like some of the suggestions I've stumbled across. I'd like to add one:
Fitting an Entosis Link, either t1 or t2, cancels Interdiction Nullifier effects AND prevents cloaking. |
UsedTampon
Kriegsmarinewerft
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:57:55 -
[253] - Quote
Not good enough. |
hanky1 panky2
decloak
Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:58:42 -
[254] - Quote
i'm going to ignore the broader issues here and focus entirely on mechanics:
why don't nodes decay? why is this even a discussion? uncontested sov needs to return to the defender easily (sov used to defend itself in 9 hours)
will entosis notifications be improved to include attacker names or is this a 'technical limitation'?
any plans to allow structure unanchoring, offlining, or transfers? all of this used to be possible.
any plans to allow switching of IHUB upgrades?
any plans to reduce structure/upgrade costs (killing an ihub is very easy now)
any plans to provide more immediate benefits for sovereignty? (losing 35d indexes every time you lose a system is crippling for strategic indexes)
ps: jump bridges are fairly useless with fatigue anyway.
any plans to provide killmails for structures? this would help defenders and attackers.
and i guess my final question is how much of aegis sov was altered during duality testing? i feel like we are beta testing this on the live server and that these changes (which do not even scratch my concerns) are very late. |
Aldjor Dayman
S.A.S
Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 07:59:43 -
[255] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda
Deep Space Engineering
1986
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:03:09 -
[256] - Quote
Alendriana wrote:So glad we will still see troll ships....... not
haha remember "not" jokes guys? ...Classic!
You sound like an idiot when you say "create content" when you mean find a fight, gank, etc... Stop it!
|
Gempei
Marvinovi pratele
Nulli Secunda
83
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:04:42 -
[257] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:...just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now - Y-C3EQ,
7RM-N0, GA-P6C When i look at dotlan, all this systems are reinforced. Sorry to say, but you have nothing under control. |
Insidious
Hax.
Wrecked.
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:04:52 -
[258] - Quote
I'm sure null will be compelling one day, quiet a few things keeping me far far away from it until then though, considering the iterations, the grand vision and all.
Personally my vision of null sec would be fleets** of ships (any size). I dont see how single pidgin ships crapping over your capture points is compelling at all.
Sure they might be apart of a larger group waiting to warp in on any engagement, and that might lead to something greater. If thats the case then maybe thats ok.
I'd rather have defensive fleets put down a beacon affecting an AU/system radius of capture points.i.e. a attacking multiplier , you can still have single entosis ships.
Would just be an enabler for better sized fleets, and give something for people to-do in null other then prey for a station timer.
I know I know hahahaha maybe Supercarriers act as the entosis beacon :)))))
|
Minty Aroma
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:05:41 -
[259] - Quote
4k m/s? Still far too quick if you take in the head start the entosis ship will have from when the pilot sees the spike in local to things landing on grid.
2k m/s max sounds a lot more like it, or just remove the activation of prop modules. |
Tish Magev
Nex Exercitus
Northern Coalition.
19
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:09:33 -
[260] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Tish Magev wrote:
Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.
yeah, and before fozziesov there were sov wars left right and center, right?
More than there is or will be now yeah.
No ones saying nullsec wasn't stale, but if you think this is the solution to reinvigorate it then you're a bit of an idiot. |
|
|
Aldjor Dayman
S.A.S
Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:16:18 -
[261] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:NO FOZZY !
NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
You are being told a fairy tale!
We have taken a couple of systems (and lost them again) but never due to a single 'trolling' ship. This stuff just doesnt happen in reality against an organized alliance/coalition. It always involved fending of ewar and controlling access to the system. Perhaps stalling for time to get the entosis done but ultimately because the defenders CAME IN TOO LATE. And whos fault is that ?
I cant believe you are giving into this whining of people who just DONT WANT TO PVP. You should see the reality of 'Entosis Trolling' with your own eyes before you make such decisions. The defender comes in, jams the Entosis ship and your warm-up cylce goes to **** wasting you 20 minutes. And if you fit a ship to counter that kitsune or falcon by outrunning it they scream "Unfair! Unfair! Fozzy nerf it pleeeease !!!"
What is this bullshit ? Sov defence by crying for nerfs ? And you play along ???
Entosis links seriously need e-war immunity or be able to keep running without a lock-on !
What do you think how many successfull jams a falcon can get off during the warm-up cycle, 20, 200 ? Because thats the amount of Entosis ships you will need in the future to capture a TCU against a defender who is actually on the ball.
And what if you field 20 ECM ships or 100 ? That gets us to a number the server cant even handle.
And how dare those that own sov to define that kiting is not a proper strategy to fight over a system ? They could easily have put on their OWN ENTOSIS onto the TCU and stopped the attackers progress. If they were TRULY holding the field that shouldnt be a problem right ? Our 9k m/s Entosis ships never could stay on grid with an actual force arriving by the way.
Again: Fozzy bro is believing a fairytale.
What was happening the last few weeks was EXACTLY what Aegis Sov was meant to do: Make power blocs realize they cant occupy all the space themselves. They were supposed to feel the pain of an empire overstretch and make a tough call about what space is worth the effort.
THEY WERE MEANT TO LOOSE SPACE ! And not only the part they choose to. Now they are starting to loose their face in being outplayed and loosing Sov so they throw all their political power at CCP. Of course on the cost of the entire player base.
Please grow a spine you lush sack of potatoe meal ... im so ******* disappointed, you were the last hope for content and conflict in Eve.
P.S.
Aegis Sov has made Pure Blind a content garden of even. Sure the Sov holders don't like to get slaughtered in skirmishes now that they are forced upon them but the content generation part of the new system is absolutely working.
Congratz on that part CCP!
Please don't give up. All the criticism is purely political and certainly not about fun and explosion.
Unfortunately this post has no credibility because you come from the bottom of the dumpster.
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
179
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:28:18 -
[262] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:
talking about ceptor successfully fulfilling 3 powerfull roles
Diagnosis: OP.
Treatment: on top of suggested MWD-jamming feature of enthosis, maybe reducing its cargo and increasing strontium consumption on enthosis would do a trick. Tackling interceptor - yes, shuttle - yes, cyno-shuttle - no, sov-shuttle - no.
it's only OP when no one shows up to defend. if someone did show up, all they need is an entosis module to successfully prevent ceptor from capturing sov.
"They need..." "to prevent [a lone] ceptor".
Proves my point actually. Interceptor is powerfull enough to in sov warfare to counter a group of ships. Not necessarily it wins, but it will keep them busy for sure. It has the power, without associated risks.
Also, do you even read? The "diagnosis" was deducted from the fact that it has 3 (three) powerfull roles. In one hull. Cheap. Not skill-intensive. Risk-reward anyone?
Warmeister wrote:you don't see people evacing their assets and dropping sov
PL member talking about not dropping sov. You might have missed some game events.
Renting empires do give ISK, but where do we spend it? If ISK dont work, they are just pixels in you imaginary wallet.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:32:48 -
[263] - Quote
Tish Magev wrote:Warmeister wrote:Tish Magev wrote:
Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.
yeah, and before fozziesov there were sov wars left right and center, right? More than there is or will be now yeah. No ones saying nullsec wasn't stale, but if you think this is the solution to reinvigorate it then you're a bit of an idiot.
if you think there were more wars before you are delusional. the last major war ended almost 2 years ago.
it ended with leadership of those involved being completely burnt out and woving not to have another war ever again until sov is fixed. since then only some local conflicts happened, which still continue to happen after fozziesov.
oh i would call your skirmish with goons a sov war, if you didn't call it goodfites yourself |
Irenia Tsurpalen
Outer Void Applications
Blades of Grass
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:36:35 -
[264] - Quote
Tish Magev wrote:
I can't believe that ANY null sec dwelling player/corp/alliance/coalition likes FozzieSov, or finds it generates content in anyway, in fact I'm pretty sure they don't.
Yo Tish, IGÇÖm really happy for you, Imma let you finish but I had fun with Fozzy sov last two or so weeks!
But since the local enemy is defeated you're might be right: There will be not much content, at least not that ~local conflicht between small entities~ kind of content Fozzy sov was advertised with. :) |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1824
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:38:31 -
[265] - Quote
Keep the mass penalty please. |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
179
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:39:24 -
[266] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:it ended with leadership of those involved being completely burnt out and woving not to have another war ever again until sov is fixed
Exactly the same leadership, now rejuvenated, said - I quote - "F*CK F*ZZIE"
Edit: this is not my opinion and I may or may not agree with it. |
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:40:08 -
[267] - Quote
I like how the most vocal people defending fozziesov in this thread are either high and lowsec people not holding a single sov system and on a couple of occasions the uninformed PL guy who didn't quite realize that his alliance has never been a classical sov holding alliance and currently holds exactly 1 sov system.
Please, if you don't hold sov and/or live in sov space, just shut up.
What's sad is that no one actually really read and tried to understand what Reagalan wrote in this two posts. It is really easy to fallback to the good old grr gons mentality instead of trying to think for yourselves. Basically you are F1 monkeys but in terms of thinking, congratulations to achieving sheep like cognitive heights.
To the Shadow Cartel guy in this thread, if I were you, I wouldn't cry about blobbing. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:52:37 -
[268] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:
What's sad is that no one actually really read and tried to understand what Reagalan wrote in this two posts. It is really easy to fallback to the good old grr gons mentality instead of trying to think for yourselves. Basically you are F1 monkeys but in terms of thinking, congratulations to achieving sheep like cognitive heights.
.
read the post, all i saw there was "wah, wah, we can't just be F1 monkeys anymore and have to undock" |
5pitf1re
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:54:13 -
[269] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:5pitf1re wrote:
What's sad is that no one actually really read and tried to understand what Reagalan wrote in this two posts. It is really easy to fallback to the good old grr gons mentality instead of trying to think for yourselves. Basically you are F1 monkeys but in terms of thinking, congratulations to achieving sheep like cognitive heights.
.
read the post, all i saw there was "wah, wah, we can't just be F1 monkeys anymore and have to undock"
Oh hello uninformed PL poster, I was just talking about you! |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 08:56:36 -
[270] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:Warmeister wrote:5pitf1re wrote:
What's sad is that no one actually really read and tried to understand what Reagalan wrote in this two posts. It is really easy to fallback to the good old grr gons mentality instead of trying to think for yourselves. Basically you are F1 monkeys but in terms of thinking, congratulations to achieving sheep like cognitive heights.
.
read the post, all i saw there was "wah, wah, we can't just be F1 monkeys anymore and have to undock" Oh hello uninformed PL poster. I was just talking about you!
i know u were, i just decided not to comment on your uninformed opinion |
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1824
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:00:39 -
[271] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:I like how the most vocal people defending fozziesov in this thread are either high and lowsec people not holding a single sov system and on a couple of occasions the uninformed PL guy who didn't quite realize that his alliance has never been a classical sov holding alliance and currently holds exactly 1 sov system..
And most railing on it are all leaning hard to the idea of making harassment impossible, to re-enable the hiding behind passive defenses of massive bubbles and intel networks as well as wanting an instant, guaranteed kill when they are on grid.
I posit that maybe a happy medium is best for all, but the trouble is you all can't see past your own selfish agendas. |
Sjugar02
Antwerpse Kerels
RAZOR Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:03:12 -
[272] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:5pitf1re wrote:Warmeister wrote:5pitf1re wrote:
What's sad is that no one actually really read and tried to understand what Reagalan wrote in this two posts. It is really easy to fallback to the good old grr gons mentality instead of trying to think for yourselves. Basically you are F1 monkeys but in terms of thinking, congratulations to achieving sheep like cognitive heights.
.
read the post, all i saw there was "wah, wah, we can't just be F1 monkeys anymore and have to undock" Oh hello uninformed PL poster. I was just talking about you! i know u were, i just decided not to comment on your uninformed opinion
Would you like to explain to the uninformed masses why PL doesn't have or want sov and how this relates to you defending the new sov system? |
Arla Sarain
604
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:26:49 -
[273] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty.
Thanks everyone, and good hunting!
Make it increase sig radius too.
W8, what if the entosis link was a deployable instead, with some volume to it, like 60m3?
Let the trollceptors fly about. They place the link at whatever range, and it just gets sniped if they don't defend it. Eventually it will just churn out of their possession, they can't carry that many. |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
238
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:28:56 -
[274] - Quote
how long till you ppl at CCP will finally understand that taking away our killmails for this structures was a BAD thing? you know killmails? the ones "we all love" ? hello?
and about trollceptors....how can you guys not get it even now it's beyond me ... |
Peacenlove
S0utherN Comfort
DARKNESS.
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:34:18 -
[275] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners.
lol, you havent taken those systems, the tcu is literally meaningless in the new sov system. You have the one station inf reeprot but in every other system it is a goonswarm ihub. AKA, they own the system. TCU is justa flag actualy ownership is station and ihub
|
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike
Circle-Of-Two
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:34:24 -
[276] - Quote
Poision Kevin wrote:The fact that you still ***** about "Troll Ceptors" when you can easily kill those now with cruiser hulls and links in system is entertaining. 4km/s instead of 8km/s is a HUGE step. Trolling factor is still ****, surely, but this reduces amount of nodes you have to keep track of as well as speed limit while the entosis link is FITTED (To be seen if it matters offline/online however).
It's not what you might have wanted, but god damn is it in the right direction. I'm sure I speak for most people when I say "Bet you didn't expect that?".
Baby steps... baby steps.
Sure are baby-steps, but better than baby-crawl! And I agree - catching a 4000 m/s ceptor should be no real problem, even without booster in system. Sov-trolling just got harder, but it is still possible. Lets try this a couple of weeks and see how it plays out!
There is probably a reason to the baby-steps; they have a 6 week release cycle/sprints, not much time to do any major redesigns, especially given their vacation period too. In all, these adaptations are probably what is possible to cram into their sprint, while still having some quality and low enough risk when they release Galatea. And as Fozzie sais, they will continue iterating, and I would guess there will be larger adaptations implemented and release in the release after Galatea, as he hints about.
But good that CCP are listening to the feedback!
I just wish that the community could have been a bit more mature in general, we have seen some really bad examples of "net hate" the last couple of weeks, our community is so immature...grown men acting like kids, c'mon guys, behave! We (i.e. the EVE community) are worse than my teenager kids sometimes!
CEO Svea Rike
|
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
572
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:34:35 -
[277] - Quote
4k isn't enough. Just change the fitting requirements so it's a BC and above sized module or cruiser but with severe limitations. I don't get why you've balanced the game to such an extent that when combat finally happens it's between two non-committal enemies who can run away from each other with ease. This doesn't make people fight. Bring back the bloody close range brawls and ditch this idiot kiting meta. |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
303
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:38:40 -
[278] - Quote
I would vote in favour of making entosis links incompatible with nullified hulls. You could then do away with all these hamfisted mass/speed penalties that beggar suspension of disbelief.
Making entosis links incompatible with nullified hulls would enable sov holders to actually defend their borders and allow for some interesting bubble tactics.. bubbles being a defining characteristic of null sec gameplay in the first place. It would force an attacker to actually risk his ship.
I know the general idea was to not place any restrictions on whatever hull you could pick to fit the entosis links to, but I feel there would be plenty of choice left after this change. |
Mac Chicovski
Capts Deranged Cavaliers
Gentlemen's.Club
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:42:30 -
[279] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
__capture time stuff__
Good start.
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty.
This is still dumb as a stump. An absolute limit means that they'll just change which ship and fittings they use, whereas a percentage decrease in speed would mean that they can't just change the fittings and make it more offensively viable.
Indeed, the whole idea ignores all the many pieces of reasonable critique about the real problems with trollcepters and defending against them by adding some new, one-off mechanic that requires you to have a 6km/s+ overheated ship, combat scanners, and the ability to kill the ship before they kill you (which they can, since they no longer have to fit for 6k, they can fit any ship that will make 4k and use the rest offensively).
I guess this is just another 'fozz you' to the myriad of people who have submitted thoughtful criticism, and who actually play this part of the game. |
yogizh
Northstar Cabal
Tactical Narcotics Team
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:49:25 -
[280] - Quote
Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing. |
|
|
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike
Circle-Of-Two
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:53:44 -
[281] - Quote
yogizh wrote:Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing.
Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples.
CEO Svea Rike
|
yogizh
Northstar Cabal
Tactical Narcotics Team
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 09:58:30 -
[282] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:NO FOZZY !
NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
:ranting:
Maybe try to challenge an enemy that is not 500 times the size of your little mission running alliance. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1824
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:04:19 -
[283] - Quote
yogizh wrote:Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing.
What is a cerberus, bob? They will one or two shot them.
Or, you know, just get a faster ship and tackle it. Seems the easier way.
but seriously - mass change NEEDS to stay. It was the ONLY thing which invalidated the interdiction nulli complaints. |
yogizh
Northstar Cabal
Tactical Narcotics Team
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:08:16 -
[284] - Quote
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:yogizh wrote:Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing. Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples.
Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank. |
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike
Circle-Of-Two
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:15:04 -
[285] - Quote
yogizh wrote:Emmy Mnemonic wrote:yogizh wrote:Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing. Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples. Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank.
Oh c'mon....what kind of comment is that? Just bring more ships than they have, how hard can it be! We live nearby TNT, you have Jabber, just ping for us and we'll come help you if you have problems getting nano-ships past enemies on your own
CEO Svea Rike
|
bear mcgreedy
Shadow State
The Bastion
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:21:27 -
[286] - Quote
i made it easy for you devs listening to the community... maybe this might be an aide for you ????
http://strawpoll.me/5252730
For those that don't read the first pages after 17 pages of text |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:26:02 -
[287] - Quote
Marcus Covinus wrote:A swing and a miss indeed! Sov requires that you put some skin in the game. Let's review what it took to take sov away from someone through the ages of eve. *** Iteration 1: Tower Sov Implementation: You had to have a higher percentage of moons towered in the system than anyone else to hold sov. What did it take to capture: A fleet of battleships or dreads to go through each moon to strip/reinforce each tower. You couldn't do it with frigates as the tower would shred you. Value at Risk: Billions *** Iteration 2: Dominion Sov Implementation: You need a TCU anchored and online in the system. What did it take to capture: 51% of the gates in had to have a Sovereignty Blockade Units on them in order to make the system vulnerable and then you had to field enough DPS to take the structures down.. *** Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov Implementation: TCU anchored and online in the system. What does it take to capture: An interceptor with an entosis link. *** Now do we see a problem here? You've gone the route of World Of Warcraft by slowly pandering to the lowest common denominator. You see smug bullsh*t like https://eveskunk.com/e/353067497 where the sole goal is to troll sov and create nodes with no intention of capture. (Yes I am calling MOA lowest common denominator) Recommendation: Entosis Link fits on Cruiser or larger hull only. Like a cyno, it restricts your movement. You've stated yourself. Quote:You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie
You are quoting the wrong fozzie.
Quote:Drastically reduced time of uncontested sov capture - CCP Fozzie
Now go and contest it. If you have ANYTHING AT ALL on the grid, trollceptor is teeth-less. If you can't put stuff on the grid, stop crying, it's not fozziesov's problem. |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
458
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:26:24 -
[288] - Quote
RatKnight1 wrote:So, we can still fly trollceptors?
Yeah.
A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.
Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game.
Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday.
Interceptors online needs to go away.
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.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:29:12 -
[289] - Quote
yogizh wrote:Emmy Mnemonic wrote:yogizh wrote:Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing. Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples. Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank.
Because when you gewn, you gewn hard - I mean, jump bridges ceased to exist... when again?
Really, trust it to gewns to be afraid of rolling in their own region...
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday.
Interceptors online needs to go away.
Delicious gewn tears. Keep it coming!
ED: In case someone misunderstands, the post above states "qqqq I can't kill a paper plane ship, nerf pls". |
Marian Devers
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
87
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:31:12 -
[290] - Quote
> CCP introduces new mechanics
> Players adapt to new mechanics with unique fits
> CCP "No, don't use -those- fits, we didn't account for it"
> CCP bans new fits
Right, let's just skip the next 6 months of patches and fixes straight to the part where you give us a prefitted ship to entosis with. Because apparently, players have the gall to react to your introduced mechanics in unexpected ways.
P.S. if mechanics encourage certain fits, you don't ban the fits. You change the mechanics!
|
|
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
458
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:31:39 -
[291] - Quote
I also like the irony of the architects of burn Jita and hulkageddon whining the most about trolling.
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.
|
Koebmand
Silverflames
43
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:36:54 -
[292] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:The only thing proven about Dominion is that it's been slowly but surely killing EVE's fun and subscriber count since launch.
Correct me if wrong but ..
Dominion was released in 2009.
Eve subscriber count grows steadily until 2013.
Does not look like Dominion caused fading numbers. |
Andre Lvov
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:42:59 -
[293] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. With vacation season winding down here in Iceland, we're fast approaching the first release since the Aegis Sovereignty deployment: Galatea on August 25th. Galatea will contain the first (and definitely not the last) set of updates to the sov capture system released in Aegis, thanks in large part to your excellent feedback and observations we've made of the first few weeks of the new system on Tranquility. This first set of adjustments is focused on the capture times and maximum number of Command Nodes, as well as some tweaks to the Entosis Link penalties itself. The first and most significant change in this release is that we are reducing the base capture time of Structure Command Nodes from 10 minutes to 4 minutes, and Station Services from 5 minutes to 4 minutes. This means the capture times for these structures will range from a minimum of 4 minutes (for defenders and when the multiplier is at its base of 1) to a maximum of 24 minutes (for attackers against a 6x multiplier structure). This change only applies to Command Nodes and Station Services, NOT to the initial reinforcement of a sov structure (which keep their current base capture time of 10 minutes).To help ensure that defenders maintain a robust but fair advantage, we are also starting the defending alliance off with 60% control in the overall event tug of war when nodes start spawning. This means that an uncontested defense will now require capture of 8 nodes at 4 minutes (plus warmup) a piece, down from 10x10 before. In total, the fastest possible defense would require 4 players and 12 minutes post-Galatea, compared to 5 players and 24 minutes pre-Galatea. To help reduce the clutter that builds up in lower value systems when capture events are left for extended periods of time uncontested, we are also reducing the cap on total nodes that can spawn per structure from 20 to 10. We are also reducing the spawn rate of randomly appearing extra nodes by approximately 50% (this second part only applies to the randomly spawning extra nodes, not the the nodes that spawn instantly when old ones are completed). We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty. We are also releasing the first batch of Sov UI little things, which CCP Punkturis and CCP Sharq sourced from your feedback in this thread. These changes include an overview of sov data in the constellation show-info window, direct access to the default vulnerability timer and a new region column in the sov dashboard and improved tooltips in the infrastructure hub UI. Punkturis is continuing to work on improving the sov UI and we encourage people to keep posting their requests in the little things thread. Finally this release also contains a number of bug fixes, some of which are quite visible (Alliance logos once again appearing in space on the TCU) and others which improve handling of rare edge cases (such as alliances disbanding mid-fight) and back-end code. The Galatea is just the beginning of our commitment to iterating and improving nullsec and sov. We are hard at work on the changing coming in future releases, including formal methods for dropping sov, the ability to turn IHub upgrades on and off, updates to the formula for calculating activity defense multipliers, new PVE experiences for sov nullsec and much more. Nullsec and Sov remain our focus here at Team Five 0 and we'll be continuing to update you on progress as we go forward. We are listening to your feedback and continuing to observe the results of our changes as we make them. These Galatea changes will also obviously not be the final changes to the capture mechanics themselves. We have some changes we know we want to make (like partially captured structures returning to defender control at a slow constant regeneration pace to reduce the need for "maintenance linking") and others that we don't want to rule out but that also need more investigation and internal/external discussion before making final decisions (such as ship restrictions on Entosis Links). Thanks to everyone who's been providing constructive feedback so far, we hope you'll continue. Thanks everyone, and good hunting!
CCP Fozzie - ASSASSIN EVE ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
FOZZISOV -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHcXlyhgzHM LOOOOOOOOOOLLL
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437423
http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
459
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:52:01 -
[294] - Quote
Alphaomega21 wrote:If you want to truly fix the sovereignty system once and for all remove it completely and base who's name is on the map by the alliance who has the greatest number of pilots out in space. Then you can start working on the problem of making 0.0 worth fighting over. Maybe by buffing moons so alliances can have an income source that is worth taking.
Best post of the month
+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.
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:57:29 -
[295] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:Allawa Phantom wrote:like what the **** kind of fix is this? 4K isnt a limit most ships you cant even get to 4K. Even with an over-sized propmod.
What CCP has done here is made Torll Ceptors More Trolly. The 4M limit will INCREASE the amount of Troll Hacking Which is the UNDER LYING PROBLEM with this sov system.
An Atron with a single overdrive can break 4km/s, and catch troll ceptors now.
Not when the troll ceptor is already 300 km off the node by the time you land and his cycle is about to end and then he cloaks lofl.....Have you played eve???
You can just burn away as soon as someone comes in local to defend. No risk for attacker at all
BTW i found a way to stop troll T3's that are interdiction nullified and cloaky...But I was warned that i would be banned if i continued....Thanks CCP fun times.
Here is a good pic of the drone sphere around the gate that worked very well at (Controlling our space ) but I guess im only allowed to control who comes in and out of my space as long as it does not include PvP immune ships that are trolling my stations and stealing my sites.
I recommend this for fun. Drone sphere |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
459
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:58:14 -
[296] - Quote
Silvia Heart wrote:MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners. Go back to your little hole you trash alliance, idiots like you guys and team 5-0 are literally the cancer killing this game from the inside out.
w
a
n
k
e
r
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.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1825
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 10:58:54 -
[297] - Quote
Stop trying to claim more space than you can defend, you bunch of bads. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1825
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:00:26 -
[298] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:You can just burn away as soon as someone comes in local to defend. No risk for attacker at all
I wasn't aware you LIVED in a system whilst NOT being there. That's some impressive shitposting right there.
There is no risk for an attacker if no-one is there. WORKING AS INTENDED. |
Atum' Ra
Nomen-illis-Legio
Legion of xXDEATHXx
85
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:02:34 -
[299] - Quote
Fozzie is that a joke?
Where the real changes?
The creation of alliance cost 1 billion
One system cost 1 ceptor (about 50 millions)
Where is logic?
Speed of ceptors was 4000-5400 m/s
You are doing just 4000
O_o
WTF?
Entosis must be only at capitall class even BS is not good for that!
Claim is a serious business! Enterance which SHOULD COST TWICE as expensive than the low-sec pvp and POS wars.
High-sec 1.0 (base)
Low-sec x2.0
Nul-sec x4.0
WH x8.0
Everything else too: the war, the yield, the taxes etc.
Where the stages of evolution?
|
Lena Lazair
Khanid's Legion Irregulars
Khanid's Legion
521
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:09:00 -
[300] - Quote
Gessiel wrote:but I've scoured 25 systems and not red/neut to be found.
But how many blues?
|
|
|
Atum' Ra
Nomen-illis-Legio
Legion of xXDEATHXx
85
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:09:22 -
[301] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Stop trying to claim more space than you can defend, you bunch of bads.
Stop atack the space which you can't claim. Only trololo ceptor you can and nothig more!
Create an alliance, gather the fleet, build carriers in low-sec and attack!
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:10:31 -
[302] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:You can just burn away as soon as someone comes in local to defend. No risk for attacker at all I wasn't aware you LIVED in a system whilst NOT being there. That's some impressive shitposting right there. There is no risk for an attacker if no-one is there. WORKING AS INTENDED.
If the system has no stations can you live there ??? Is that the new meta just staying in the same ship in a pos or cloaked all day in a system that is not suitable for CTA formups I guess we should have people AFK cloaked in every system we have any pos in. EVE do you Play it ???? You are the cancer killing this game. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
23
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:10:59 -
[303] - Quote
Sjugar02 wrote:
Would you like to explain to the uninformed masses why PL doesn't have or want sov and how this relates to you defending the new sov system?
what makes you think i'm speaking on behalf of PL? also what makes you think that me defending new sov has anything to do with me being in PL or with PL allegedly not having and not wanting sov? |
bear mcgreedy
Shadow State
The Bastion
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:11:28 -
[304] - Quote
If you insist on this entosis bull make it so these so called small gang warfare can happen
remove the ceptor idea totally its bull no major entity wants it 0.0 it doesn't create content, as command ships are not used due to t3 boosters make it so the command ships can entosis maybe review the bonuses that it gets a hp boost while in entosis mode (similar to bastion on marauder) also make it so the entosising ship can also receive reps. but can be jammed or the cycle can be itterupted to reset the timer
alternatively look at t3 having a subsystem which means it can entosis but make it so the subsystem is the same as nullified so to stop them be able to warp off while bubbled.
the whole idea of taking sov is that as an attacker you want that system not for sh*ts and giggles by having a command ship have the entosis link it means that you have more to lose by travelling through hostile systems with support this will be seen by hostile scouts be reported and a fleet will be scattered to go intercept why ? because content is created and kms to be had.
look at every single video ccp has made when you have a so called fight every ship has support in a hostile system im waiting cor the new trailer where you just have one ceptor going around the system for 3 minutes
take the ceptor idea and throw it away before you either get fired or get made redundant fozzie..
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:11:46 -
[305] - Quote
Atum' Ra wrote:afkalt wrote:
Stop trying to claim more space than you can defend, you bunch of bads.
Stop atack the space which you can't claim. Only trololo ceptor you can and nothig more! Create an alliance, gather the fleet, build carriers in low-sec and attack!
Sorry, it aint going to work like that. you don't get to hold sov afk and with the thread of supers of doom any more.
Adapt, or fade into insignificance. The choice is yours, no-one elses. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:15:18 -
[306] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:afkalt wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:You can just burn away as soon as someone comes in local to defend. No risk for attacker at all I wasn't aware you LIVED in a system whilst NOT being there. That's some impressive shitposting right there. There is no risk for an attacker if no-one is there. WORKING AS INTENDED. If the system has no stations can you live there ??? Is that the new meta just staying in the same ship in a pos or cloaked all day in a system that is not suitable for CTA formups I guess we should have people AFK cloaked in every system we have any pos in. EVE do you Play it ???? You are the cancer killing this game.
Hah.
You think you have problems? Wait until the wormholes guys get citadels where even one jump from home can disappear in a blink and you don't have local to spot interlopers. Those guys will need to put alts not just in system, but on EVERY grid of EVERY citadel.
The full expectation of WHers are you LIVE in the system, the system which has inconsistent anoms, no local, no stations....but yeah, you guys are hard done by here.
You're full of first world problems here bro. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
23
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:16:35 -
[307] - Quote
Atum' Ra wrote:Fozzie is that a joke?
Where the real changes?
The creation of alliance cost 1 billion
One system cost 1 ceptor (about 50 millions)
Where is logic?
in order to be able to contest sov ceptor needs to be in alliance
so the pilot needs to pay same 1b
now when a pilot in said ceptor comes to capture a system that no one turned up to defend, he puts on the field 50m more than defender did.
that's the logic. |
Mischa Gau'ss Tesla
WHITE FLAG.
The Bastion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:16:56 -
[308] - Quote
From my point of view, fozzie sov has just been a miss for now:
Before it, taking a system was starting a war, putting major fleets, firepower, a lot of man and effort on taking big objectives. Taking a system was something, you had to fight for it... Now, people just come with one or two fast ships and orbit a sov structure 250k off... no fighting, no strategy, no effort.
What i liked and still like in eve is it's variety, and a thing that has been removed by fozzie is the actual BIG part of eve, two (or more) alliances fighting in huge fleets to get control of space. This is the so called blobbing, which is, even if you don't like it, a way of playing. Small gang always existed in ganking, factional warfare,... big fight just tend to disappear, just like dread, titans and other carriers will become useless (which is a shame, fighting around those ships is interesting, the fact they need support fleets making giving the fight a great aspect and making coordination critical).
Empires where build by man followed by a thousands, not by some lonely pilot orbiting in a system. People like TLOTR because of it's big epic fights, star wars because of the huge fleets fighting around the deathstar; and the efforts of Frodon and Luke were supported by a lot of lives, they did not just took the control by themselves!
Fozzie sov on an other hand offers good ideas, but in a bad way. If entosis was limited to the biggest classes of ships, if there were a risk to take to entosis a system then it could be good... fozzie sov just need to bring the meaning of war back to new eden, for now, it just takes the meaning of "run".
My suggestions:
- limit entosis to bigger ships (BC's ad over);
- bring back the fight, for example by giving "control points" when an ennemy entosis ship is destroyed, or just for destroying ennemies,... plenty of ideas can be used here, just think about it BEFORE releasing the new system...
What is bad in actual system:
- one lonely interceptor or recon can still entosis a system while being hard to catch... just because of speed and range;
- no fights for a system, in most of the case it is just a time attack;
- the actual system seems to not have been thought through...
Oh and before some whiners say it: yes, i'm from the imperium/cfc, and yes, I see blobbing as a way of playing, and yes, number is a force, that i think should be the most important in a mmo (MASSIVELY MULTIplayer online ;) ).
Ty for your reading! o7 |
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
470
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:17:47 -
[309] - Quote
Alphaomega21 wrote:If you want to truly fix the sovereignty system once and for all remove it completely and base who's name is on the map by the alliance who has the greatest number of pilots out in space. Then you can start working on the problem of making 0.0 worth fighting over. Maybe by buffing moons so alliances can have an income source that is worth taking.
Managed to be funnier than all the CFC salt. Post of the day.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Lena Lazair
Khanid's Legion Irregulars
Khanid's Legion
521
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:18:58 -
[310] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:BTW i found a way to stop troll T3's that are interdiction nullified and cloaky...But I was warned that i would be banned if i continued....Thanks CCP fun times.
Good job for discovering a decloaking tactic that's been around (and bannable if it affects server performance) since 2006. It has nothing to do with fozziesov and nothing to do with this thread.
|
|
|
Sigras
Conglomo
1051
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:19:59 -
[311] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:I'm saying this as nicely as possible. Fozziesov is a broken and fundamentally flawed system. No amount of tweaking will ever make it work as well as either of the two previous sov systems.
Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end.
Fozziesov is not fun for a sov defender, who has to race to defend buffer zones from entities who have no intention of actually taking your space, or holding it, or even using it.
It's not fun to chase interceptors around. This has also been a problem as far back as since interceptors recieved bubble immunty which was also one of the worst design decisions in the history of Eve.
I have 2 objections to to this line of thinking:
1. Later on in your own post you state that Eve is not a game that is meant to be fun, so why are you using the "fun" argument now?
2. I'm not sure if you were playing a different game than I was, but structure bashing was one of the most insufferable things we were forced to do on a regular basis. The only thing worse was a RR op. Sure the Entosis mechanic isnt any better but it certainly isnt any worse than before either.
Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov lacks permanence. Under Dominion sov, losing a system was potentially, for all intents and purposes, permanent. It could potentially fall into a timezone from which you would never be able to take it back. Under Fozziesov, you can lose systems and take them back later. Losing your space therefore has far less value. There is less on the line.
I'm not sure I understand... Isnt the risk the same that your system could fall to an alliance with a vulnerability window outside your TZ?
Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov discourages fighting because it does not force an entity to control a grid in order to win an objective. Ironically, this was one of the stated goals of the system. It discourages fighting because there is no need to commit anything more to win an objective than a single sovhacker.
Here I completely agree, I believe the Entosis links should have their cycle timer extended at the very least.
Reagalan wrote:The ADMs of Fozziesov aim to restrict the size of a space empire on the concept of "occupancy sov". In hindsight, "occupancy sov" was a misguided and flawed concept. The size of a space empire should not be limited to the amount of space it can utilize, but by the military pressure exerted by the other players and their space empires.
This is quite convenient coming from a member of the largest military force in the game... "Peace is having a bigger stick than the other guy" says the guy selling the sticks.
Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.
Need I remind you the problems your own alliance had with the Dominion sov system? I remember listening to your directors whine about how "CCP really screwed up this sovereignty system" In fact Goonswarm claimed that was one of the reasons you lost Delve to IT Alliance.
Look, I'll be the first one to say that this system needs work. At the very least the module cycle time should be made longer to force a ship to commit to the fight, but let's not get graduation goggles and make ridiculous claims like saying the old system was fun and engaging. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
291
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:21:20 -
[312] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:Allawa Phantom wrote:like what the **** kind of fix is this? 4K isnt a limit most ships you cant even get to 4K. Even with an over-sized propmod.
What CCP has done here is made Torll Ceptors More Trolly. The 4M limit will INCREASE the amount of Troll Hacking Which is the UNDER LYING PROBLEM with this sov system.
An Atron with a single overdrive can break 4km/s, and catch troll ceptors now.
Quit making ******* sense, they don't understand, nor comprehend that |
Andre Lvov
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:22:39 -
[313] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Stop trying to claim more space than you can defend, you bunch of bads.
CCP Fozzie & FOZZISOV---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHcXlyhgzHM
¦¦C¦¦C¦¦P¦¦ ¦¦F¦¦o¦¦z¦¦z¦¦i¦¦e¦¦ & ¦¦F¦¦O¦¦Z¦¦Z¦¦I¦¦S¦¦O¦¦V¦¦---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvB2nRGMl2c
______________________________________________________________
CCP Fozzie - ASSASSIN EVE Online ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! |
Lena Lazair
Khanid's Legion Irregulars
Khanid's Legion
521
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:22:54 -
[314] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Alphaomega21 wrote:If you want to truly fix the sovereignty system once and for all remove it completely and base who's name is on the map by the alliance who has the greatest number of pilots out in space. Then you can start working on the problem of making 0.0 worth fighting over. Maybe by buffing moons so alliances can have an income source that is worth taking. Managed to be funnier than all the CFC salt. Post of the day.
Funny because accurate. CCP's true sov mistake was ever giving in to the requests to make sov an "in-game" thing. Should have just kept adding more API endpoints to facilitate out-of-game tools being able to decide for themselves who "owns" a system. It's easy enough to fix now though... just remove TCU's entirely and drop sov requirements on supercap assembly arrays so they can be anchored in any system with a gate (since we don't want filthy wormholers having supercaps). |
Drie L
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:31:26 -
[315] - Quote
CCP Fozzie / FOZZISOV + EvE Online = DEATH EvE Online |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:31:56 -
[316] - Quote
If you want another B-R, you are welcome to YOLO your supers into CFC space. I GUARANTEE the epic tidi fest you were hoping for would occur.
But you won't, will you? So how bad do you really want these fights? Because you could make them happen no problem at all.
Or is this more about not being able to hold a stupid amount of space for a very small headcount? I feel like you're throwing out white noise to distract form the fact you have a stupid number of systems and a stupidly lower headcount to hold them. |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
459
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:33:21 -
[317] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:Nevil Kincade wrote:Allawa Phantom wrote:I Smell MOA Tears
Its really ironic how the entities who say this system is brilliant is the trolls who run around and entosis stuff then run at the first sight of danger We are not trolls, we fight CFC every day with great success and you know it. It's bad enough that the blob of garbage forces it's pvp style on so many players but the political bullshit going even into game design is a danger to Eve as a product. Yep, that's why numbers started dwindling at a disturbing rate ever since fozziesov hit TQ. It must be because it is such a great success and of course all we want is to destroy the game by having the cause of EVE's dwindling numbers reverted. Hang on, I'm confused now ...
Numbers have been dwindling since long before Fozziesov and even Phoebe.
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.
|
Andre Lvov
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:45:45 -
[318] - Quote
afkalt wrote:If you want another B-R, you are welcome to YOLO your supers into CFC space. I GUARANTEE the epic tidi fest you were hoping for would occur. But you won't, will you? So how bad do you really want these fights? Because you could make them happen no problem at all. Or is this more about not being able to hold a stupid amount of space for a very small headcount? I feel like you're throwing out white noise to distract form the fact you have a stupid number of systems and a stupidly lower headcount to hold them.
I think youGÇÖre wrong . |
Andre Lvov
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:47:54 -
[319] - Quote
CCP Fozzie kill EVE . |
Andre Lvov
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:50:37 -
[320] - Quote
CCP Fozzie - shame CCP . |
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:50:45 -
[321] - Quote
Well I await the battle reports of you YOLOing supers around into CFC space then.
There is nothing stopping doing this you but your own trappings of fear.
Note I shall not be holding my breath for this fight, as it will never happen and that has exactly nothing to do with aegis sov and EVERYTHING to do with your own risk aversion winning out over a sense of fun.
You see, you *****, cry, scream and yell like petulant children about these great battles, which if you were so inclined could happen this weekend if you really wanted. But you DON'T really want this and the complaints and parallels have NOTHING to do with the new system.
You're crying because you're too thinly spread and too pigheaded to do anything about it but cry.
The very least you can do, is be honest about it. |
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
5656
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:53:44 -
[322] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:5pitf1re wrote:Yep, that's why numbers started dwindling at a disturbing rate ever since fozziesov hit TQ. It must be because it is such a great success and of course all we want is to destroy the game by having the cause of EVE's dwindling numbers reverted.
Hang on, I'm confused now ... Numbers have been dwindling since long before Fozziesov and even Phoebe.
I actually want Goons to make good on their threats and mass-quit the game. Every time I see one of them threatening to cancel their sub, I feel like egging them on. Hell, let the entire CFC vanish in smoke. I'd love to see the look on their faces when they realise they aren't nearly as vital to this game as they think they are.
Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.
Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.
Andreus Ixiris > ...
Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
|
Andre Lvov
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:54:03 -
[323] - Quote
FOZZISOV It is a big failure CCP Fozzie . |
Dantelion Shinoni
SQUIDS.
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 11:59:27 -
[324] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:
[...]
Why has CCP decided that the minimum barrier to entry as a Sov holding entity is a 50 mill, T2 frigate?
The intent was good. By allowing all kind of ships to have the Entosis Link you ensured that people from all space could use it. As it is a tool that is supposed to be universal and used to deal with structures all over EVE in the future, it made sense that the most fits should have access to it.
However the problem is that this mechanic also interacts with Sov, and some class of ships are way too toxic to be allowed to mess with Sov. Interceptors Nullification make them a direct candidate for exclusion, Cruisers with 500mn too. But still, despite some ships being way too toxic to have the mechanic, you still need the Link to be available at the Small, Medium, Large, and X-Large scale.
Also, reposting this idea that has been posted on Reddit (I know, I know...) which I think is actually quite good when it comes to solving several problems:
Quote:
Entosis links are a Warfare Link.
Assault Frigates can use Warfare Links now.
Fixed.
Although there is a problem in that T3 cruisers can still fit the module and those can go past bubbles at least a T3 cruiser is a juicy killmail unlike an Interceptor, still another simpler alternative could be:
Quote:
Entosis Links limited to Assault Frigates, BattleCruisers and higher.
I still like the first idea because it would give Assault Frigates the long awaited utility to make them distinct, useful, and no longer obsolete when compared to T3 Destroyers, plus it opens up the possibility of smaller size fleets having access to a viable link ship in the hypothetical scenario where On-Grid Links are a reality. But the second idea makes sure that only ships that have to commit to the grid, due to being slow in general, would be able to contest Sov.
But hey, maybe just having the Link prevents any kind of Nullification and have a speed/align time penalty is the simpler solution.
So yeah you have many components for a solution really:
- Limit the Entosis Link to BC and up while allowing Assault Frigates to use one for S/M-size fleets.
- Make the Entosis Link become a Warfare Link.
- An align time penalty imposed by the Entosis Link.
- Further speed penalties.
- Decouple the Entosis Link from Structure "warfare" and dedicate it to Sov Warfare, asking users to be immobile and committed when contesting Sov.
- Make another kind of Link that can't contest Sov for cases where you need fleets to have flexibility when it comes to engagement.
As long as the link becomes more of a tool of commitment than a tool of trolling, things will get better really fast. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
350
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:01:18 -
[325] - Quote
I still think that the first reinforcement of a sov structure should require several concurrent entosis cycles (which could be run all at once by a small gang, or one ship can attempt to run several subsequent cycles). This would curb most trollceptor use entirely, while forcing at least an authentic commitment from an enemy. |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:02:28 -
[326] - Quote
Nice measured changes to the new Sov.
Also nice to see CCP isn't falling for the shenanigans of late.
Can't wait to see what we have in store for Capital changes.
|
Andre Lvov
Keepers of Balance
Legion of xXDEATHXx
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:05:01 -
[327] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Well I await the battle reports of you YOLOing supers around into CFC space then.
There is nothing stopping doing this you but your own trappings of fear.
Note I shall not be holding my breath for this fight, as it will never happen and that has exactly nothing to do with aegis sov and EVERYTHING to do with your own risk aversion winning out over a sense of fun.
You see, you *****, cry, scream and yell like petulant children about these great battles, which if you were so inclined could happen this weekend if you really wanted. But you DON'T really want this and the complaints and parallels have NOTHING to do with the new system.
You're crying because you're too thinly spread and too pigheaded to do anything about it but cry.
The very least you can do, is be honest about it.
You're a liar and a provocateur. Go to ***** . |
TigerXtrm
Black Thorne Corporation
Black Thorne Alliance
1210
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:10:06 -
[328] - Quote
Cat silth wrote:More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not
Okay I don't get this reasoning. Litterally the only difference between shooting and entosising in this game currently is the sound and visual effect of the weapon. When you're sieging a structure with 8 guns you're still orbiting and pressing F1, same as now. If they made the Entosis link make a pew pew sound, would that make it more fun for you?
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Crazy Vania
Calamitous-Intent
Feign Disorder
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:11:25 -
[329] - Quote
Hi. I rarely give feedback here but since I've been greatly enjoying fozziesov so far, and since CCP has done a major effort to listen, why not:
For groups like mine, Fozziesov has been the greatest thing. All the naysayers out there can just die out, I couldn't care less. The amount of PvP we've gotten out of purely entosis trolling is monstruous. We've accidentally acquired 4 stations so far. We've evicted big groups that were too bloated and confident to understand that they were at risk. We've had the best killboard months our "low-sec scrub" pvp group has ever gotten. So my first thingy here is: thank you CCP for fozziesov.
Now for this specific update's feedback: YES PLZ for the node time reduction. One hour nodes were starting to turn us off considerably. You've fixed this.
But on the speed reduction on entosis ship, please, please listen to this: don't make it "WHEN FITTED". Make it "WHEN ACTIVE". You are killing a brand new wave of clever ship fitting if you make it "WHEN FITTED".
Make active entosis links as slow as you want! But don't punish people for merely fitting an entosis link to their ships. Combat Entosis dual purpose fits exist ! And we don't want to slow down just for having the module in one of the highs. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:11:27 -
[330] - Quote
Andre Lvov wrote:afkalt wrote:Well I await the battle reports of you YOLOing supers around into CFC space then.
There is nothing stopping doing this you but your own trappings of fear.
Note I shall not be holding my breath for this fight, as it will never happen and that has exactly nothing to do with aegis sov and EVERYTHING to do with your own risk aversion winning out over a sense of fun.
You see, you *****, cry, scream and yell like petulant children about these great battles, which if you were so inclined could happen this weekend if you really wanted. But you DON'T really want this and the complaints and parallels have NOTHING to do with the new system.
You're crying because you're too thinly spread and too pigheaded to do anything about it but cry.
The very least you can do, is be honest about it. You're a liar and a provocateur. Go to ***** .
The only one lying here, is you my friend.
Tell me, what's stopping you dropping supers into CFC space at the weekend? |
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:19:59 -
[331] - Quote
Dantelion Shinoni wrote:
Although there is a problem in that T3 cruisers can still fit the module and those can go past bubbles at least a T3 cruiser is a juicy killmail unlike an Interceptor, still another simpler alternative could be:
it doesn't really matter what ship attacker has if the defender didn't show up
there will be no kill mail either way |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:25:23 -
[332] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:Yep, that's why numbers started dwindling at a disturbing rate ever since fozziesov hit TQ. It must be because it is such a great success and of course all we want is to destroy the game by having the cause of EVE's dwindling numbers reverted.
Hang on, I'm confused now ...
I hate to point out to you Mr. Fivepitfonere, but EVE's subscriber count has been dwindling since well before Phoebe and Fozziesov. The current slump EVE is experiencing started back in February of 2014 which was right after Halloween War ended and those running the vast rental empires (N3, CFC, PL, & XIX) decided not to risk those empires after this massive war because that'd be bad. After Phoebe however, only one group gave up their rental empire while another crumbled. The remaining two are the most vocal of those complaining about the current sov system because they appear unwilling to actively defend those systems or part with them.
Fozziesov is a total of 1 month old at this time, it's far from the deathknell of EVE when you take the previous two years and actions of the larger powerblocs into consideration. It does make a good scapegoat though, I'll admit that but so does CCP Sounwave's involvement in the Monoclegate business.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
JetStream Drenard
Black Fox Marauders
Spaceship Bebop
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:26:04 -
[333] - Quote
Syri Taneka wrote:Amy Garzan wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended. News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills? Think that over. All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years?
This.
The player base ruined null sec long ago, They intuited that the Goon warfare methods were the most practical way to win sov with the least effort. The players institutionalized the methods that worked the best. All this means is that fighting in null is the most horribly boring, soul destroying thing that ever happens in the game pvp-wise.
That no sane people want to go to null sec to get blue balled or hell blobbed. So daily focused pvp happens everyday in low sec where people go to have fun.
Remove all sovereignty and take their names off the map. |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
972
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:26:50 -
[334] - Quote
Huge changes followed by tiny iterations for 9+ months of a system that is crap.
Never change CCP.
Not today spaghetti.
|
Seven Koskanaiken
FinFleet
Northern Coalition.
1626
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:27:34 -
[335] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:RatKnight1 wrote:So, we can still fly trollceptors?
Yeah.
A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.
Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game. Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday. Interceptors online needs to go away.
This was a CSM idea, so blame them.
I'll repeat the points I made at the time about this.
1) An interceptor is already the most likely ship to escape bubbles after nullified T3s. A skilled pilot could already get out of a bubble and escape. So nullifcation was just a plain dumbing-down gift to people who can't fly their ships.
2) The logic was that "ceptors were made to chase and catch things". But the change was made simultaneously with the changes to warp speed. So if a ship and a non nullified ceptor warp together towards a bubble, the ceptor will land long before the ship, and will be at 0km to its prey, and be in a better position to catch than if it skids right through the bubble 80km to the gate. If the other pilot is smart and bounces off a celestial (dscan on narrow angle to starting point will show he's no longer on same trajectory as you) the ceptor can still MWD toward the gate (or backwards+warp if the bubble is > 75km) and be there before the other ship lands from his bounce because of the new slower warp speeds.
Add to this they had to nerf agility (which ceptors actually do need) to balance the nullifcation (which they don't).
It was just dumbing down, plain and simple. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
2209
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:33:37 -
[336] - Quote
Andre Lvov wrote:FOZZISOV It is a big failure CCP Fozzie . Yup. A colossal failure.
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.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6575
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:34:44 -
[337] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:Syri Taneka wrote:All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years? This. The player base ruined null sec long ago, They intuited that the Goon warfare methods were the most practical way to win sov with the least effort. The players institutionalized the methods that worked the best. All this means is that fighting in null is the most horribly boring, soul destroying thing that ever happens in the game pvp-wise. That no sane people want to go to null sec to get blue balled or hell blobbed. So daily focused pvp happens everyday in low sec where people go to have fun. Remove all sovereignty and take their names off the map. Lol? How is it more accessible? You might be able to contest it, but you still can't live in it without either renting or blueing, since you'll just get farmed when the larger groups get bored. And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled
Initiative Mercenaries
783
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:37:29 -
[338] - Quote
Wow this thread is so salty I died of dehydration. Limiting the Entosis to BCs and BSs is bad gameplay, cruisers are often used to control the grid, HACs and pirate Cruisers especially.
3000m/s would control trollceptors while still allowing nano gangs the ability to move around.
Alternatively, why not disallow a ship with an active entosis link from leaving the range of the entosis link? If you can't make an artificial barrier, then cause their ship to explode. Put in some lore about the mind of the capsuleer being seperated from his/her ship when the entosis link is broken.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
361
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:40:14 -
[339] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Alphaomega21 wrote:If you want to truly fix the sovereignty system once and for all remove it completely and base who's name is on the map by the alliance who has the greatest number of pilots out in space. Then you can start working on the problem of making 0.0 worth fighting over. Maybe by buffing moons so alliances can have an income source that is worth taking. Managed to be funnier than all the CFC salt. Post of the day.
Ah, welcome! We were looking for the clueless highsec salvager to comment on the null sov changes, and you did not disappoint to deliver. Now all we need is a low class wormhole PvE farmer to comment on them as well, because why the hell not?
(For other readers, this person has been talking without a clue re: fozzie sov since it's very early announcement, and if you take a look at his corp history, you'll find out that he is a high-sec salvager) |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
361
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:43:53 -
[340] - Quote
Aldjor Dayman wrote:Nevil Kincade wrote:NO FOZZY !
NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
You are being told a fairy tale!
We have taken a couple of systems (and lost them again) but never due to a single 'trolling' ship. This stuff just doesnt happen in reality against an organized alliance/coalition. It always involved fending of ewar and controlling access to the system. Perhaps stalling for time to get the entosis done but ultimately because the defenders CAME IN TOO LATE. And whos fault is that ?
I cant believe you are giving into this whining of people who just DONT WANT TO PVP. You should see the reality of 'Entosis Trolling' with your own eyes before you make such decisions. The defender comes in, jams the Entosis ship and your warm-up cylce goes to **** wasting you 20 minutes. And if you fit a ship to counter that kitsune or falcon by outrunning it they scream "Unfair! Unfair! Fozzy nerf it pleeeease !!!"
What is this bullshit ? Sov defence by crying for nerfs ? And you play along ???
Entosis links seriously need e-war immunity or be able to keep running without a lock-on !
What do you think how many successfull jams a falcon can get off during the warm-up cycle, 20, 200 ? Because thats the amount of Entosis ships you will need in the future to capture a TCU against a defender who is actually on the ball.
And what if you field 20 ECM ships or 100 ? That gets us to a number the server cant even handle.
And how dare those that own sov to define that kiting is not a proper strategy to fight over a system ? They could easily have put on their OWN ENTOSIS onto the TCU and stopped the attackers progress. If they were TRULY holding the field that shouldnt be a problem right ? Our 9k m/s Entosis ships never could stay on grid with an actual force arriving by the way.
Again: Fozzy bro is believing a fairytale.
What was happening the last few weeks was EXACTLY what Aegis Sov was meant to do: Make power blocs realize they cant occupy all the space themselves. They were supposed to feel the pain of an empire overstretch and make a tough call about what space is worth the effort.
THEY WERE MEANT TO LOOSE SPACE ! And not only the part they choose to. Now they are starting to loose their face in being outplayed and loosing Sov so they throw all their political power at CCP. Of course on the cost of the entire player base.
Please grow a spine you lush sack of potatoe meal ... im so ******* disappointed, you were the last hope for content and conflict in Eve.
P.S.
Aegis Sov has made Pure Blind a content garden of even. Sure the Sov holders don't like to get slaughtered in skirmishes now that they are forced upon them but the content generation part of the new system is absolutely working.
Congratz on that part CCP!
Please don't give up. All the criticism is purely political and certainly not about fun and explosion. Unfortunately this post has no credibility because you come from the bottom of the dumpster.
You realize now in MoA internal forums, you will now be referenced as a Goon alt? :P |
|
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:44:53 -
[341] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system. Ah yes. Where goons reigned supreme with the Blob or GTFO tactics on, well on everything. How about no.
I'm sorry as an EX HERO member myself.. an EX fighter Against your Group when I lived in Providence.. You people Blob as much as goons back when you didn't murder your membership numbers with bad ideas. Back when Brave Newbies was a classy and respectable group with great ideologies. Back when every MAJOR power bloc started rolling out their own versions of Brave Dojo because they RESPECT how BNI was handling things. When Powerblocs started changing how they handled things internally into the ways BNI handled them. Lets not Forget the Brave we all knew, Loved, respected, mocked, faught, and cheered forward to great heights.
Brave was becoming Goonswarm 2.0 until you failscaded due to EGO. Hubris led to the downfall of your great alliance, it's many coupes, its abandonment of great corporations, lets not forget about the Internal Destruction of the Hopefully Effective Rookie Organization (H.E.R.O). But let us make no Mistake.. BNI was BLOB or GTFO when it's members Enjoyed logging in. |
JetStream Drenard
Black Fox Marauders
Spaceship Bebop
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:44:57 -
[342] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:JetStream Drenard wrote:Syri Taneka wrote:All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years? This. The player base ruined null sec long ago, They intuited that the Goon warfare methods were the most practical way to win sov with the least effort. The players institutionalized the methods that worked the best. All this means is that fighting in null is the most horribly boring, soul destroying thing that ever happens in the game pvp-wise. That no sane people want to go to null sec to get blue balled or hell blobbed. So daily focused pvp happens everyday in low sec where people go to have fun. Remove all sovereignty and take their names off the map. Lol? How is it more accessible? You might be able to contest it, but you still can't live in it without either renting or blueing, since you'll just get farmed when the larger groups get bored. And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.
You prove my point for me. thank you. How do you stop a null sec from only fighting with a blob. you cant because it is part of their mentality. n+1, yada yada. Null sec needs to feel that it is special, important, relevant. super blobs.
Polarization is human nature of trying to be on a winning team and is only nerfable by putting severe limits on both corp and alliance size, yet there will always be ways around it. Null sec proved for 8 years that it would always find the way around everything to get what they want, and now they cant do it with fozzie sov. Fozzie sov was a good idea that was poorly implemented, even I know that. but it is still a great idea. |
Atum' Ra
Nomen-illis-Legio
Legion of xXDEATHXx
85
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:45:13 -
[343] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Atum' Ra wrote:Fozzie is that a joke?
Where the real changes?
The creation of alliance cost 1 billion
One system cost 1 ceptor (about 50 millions)
Where is logic?
in order to be able to contest sov ceptor needs to be in alliance so the pilot needs to pay same 1b now when a pilot in said ceptor comes to capture a system that no one turned up to defend, he puts on the field 50m more than defender did. that's the logic.
Why someone mst create an alliance?
Someone need to get to the alliance! Hi-sec alliace and nothing more!
That char can be an alt of anyone with 1 mil SP
That sound like: " I'm 8 years old I know very much about everything, and now I want to be a president of a small country! Give me please the ability to be! " 
That sov is the benining of the end. |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2340
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:45:54 -
[344] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us.
Thank you very much. This is exactly how I feel. CCP if you want to force us to play the game like this then do it. Stop guiding and pushing us. Do the sledgehammer thing, like you usually do and dictate the way we should play. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
361
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:46:29 -
[345] - Quote
yogizh wrote:Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing.
Yes, a ship that can also move between grids at will to be able to catch the entosis trollceptor who is already out of the sov structure grid by the time you land on it from the gate.
Because he'll have seen you drop in local long before you land on grid and he'll have aligned away.
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
193
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:49:14 -
[346] - Quote
Alundil wrote:PopplerRo wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:What does a 4km/s speed limit on atrollceptor actually mean? You can ECM the ceptor using a 16M ISk Dragoon and break his lock, scuppering his warm-up timer. Quote:[Dragoon, test]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
5MN Microwarpdrive II
Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Drone Link Augmentor II
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Hornet EC-300 x 5
.. while the idea is sound that fit is plain stupid. 1.You have no active ecm mod, and those rigs don't work on the drones. 2. The drones are too slow to even catch up to jam the target. For the cost just use a griffin, or an instawarp 'ceptor with active jams in the mids. Land, jam, warp out. Troll 'ceptors with even more cancerous ones Couple points on your points: 1. The Dragoon is a drone dessie. It needs no ECM mods. The rigs aren't there to affect the drones, they allow the Dragoon to target out to 124km. 2. EC-300 drones on the Dragoon can travel up to 5k/s so more than fast enough to catch the magicsovwandingceptors after Galatea. As an aside - the b|tching and moaning taking place in the first 9 pages is already increasing the risk of cardiovascular disease in the playerbase. Ease up folks. Ease up. This set of changes isn't the "sky is falling" moment either. FFS.
I believe what he's trying to say is.. Why chase the damn ceptor with drones and just JAM it period. Land on Grid.. Use Active-ECM mid slot.. Ceptor is jammed.. Frigates do this job well. No need for a dessy. Hell warp in with ECM frig, Jam ceptor... Cloak up and wait for him to come back.. he arrives and starts entosing, let his "warm-up" cycle clear.. Decloak and jam again. Continue until heart is crushed.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
362
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:50:05 -
[347] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Here are my thoughts about the set of 'tweaks' that Fozzie announced:
They are simply amazing.
They absolutely manage to touch and correct almost none of the issues that the majority of null players were pointing out very vocally.
Node reductions might be pointed out as a positive change, but the tweak on them is so light that is suspiciously looks like to me an attempt to damage control after the overwhelmingly negative feedback that has been addressed to Fozzie & the team.
With these levels of excellence at the inability to comprehend the basic demands of the null sov players, I can easily foresee EVE Online going F2P in short to medium term with the current trends of concurrent logins and subscription numbers rapidly bleeding out.
Well done Fozzie, now please do pen a dev blog about how you succeeded on placing the game on life support and prevented the death. Meanwhile, we'll be throwing soil on EVE's casket and saying our prayers in the grim cemetery of reality.
Reagalan made an excellent post about why your ideas and insistence on shoving a certain playstyle down the nullseccers collective throats is a bad idea. You might want to read that several times. The majority of nullsec hasn't pointed to anything. A loud minority, consisting mostly of your alliance is crying and pointing at all the wrong things, rest of the playerbase and devs laugh at your futile mongering. You're wrong, suck it up or just gtfo- there''s literally nobody that cares whether you unsub or not, but at least have the decency to shut up.
Taking a look at Deklein and taking a look at your post shows me that in the end, you will be the one who'll take up your well documented tradition of a) shutting up b) giving up c) quitting
Besides, this thread is a very good demonstrator just like all the sov threads and roundtables before that majority of sov null is against being forced to play this game in just a certain type of way and spend hours of grinding while doing so. Basically, your kind is a very small minority.
However, I do appreciate your candor for trying. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1807
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:50:37 -
[348] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Sjugar02 wrote:
Would you like to explain to the uninformed masses why PL doesn't have or want sov and how this relates to you defending the new sov system?
what makes you think i'm speaking on behalf of PL? also what makes you think that me defending new sov has anything to do with me being in PL or with PL allegedly not having and not wanting sov?
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yfAeMtcURg0/hqdefault.jpg
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
193
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:52:41 -
[349] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Galphii wrote:Consider prohibiting microwarpdrive use while entosis links are running I like this. 4km/s hard limit seems really random to me. What next? 100k EHP hard limit for T3 cruisers? 150km drone control range? 500 GJ/s capacitor regen when in triage?
The field from the Entosis link causes a Disruption to Warp field Generation (It already can't warp out under entosis.. so it follows that lore) disabling the ability for Micro warp drives to be activated in conjunction with the Link. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:53:01 -
[350] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote: Back when every MAJOR power bloc started rolling out their own versions of Brave Dojo because they RESPECT how BNI was handling things.
Except those sort of channels and programs existed well before BRAVE was even a thing. Ask E-UNI, GOONs, TEST, or any of the other dozen or so new player friendly alliances about their newbie education systems. BRAVE didn't really invent anything that didn't already exist.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
|
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
362
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:58:05 -
[351] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:OldWolf69 wrote:Fozzie. What if ppl STILL won't come to TAKE the Sov effectively? Because they won't. WHY in the blue hell would you expose yourself to trolling, and spend a LOT of isk too, if you can be the troll, and this for peanuts? http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
This speaks for itself. You still think your game is kept alive by 2 trolling small gang runners? Or 2-3 forum yellers? or they are just a convenable way to justify bad decisions/total lack of imagination? ....saw a lot of imbecility in corporate ranks. A great lot. But this batch beats them all. I suppose this is because they had ENOUGH things to destroy. And the corporation owners do not give a **** about it. Once again: there is absolutely no real reasons to fight except the economical ones. Or trolling ones. EVERYBODY knows Sov is work, and will be actually worser after all this ****. THIS is a GAME, not a JOB. WE all know you CCP boyz are out of ideeas. Presuming you had some back in time. Ok, HIRE someone able to fix the sandbox. It does cost? Stupidity does cost a lot. CCP lost already more than a good team of Devs does cost. It's already REALLY close to a point of no return, for this game. Every change is fun for exactly 3 days here, like the orthodox wonders. Hallelujah! This is really bad posting, but I have to say it: Delicious subgewn tears. Less bot/multicast accs being bad? No, except if you're gewn, then yes. If holding sov makes you cry, you should not hold sov. Fairly obvious, unless your density is in "gewn or worse" range. If you think the troll has it so nice, why aren't you trolling yet? If a gewn/subgewn quits, good riddance. Can I have your stuff?
Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10 |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6576
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:59:16 -
[352] - Quote
JetStream Drenard wrote:You prove my point for me. thank you. How do you stop a null sec from only fighting with a blob. you cant because it is part of their mentality. n+1, yada yada. Null sec needs to feel that it is special, important, relevant. super blobs.
Polarization is human nature of trying to be on a winning team and is only nerfable by putting severe limits on both corp and alliance size, yet there will always be ways around it. Null sec proved for 8 years that it would always find the way around everything to get what they want, and now they cant do it with fozzie sov. Fozzie sov was a good idea that was poorly implemented, even I know that. but it is still a great idea. Exactly! You can't. You seem to think these mechanics will do that and failing that "just one more nerf (tm)". Whatever system is in place and whoever leaves the game, the alliance level mechanics will always be rules by the players with the biggest stick. Groups will gravitate towards collaboration to overcome their enemies until we're back to exactly the same blob we have always had. The only question is will there even be a population left over when the dust settles.
One of the biggest draws to EVE were the massive space battles that ended up in the news all over the world. Those are now dead. How anyone can consider that a good thing I do not know.
And no, nullsec can still get around everything to get what they want, even with fozziesov. You realise fozziesov isn't hard to defend, right? It's easy to contest but it's difficult to take. The only difference now is that it's boring from both sides and far more frequent. The smaller groups were happy to live with that at first because the dull mechanics were a means to an end, their chance to fight back against the null powers. Now they are already bored and starting to post the same complaints as everyone else.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 12:59:28 -
[353] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10
Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
bear mcgreedy
Shadow State
The Bastion
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:01:22 -
[354] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10 Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad.
thats because they're hammered on vodka |
Aaron Kyoto
The Minutemen
The Bastion
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:01:37 -
[355] - Quote
oodell wrote:Interceptors have been cancer since the day they were released. Not having counters for things in this game has been historically terrible, and right now a gang of interceptors has no counter if they don't want to get caught. Yes you can catch one or two if you're lucky and have the right ships, but the rest blow past you, and you have no way to catch up. Let HICs catch them already.
So Sabres and HICs are bad without Interceptors, since ships without counterplay are bad...?
Giving these changes a chance, personally with hopes they disable entosis on Interceptors and Cloaking ships. |
Arla Sarain
604
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:01:42 -
[356] - Quote
Non of this is productive.
Until a motivation to actually hold sov is established, any capture mechanics will always invite some incoherent philosophy regarding:
what should be easier (capturing or holding)
what assets should be required to engage in a sov conflict
how much undocking should the defender require
the logistics required to occupy out in sov, and consequently prod other groups in local or remote accommodations in order to insinuate a fight (also called content, because explorers, miners, manufacturers, and ratters are not real people. In fact, the "blood thirsty NS f1 wizards are the divine inheritors of all EVE content)
Majority of points in this thread are valid from their PoVs - some people are happy cos Aegis Sov is inviting PvP that those groups can participate in, without the forced commitment to an encounter where they are blobbed.
Others hate it for the amount of chasing it requires, which diverts from the actual monopolisation of "their" sov.
Third are still bitter they can't base out in relative safe pastures and then snap their fingers to deploy to the other side of the map to gank a ratting carrier. Elite pvpers and such.
Wanna bet if owning sov deposited ISK into corp wallet which would then fund the alliance SRP (that is if your corp really matters), then chasing trollceptros around wouldn't be such a big deal? Also rat bounty tax. |
Cati
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:01:42 -
[357] - Quote
http://i11.pixs.ru/storage/0/9/1/2DebeaNjpg_3237833_18462091.jpg |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
362
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:01:44 -
[358] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system. Ah yes. Where goons reigned supreme with the Blob or GTFO tactics on, well on everything. How about no.
It is actually Brave that tried to, but failed most of the time, to reign supreme through blobbing everything. But since that irony did not strike you at all before posting, what are the chances of your character being an alt of some other player that is unrelated to null sov? |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:02:31 -
[359] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:One of the biggest draws to EVE were the massive space battles that ended up in the news all over the world. Those are now dead.
The last time any major space battle was reported by non-gaming sites focusing on EVE was in February 2014. That was 18 months ago and no one has even tried or attempted to create another major battle on that scale between then and now.
bear mcgreedy wrote:Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10 Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad. thats because they're hammered on vodka
That's racist.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Jenn aSide
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
12135
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:04:06 -
[360] - Quote
Just read the original post. All of that sounds great till you realize that the underlying system is the thing that is bad, not individual mechanics or issues.
The problem is that this system is tantamount to CCP going "you know what, screw it" after 12 years of advertising huge space battles. Now we have a system to bends null sec into a crappier copy of faction warfare low sec.
They literally took a system that could be equal parts boredom (structure grinding) and Epicness and made it ALL boring (and then counted that as a win). I thought the change (ie massive over-reaction) from POS based sov to dominion was bad, but this one is worse, at least Dominion preserved the spirit of 0.0 space fighting.
This new system is EASIER to defend, my wallets have never been so fat from null sec isk, but Aegis SOV has sucked the 'awesome' out of the game. For some reason, some people think the opposition is about not liking change, or not wanting to adapt, or losing. But we HAVE all adapted , and no one of consequence has lost anything..
Dominion was only occasionally fun (while being heart breaking, I was in NCDot when Goons kicked us out of Tribute, didn't want that region anyways), Aegis is no fun at all..
In the grand scheme of life it's not a big deal however, and hell, we survived 6 years of the badness that was Dominion, we can survive another 6 years till CCP realizes that this one sucks too...undoubtedly after more inevitable personnel changes lol. But the ability to survive a bad situation doesn't make that situation any less bad. |
|
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:04:33 -
[361] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended. I suppose you will edit your post out when a brighter crayon in the box you are in points it out to you that Reagalan is not some "average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1" I will give you bonus points if you turn out to be some backwater PvE wormholer or a high-sec Noctis salvager, because you do certainly demonstrate the prerequisite mental faculties for being either of the two. as to my mental faculties, thanks for the vote of confidence regarding wormhole pve. not a bad playstyle
Yeah, as I pointed out, I knew you were writing cheques (arguments about null sov) that your body cannot cash (and being someone who exclusively does wh PvE at the same time). Well, I trust you will be able to find a wormhole PvE thread by yourself then? |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
576
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:09:00 -
[362] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:
The last time any major space battle was reported by non-gaming sites focusing on EVE was in February 2014. That was 18 months ago and no one has even tried or attempted to create another major battle on that scale between then and now.
No one has deliberately tried however during that last Delve campaign prior to N3 collapsing, there were a ton of opportunities to create an even bigger capital fight if PL+N3 had decided to have a go. Many of us were certainly hoping there would be.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:09:38 -
[363] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Reagalan wrote:The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system. Ah yes. Where goons reigned supreme with the Blob or GTFO tactics on, well on everything. How about no. I'm sorry as an EX HERO member myself.. an EX fighter Against your Group when I lived in Providence.. You people Blob as much as goons back when you didn't murder your membership numbers with bad ideas. Back when Brave Newbies was a classy and respectable group with great ideologies. Back when every MAJOR power bloc started rolling out their own versions of Brave Dojo because they RESPECT how BNI was handling things. When Powerblocs started changing how they handled things internally into the ways BNI handled them. Lets not Forget the Brave we all knew, Loved, respected, mocked, faught, and cheered forward to great heights. Brave was becoming Goonswarm 2.0 until you failscaded due to EGO. Hubris led to the downfall of your great alliance, it's many coupes, its abandonment of great corporations, lets not forget about the Internal Destruction of the Hopefully Effective Rookie Organization (H.E.R.O). But let us make no Mistake.. BNI was BLOB or GTFO when it's members Enjoyed logging in.
Well since he does not realize what you pointed out, I'd say he is spy alt of someone else that mainly dabbles in unrelated playstyle to sov null who just came to this thread to post with a GRR GON bias.
He probably wanted to post with a plausible alt that looked like he is vested in sov null, but he did not realize making such a contradictory claim would break the illusion he wanted to create initially. And therefore, hilarity ensued.
And the funniest part is, our official stance has never been against an occupancy sov system as an idea, and we did not lash out against this certain sov system. Yet, people of questionable mental faculties continue to associate the clear and present major community backlash as 'Goon objections'.
TL;DR is, he is not Brave. He is either a NPC null player who has absolutely no interest in maintaining and developing space assets (as he doesn't want to fight for them) or he plays in either wormholes, lowsec or highsec exclusively and ironically pitches himself as an expert on sov null. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
196
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:09:39 -
[364] - Quote
Tish Magev wrote:Well that was a waste of a wall of text.
Literally changes nothing.
I can't believe that ANY null sec dwelling player/corp/alliance/coalition likes FozzieSov, or finds it generates content in anyway, in fact I'm pretty sure they don't.
Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.
All the best CCP, let's see how much (positive) media attention EvE gets when no one's fighting anymore.
EvE, your PvP content isn't good enough to be ignoring the mass-PvP element of the game, this isn't WOW.
All nullsec alliances should just go back to highsec, cos well there isn't any content in null anymore anyway, let the scrubs that think fozziesov is a good idea deal with it for a while.
FozzieSov CAN be good with A LOT of tweaking.
Ditch the Small group / low number 4-5 man mentality. Shift it to 10-20.
Set the links to a larger ship. Your hacking Command Nodes... Put it on the Battlecruiser and Command Ship and put back use to the Command Ship. It's been replaced by Tech3s as boosters for the most part. Give the Command ship a use for Sov warfare again. Battlecruisers can use Tech 1 Entosis, Tech 2 Entosis is for the Command Ships which are specialized with a new role for the faster elimination of enemy Infrastructure networks. This would also help put the aging Battlecruiser hulls back into active use in warfare in Sov.
If you do make it a higher SP/ISK ship, REMOVE the External Repping limit. Put Fleet and Squad mechanics back into taking squads. I have friends who flip sov solo. That isn't warfare.. thats just ... for lack of any better wording.. stupid.
The Entosis Link disabled Warping away due to its activation, have the field disrupt Micro warp drives when attempting to be activated while in Conjunction of the Entonsis Link. This further commits the fight and brings small battles and local content. This could also escalate into larger fights the players seem to call for (people miss Tidi that much I guess...)
Reduce Command nodes slightly then keep the rest of FozzieSov as it is. Time frames, Freeporting. Stays the same. The Structure grind is gone, the faster system flipping is in place. People will rush to go take a chance at Destroying a larger ship types. I know I won't chase down Ceptors, I will bust my ass to drop an Nighthawk or EOS.
In the end FozzieSov fighting will bring fights locally again. Small skirmishes would have chances of Escalating into **** storm fights with people not wanting to lose a command ship if one was fielded. The Larger Battlecruiser hulls would start appearing outside of Kitchen sink fleets again. Players will undock and go chase several systems over to attack a squad comp built over protecting a BC/Command ship. If not, the sov still flips as intended in the same time shorter frame. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:12:56 -
[365] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10 Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad.
Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :) |
Smertyukovitch
Caladari CareBear Corporation
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:13:43 -
[366] - Quote
For crying out loud CCP! Not only your 4km\s speed limit doesnt change anything but you've made it easier to troll station services! You can still do it in a ceptor, you can still do it in a cruiser with some webs \ target jammers... When and who decided that this kind of soverenity worth anything?! ISK\hour for most 0.0 players is now lower than ever cince you can't now delegate control over figthers, running unrated sites with your carrier is also an issue, logistics is crap (it takes about hour of wathing REALLY ENTERTAINING SHINY COLORED CIRCLES to get something from Jita to most 0.0 space), you don't even get massive fights couse capitals are now nearly useless and it takes 5 characters in crappy ships up to 24m to disable your station. Exitement without a need to play 23/7! |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:16:12 -
[367] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10 Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad. Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :)
I thought MOA were ESL?
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:18:03 -
[368] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:yogizh wrote:Emmy Mnemonic wrote:yogizh wrote:Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?
This change solves nothing. Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples. Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank. Because when you gewn, you gewn hard - I mean, jump bridges ceased to exist... when again? Really, trust it to gewns to be afraid of rolling in their own region... Speedkermit Damo wrote:Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday.
Interceptors online needs to go away. Delicious gewn tears. Keep it coming! ED: In case someone misunderstands, the post above states "qqqq I can't kill a paper plane ship, nerf pls".
No, it states "certain groups who always want to avoid fights are abusing the system by using uncatchable entosis ships and since they aren't interested in maintaining sov or any space assets because they are not willing to fight, they just dabble in entosis stuff for trolling".
However, if we actually proceeded and went through what your... 'posts'... meant, we'd have to agree on calling social services and placing you under their stewardship depending on whatever jurisdiction you somehow managed to establish your presence under. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
697
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:18:23 -
[369] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:Warmeister wrote:troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
...
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own. While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing. This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin. i didn't say null sec is not worth living in. you don't see people evacing their assets and dropping sov, so obviously it is worth it. especially considering the stupid amount of money people make from rental empires and the fact that there are people willing to pay that money. what i said is that people capture sov but don't intend to live in it. the sole purpose of it is so they can see a big spot on the map with their name so when someone comes and tries to take it away from them, instead of showing up to protect this space, they cry to CCP about broken mechanics.
Actually, you do see people evacuating assets, quite regularly.
Alliance's are dropping sov, some merging into other alliances some just leaving nul.
The groups who hold sov "just to see the big spot on the map" sadly are the ones who aren't really at risk of losing anything due to armies of blues.
It is up to individual alliances to decide whether they want to play eve or blues online. So far, "blues online" seems to be winning on all fronts.
Give it a few more months and "blues online" will have spread enough that things will again settle into quiet isk making (and complaining about no content)
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:21:41 -
[370] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10 Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad. Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :) I thought MOA were ESL?
Only one or two corps within MoA are truly ESL, the rest are led by native speakers. The only exception is that the fact that Gen Eve is a sucker for a certain Serbian war criminal, but he pointed out before that he lives overseas in a English native country for higher education.
Other than that, my good friend MASSADEATH has publicly stated before that English is his native language. |
|
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:23:47 -
[371] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Tallardar wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10 Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad. Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :) I thought MOA were ESL? Only one or two corps within MoA are truly ESL, the rest are led by native speakers. The only exception is that the fact that Gen Eve is a sucker for a certain Serbian war criminal, but he pointed out before that he lives overseas in a English native country for higher education. Other than that, my good friend MASSADEATH has publicly stated before that English is his native language.
Didn't Gen Eve have to change their name because they named their main after a war criminal who committed genocide?
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:23:52 -
[372] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
- And ofc better UI. But Punkturis is already on top of its game.
Agreed. Besides Punkturis, there are other team five-o team members that I personally believe in their excellence in their specialty tasks. I personally appreciate their work very much. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
363
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:31:00 -
[373] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Didn't Gen Eve have to change their name because they named their main after a war criminal who committed genocide?
That is indeed accurate. By his public personal claim, Gen Eve has pointed out before his character was originally named 'Gen Mladic', which refers to one General Ratko Mladi-ç (a.k.a. 'The Butcher of Bosnia') who's been accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide by the International Court of Justice and currently is on trial for said accusations.
AFAIK you cannot name your EVE characters after people like Hitler, Idi Amin, Mladic etc.
(I suspect he might be the Internet personality who came up with 'Remove Kebab' without any intention to create a meme or a sense of irony) |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
240
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:36:43 -
[374] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:Cat silth wrote:More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not Okay I don't get this reasoning. Litterally the only difference between shooting and entosising in this game currently is the sound and visual effect of the weapon. When you're sieging a structure with 8 guns you're still orbiting and pressing F1, same as now. If they made the Entosis link make a pew pew sound, would that make it more fun for you?
that's the only difference you can see?
how about, for example one big difference is that shooting things give you a killmail while entosing things give you nothing; a killmaill in a pvp game, how about that difference?
should i go on?
|
TigerXtrm
Black Thorne Corporation
Black Thorne Alliance
1210
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:37:36 -
[375] - Quote
gascanu wrote:TigerXtrm wrote:Cat silth wrote:More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not Okay I don't get this reasoning. Litterally the only difference between shooting and entosising in this game currently is the sound and visual effect of the weapon. When you're sieging a structure with 8 guns you're still orbiting and pressing F1, same as now. If they made the Entosis link make a pew pew sound, would that make it more fun for you? that's the only difference you can see? how about, for example one big difference is that shooting things give you a killmail while entosing things give you nothing; a killmaill in a pvp game, how about that difference? should i go on?
Please do, killmail whoring does not convince me.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:39:47 -
[376] - Quote
bear mcgreedy wrote:If you insist on this entosis bull make it so these so called small gang warfare can happen
remove the ceptor idea totally its bull no major entity wants it 0.0 it doesn't create content, as command ships are not used due to t3 boosters make it so the command ships can entosis maybe review the bonuses that it gets a hp boost while in entosis mode (similar to bastion on marauder) also make it so the entosising ship can also receive reps. but can be jammed or the cycle can be itterupted to reset the timer
alternatively look at t3 having a subsystem which means it can entosis but make it so the subsystem is the same as nullified so to stop them be able to warp off while bubbled.
the whole idea of taking sov is that as an attacker you want that system not for sh*ts and giggles by having a command ship have the entosis link it means that you have more to lose by travelling through hostile systems with support this will be seen by hostile scouts be reported and a fleet will be scattered to go intercept why ? because content is created and kms to be had.
look at every single video ccp has made when you have a so called fight every ship has support in a hostile system im waiting cor the new trailer where you just have one ceptor going around the system for 3 minutes
take the ceptor idea and throw it away before you either get fired or get made redundant fozzie..
Another delicious gewn tears sample! I will quote the gem:
bear mcgreedy wrote:no major entity wants it 0.0
You may not realize it (being gewn you don't have much thought going on usually) but that's the core reason it is a most welcome change. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:42:01 -
[377] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.
does this 'sharp drop' manifests itself in ways other than people like yourself whining on forums? Because the status monitor doesn't show any sharp drops in the past 6 months. |
JiN Azuma
KILL Corp
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:45:01 -
[378] - Quote
My suggestions.
1) Limit the entosis module to battle cruiser and above.
This would make it remain accessible to smaller low SP groups while removing the troll interceptor's
2) increase the manufacturing cost of entosis modules, add a irreparable damage to them like T2 crystals but with a lower durability.
That will make spamming systems costly to the attacking alliance and discourage sov trolling for the sake of sov trolling. If someone wants to take someones space away there should be a cost involved, and this wont prevent you from burning an entities sov to the ground it will just attach a price to it.
3) Add a new capital entosis module that will entosis all free nodes in the current system, smaller entities could stop this by manually attacking nodes. Keep the capital penalty.
This gives us a chance to use cap ships in fozzie sov, it also puts those ships on the field to be attacked. I would much rather escort an expensive ship with the chance of a fight than have to sit on a node watching a timer while 10 other pilots do the same thing.
4) Add decay to the nodes based on the index of the system.
The whole point of fozzie sov is to occupy the space you own, if you can lock down the area then you have proven that this is the case. I think most players would rather go on a roam or set up a gate camp than watch timers tick down on magical space beacons. If a hostile activates a beacon then this timed decay should be extended/stopped for a set period so that the attacker has to put effort into taking space. As it stands someone can fly through your space entosising random systems and creating work for the sov holders with no further input from them.
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:45:07 -
[379] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply. does this 'sharp drop' manifests itself in ways other than people like yourself whining on forums? Because the status monitor doesn't show any sharp drops in the past 6 months.
It's not a sharp drop, but it's certainly been peetering out over the past 6 months compared to previous years.
http://puu.sh/jGWlo/5fe24d1b4d.png
That said it's still been an issue that's dated back to 2014.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:48:53 -
[380] - Quote
Atum' Ra wrote:Why someone mst create an alliance? Someone need to get to the alliance! Hi-sec alliace and nothing more! That char can be an alt of anyone with 1 mil SP That sound like: " I'm 8 years old I know very much about everything, and now I want to be a president of a small country! Give me please the ability to be! " That sov is the benining of the end.
i don't know why. you said defender has to pay whole of 1b to create alliance to hold sov, which is a disadvantage.
i'm just explaining you that attacker has to wear same costs. probably even more if you calculate cost vs member number ratio
it doesn't really matter what SP that alt has. if he only has 1m sp then you can fend him off with a 1m sp toon. but you won't even know how much SP the attacker has if you dont turn up |
|
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:49:09 -
[381] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:No, it states "certain groups who always want to avoid fights are abusing the system by using uncatchable entosis ships and since they aren't interested in maintaining sov or any space assets because they are not willing to fight, they just dabble in entosis stuff for trolling".
Hear, hear! The goonie here claims that MoA, then #1 gewn killer, the member of top10 killboard stats (and one of two entities in top10 which does not pad their killboard on helpless freighters in hisec), is... not willing to fight!
They are not interested in maintaining sov - true. But they are interested in YOU not being able to maintain your sov, which makes their attacks a legit fighting agenda rather than "trolling" you seem to be so butthurt about.
So what do you think MoA does if it's not fighting? Ratting 23/7 like an average gewn? lmao, gewnologic.
Alp Khan wrote:However, if we actually proceeded and went through what your... 'posts'... meant, we'd have to agree on calling social services and placing you under their stewardship depending on whatever jurisdiction you somehow managed to establish your presence under.
I have no idea what you mean here, but I think that was supposed to be an insult among gewns, which only someone as unsophisticated as gewn could understand and take as an insult. But hey, keep trying, and maybe one day you'll actually get under my skin. You sound like you have 80 years ahead to try it, you know...
P.S. Your tears are much appreciated. Please keep them coming. |
TrickyBlackSteel
Russia Caldari
RUCA Emperor
30
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:50:16 -
[382] - Quote
lets change a few numbers from 10 o 4 and we make a new patch guys ),yeaaaa lets gooo |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6576
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:54:02 -
[383] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:The last time any major space battle was reported by non-gaming sites focusing on EVE was in February 2014. That was 18 months ago and no one has even tried or attempted to create another major battle on that scale between then and now. I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur.
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply. does this 'sharp drop' manifests itself in ways other than people like yourself whining on forums? Because the status monitor doesn't show any sharp drops in the past 6 months. ... Wut? Are you sure you're looking at the right stats? Take a look at EVE-offline YTD 2015. Even the peaks in July and August are at best on par with the average for the year so far.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
33
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:56:40 -
[384] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur.
Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6577
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:58:41 -
[385] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:*trying too hard* Good lord you are butthurt. What happened? You lose a freighter or something?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 13:59:42 -
[386] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:It's not a sharp drop, but it's certainly been peetering out over the past 6 months compared to previous years. http://puu.sh/jGWlo/5fe24d1b4d.png
That said it's still been an issue that's dated back to 2014.
which is exactly my point, the decline doesn't have anything to do with fozzisov, like some people are trying to present
i think with every patch that has a controversial change people point to that graph and say 'see, the numbers are dropping because of X change' |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6577
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:02:06 -
[387] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur. Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway. Fozziesov isn't the sole reason those battles aren't occurring. The players have to be willing to throw their fleets at one another, and presently it appears that's not happening because of a lack of value in winning whatever systems or regions. Since the current sov system is less than 8 weeks old, I'm willing to give CCP time to implement changes to make the systems valuable enough in terms of natural resources. That should have been done first before this tweak to Fozziesov though. Right... so surely if big battles = good and people aren't creating big battles, then the best course of action is to make changes that push people to have big battles, for example shifting moon goo around. Rather, they've actually increased null income a bit and made it easier to fortress up in a single location while encouraging small scale battles over the large scale ones.
Let's face it, all the core fozziesov mechanics have done is turned "mass structure shooting" into "mini structure mining". The rest has basically retained the status quo.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1812
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:03:07 -
[388] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote: (and one of two entities in top10 which does not pad their killboard on helpless freighters in hisec)
Ladies and men, the ulterior motive. This poster can safely be ignored.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6577
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:04:15 -
[389] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Tallardar wrote:It's not a sharp drop, but it's certainly been peetering out over the past 6 months compared to previous years. http://puu.sh/jGWlo/5fe24d1b4d.png
That said it's still been an issue that's dated back to 2014. which is exactly my point, the decline doesn't have anything to do with fozzisov, like some people are trying to present i think with every patch that has a controversial change people point to that graph and say 'see, the numbers are dropping because of X change' Of course it does. It mostly began around the time they announced upcoming changes to sov and nuked force projection, then in more recent times has accelerated following "sov mining 1.0". Remembers, these impacts will first be seen when they announce the changes, not when they release them.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:07:42 -
[390] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: ... Wut? Are you sure you're looking at the right stats? Take a look at EVE-offline YTD 2015. Even the peaks in July and August are at best on par with the average for the year so far.
that's exactly what i'm looking at. it's been declining for the whole year, with a bigger than usual drop end of may and then sort of hovering stable since then. so if anything - we should blame the overview changes for the 'sharp drop'
or we could blame dominion sov for the constant decline since way before that
although we can't really tell from that graph whether the drop is at related to null sec, for all we know it could be high sec carebears leaving cause they don't get shiny new stuff while ccp makes null sec changes that they don't really care about. |
|
|
Soldarius
Naliao Inc.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1374
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:08:12 -
[391] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us.
Who is "we"? Are you trying to speak for me? Because I disagree.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:10:04 -
[392] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Remembers, these impacts will first be seen when they announce the changes, not when they release them.
that's a good point, although i don't think that this is the actual reason for numbers decline |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:11:41 -
[393] - Quote
Now let's see another example of gewn tears we all love so much!
Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:From my point of view, fozzie sov has just been a miss for now:
Before it, taking a system was starting a war, putting major fleets, firepower, a lot of man and effort on taking big objectives. Taking a system was something, you had to fight for it... Now, people just come with one or two fast ships and orbit a sov structure 250k off... no fighting, no strategy, no effort.
Ummmm... have you tried that in, you know, system people actually live in?
And if you're not using that system, you don't need to own it. Working as intended.
Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:What i liked and still like in eve is it's variety, and a thing that has been removed by fozzie is the actual BIG part of eve, two (or more) alliances fighting in huge fleets to get control of space. This is the so called blobbing, which is, even if you don't like it, a way of playing. Small gang always existed in ganking, factional warfare,... big fight just tend to disappear, just like dread, titans and other carriers will become useless (which is a shame, fighting around those ships is interesting, the fact they need support fleets making giving the fight a great aspect and making coordination critical).
"BAWW NOBODY FIGHTS MAH BLOOB BLOOB"
Why don't you try deploying on someone's staging system and see if there'll be no major fight for it. Hint: gudfait in 3...2...1...
Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:Empires where build by man followed by a thousands, not by some lonely pilot orbiting in a system. People like TLOTR because of it's big epic fights, star wars because of the huge fleets fighting around the deathstar; and the efforts of Frodon and Luke were supported by a lot of lives, they did not just took the control by themselves!
Fozzie sov on an other hand offers good ideas, but in a bad way. If entosis was limited to the biggest classes of ships, if there were a risk to take to entosis a system then it could be good... fozzie sov just need to bring the meaning of war back to new eden, for now, it just takes the meaning of "run".
Frodo has captured the uncontested mt. Doom in 2v1 fight against Gollum, working as intended.
Fozziesov will be a war once alliances downsize to what they occupy. We'll come to burn Deklein then - and there will be a fight for every system in it. Unless you drop it like the fountain, that is.
Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:My suggestions:
- limit entosis to bigger ships (BC's ad over);
- bring back the fight, for example by giving "control points" when an ennemy entosis ship is destroyed, or just for destroying ennemies,... plenty of ideas can be used here, just think about it BEFORE releasing the new system...
What is bad in actual system:
- one lonely interceptor or recon can still entosis a system while being hard to catch... just because of speed and range;
- no fights for a system, in most of the case it is just a time attack;
- the actual system seems to not have been thought through...
Oh and before some whiners say it: yes, i'm from the imperium/cfc, and yes, I see blobbing as a way of playing, and yes, number is a force, that i think should be the most important in a mmo (MASSIVELY MULTIplayer online ;) ).
Ty for your reading! o7
Suggestions are just copy from the propagoonda and not worth reading.
But the tears! "qq we cannot use numbers qq give me ez numbers F1 win qq". I wonder what is stopping those number from spreading out and occupying all those systems to chase the trolls away and grind ratings? Can't handle the trollceptor?
Keep the delicious tears coming. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
110
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:14:19 -
[394] - Quote
I think 4k m/s is very little. I mean the average frigate that I see that are used to catch entosis ships does about 7 or 8k m/s. They use a local booster tengu. It means entosis ships will be practically always get caught with this changes. Whatever happened to give it a chance or one should not be able to catch everything they see? I would request to give it more speed. Twise as slow is really slow imo. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:18:47 -
[395] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I think 4k m/s is very little. I mean the average frigate that I see that are used to catch entosis ships does about 7 or 8k m/s. They use a local booster tengu. It means entosis ships will be practically always get caught with this changes. Whatever happened to give it a chance or one should not be able to catch everything they see? I would request to give it more speed. Twise as slow is really slow imo.
+1 to that. To hell with this speed limit. Occupied systems are essentially invulnerable to trollceptors, and if the system isn't occupied, it shouldn't be owned. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6578
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:20:18 -
[396] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: ... Wut? Are you sure you're looking at the right stats? Take a look at EVE-offline YTD 2015. Even the peaks in July and August are at best on par with the average for the year so far. that's exactly what i'm looking at. it's been declining for the whole year, with a bigger than usual drop end of may and then sort of hovering stable since then. so if anything - we should blame the overview changes for the 'sharp drop' So you believe it was around may the drop was bigger than usual? I wonder what dev blog was released in may. We've know the changes are coming for a long time and people have been gradually dropping off since then. Announcements of the mechanics then implementation are more than likely driving the decline.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Duramora Kado
Mindstar Technology
Get Off My Lawn
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:22:55 -
[397] - Quote
This is a good start. I'd like to see this in action for sure... |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6578
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:23:03 -
[398] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I think 4k m/s is very little. I mean the average frigate that I see that are used to catch entosis ships does about 7 or 8k m/s. They use a local booster tengu. It means entosis ships will be practically always get caught with this changes. Whatever happened to give it a chance or one should not be able to catch everything they see? I would request to give it more speed. Twise as slow is really slow imo. While I don't agree that these changes will cause that, that should be the case. The whole point of the entosis modules is it's supposed to show you have control of the grid. If you are firing the laser then "get caught" when trying to run away, you obviously don't have that. You should bring a sizable enough force to realistically contest sov. That's how conflict is driven.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:26:29 -
[399] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:BTW i found a way to stop troll T3's that are interdiction nullified and cloaky...But I was warned that i would be banned if i continued....Thanks CCP fun times. Good job for discovering a decloaking tactic that's been around (and bannable if it affects server performance) since 2006. It has nothing to do with fozziesov and nothing to do with this thread.
It might not be new but the fact that these PVP immune ships can take SOV is new and its a real problem when trying to (control) space. |
Ludi Burek
Combined Imperial Fleet
Darwinism.
312
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:28:14 -
[400] - Quote
I wouldn't be surprised if Vermin Supreme was a special consultant on this project. |
|
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
365
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:28:27 -
[401] - Quote
*MoA claims that the broken changes which allowed sov trolling without commitment and being able to avoid a fight is great for PvP
*Then another MoA guy comes in and chimes about how being unable to run from a fight and getting required to commit in sov warfare is bad
10/10 comedy |
ISD Buldath
ISD STAR
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:29:01 -
[402] - 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.
Thread Scrubbing has begun.
~ISD Buldath
Interstellar Services Department
Support, Training and Resources Division
Lt. Commander
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:29:02 -
[403] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:I think 4k m/s is very little. I mean the average frigate that I see that are used to catch entosis ships does about 7 or 8k m/s. They use a local booster tengu. It means entosis ships will be practically always get caught with this changes. Whatever happened to give it a chance or one should not be able to catch everything they see? I would request to give it more speed. Twise as slow is really slow imo. While I don't agree that these changes will cause that, that should be the case. The whole point of the entosis modules is it's supposed to show you have control of the grid. If you are firing the laser then "get caught" when trying to run away, you obviously don't have that. You should bring a sizable enough force to realistically contest sov. That's how conflict is driven.
Defender brings someone on grid - entosis ship runs away and doesn't entosis anything anymore. Defender wins, working as intended.
With a speedlimit defender will always win by having a variation of trollceptor 5 jumps away. Not working as intended.
You should bring a sizable force to contest sov - totally agree. However, the definition of sov has changed to occupancy. To bring down an occupied sov, the sizable force is needed. Bringing down an uncontested sov shouldn't require such force. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:31:42 -
[404] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:So you believe it was around may the drop was bigger than usual? I wonder what dev blog was released in may. We've know the changes are coming for a long time and people have been gradually dropping off since then. Announcements of the mechanics then implementation are more than likely driving the decline.
the drop was end of may, not beginning. are you implying it took eve community a whole month to read it and decide they aren't going to play?
here are the reasons why i think that blog isn't related to drop at all:
1) 1 month time difference
2) people haven't actually started complaining until well after. probably until the competition started on duality (at least as far as i'm aware).
3) since that drop the numbers haven't been dropping further.
point 3 actually a very good indicator, as you can see that once the new sov was released and people actually got to play it, they didn't quit as a result of it. if fozziesov was responsible for the drop in may, i would expect even bigger drop after the thing actually got released and people got to to play with it and figured they don't like it.
also there is #4 that i have mentioned before - we don't even know if the drop is in the null sec population, other areas, or across the board.
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:33:47 -
[405] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:BTW i found a way to stop troll T3's that are interdiction nullified and cloaky...But I was warned that i would be banned if i continued....Thanks CCP fun times. Good job for discovering a decloaking tactic that's been around (and bannable if it affects server performance) since 2006. It has nothing to do with fozziesov and nothing to do with this thread.
It might not be new but the fact that PvP immune ships can now troll/take sov is new and its a problem that needs fixed...The fix should be no nullified ships can take sov peroid. That way an alliance can actually (control) the space they are living in. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:35:03 -
[406] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:*MoA claims that the broken changes which allowed sov trolling without commitment and being able to avoid a fight is great for PvP
*Then another MoA guy comes in and chimes about how being unable to run from a fight and getting required to commit in sov warfare is bad
10/10 comedy
The whole gewn-n-pets coalition crying in admittance of being unable to defend against solo frigs.
10/10 salt. |
John Wolfcastle
Galactic Cargo Inc.
Crying Clowns Foundation
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:41:14 -
[407] - Quote
It's probably going in the right direction, yet I think entosis still needs to be a bit more restricted. Just a little bit, don't know, ... something. |
Jenn aSide
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
12137
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:42:29 -
[408] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur. Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway.
This is a bit inaccurate. "Fleet Fights" aren't just Asakai and BR-5 type deals, plenty of fleet fights involve only sub caps, and plenty happened over the coure of the last year. The Mittani website and EVE news detail those kinds of fights all the time.
I've been in only 2 mid sized scraps since Aegis began (one involving my old alliance INIT fighting my new alliance lol). And that's it, the rest have been "Aegis style bullshit Nibble fights" (that phrase shall be copyrighted soon lol). I still find it odd that (from my perspective as someone who likes fleet fights) CCP could take a system of occasional fair sized to big fights and make them less occasional lol. |
ISD Buldath
ISD STAR
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:46:53 -
[409] - 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.
31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.
CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.
Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.
We are watching this closely. Keep it nice and clean, stay civil.
~ISD Buldath
Interstellar Services Department
Support, Training and Resources Division
Lt. Commander
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
111
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:47:43 -
[410] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:I think 4k m/s is very little. I mean the average frigate that I see that are used to catch entosis ships does about 7 or 8k m/s. They use a local booster tengu. It means entosis ships will be practically always get caught with this changes. Whatever happened to give it a chance or one should not be able to catch everything they see? I would request to give it more speed. Twise as slow is really slow imo. While I don't agree that these changes will cause that, that should be the case. The whole point of the entosis modules is it's supposed to show you have control of the grid. If you are firing the laser then "get caught" when trying to run away, you obviously don't have that. You should bring a sizable enough force to realistically contest sov. That's how conflict is driven.
There is nothing no where it says you have to have control of grid. Also you cant have control of grid if you are runing! lol
Therefore you dont have control of grid 
Conflict is not driven by force alone but also by will power! Conflict can be driven when outnumbered. All you got to do is strike fast when or where not expected. If thats not conflict, I dont know what is...
I am laughing cos this is the begining of the nerfs before it goes back to the same old story. I would love to see how thye are going to solve this blue donut cos thats whats killing this game and not sov or jump fatigue. Simply no one wants to fight super and titans in a blob plus tidi. 
|
|
|
JiN Azuma
KILL Corp
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:50:35 -
[411] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Alp Khan wrote:*MoA claims that the broken changes which allowed sov trolling without commitment and being able to avoid a fight is great for PvP
*Then another MoA guy comes in and chimes about how being unable to run from a fight and getting required to commit in sov warfare is bad
10/10 comedy The whole gewn-n-pets coalition crying in admittance of being unable to defend against solo frigs. 10/10 salt.
The complaints are about a lack of fun.
The space is defensible like you said, hostiles land on grid and trollsepter runs away to the next system. That isn't being contested. This isn't new with fozzie sov, you did that anyway.
The problem is playing cat and mouse against a nullified cloaking nanoship that are designed to be immune from PVP is that it's not fun. This is a computer game that is meant to be above all else enjoyable to play.
I would say most of the eve community enjoys eve for this reason, sure you have groups like MOA who play for other reasons like being rejected by the goons and vowing vengeance against them like a angsty teenager by weaponizing boredom, and if that's how you get your kicks then good for you. But it is bad for the game. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6579
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:51:08 -
[412] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:You should bring a sizable force to contest sov - totally agree. However, the definition of sov has changed to occupancy. To bring down an occupied sov, the sizable force is needed. Bringing down an uncontested sov shouldn't require such force. And it won't. Uncontested sov is by definition uncontested. It won;t matter if you bring a frigate or a carrier, if it's uncontested there will be no opposition. If people show up and you "get caught" then it wasn't uncontested, and if you didn't bring enough to fight then you obviously didn't want it anyway.
Warmeister wrote:the drop was end of may, not beginning. are you implying it took eve community a whole month to read it and decide they aren't going to play? Not the whole community, but yes, people don't always make knee-jerk reactions. Some of us are still undecided now.
Warmeister wrote:point 3 actually a very good indicator, as you can see that once the new sov was released and people actually got to play it, they didn't quit as a result of it. if fozziesov was responsible for the drop in may, i would expect even bigger drop after the thing actually got released and people got to to play with it and figured they don't like it. There is a continued decline in players. After a change as big as Fozziesov I'd expect to see a dramatic uptick in players as people return to check it out. That there has been no upwards momentum at all and a continue slow decline is an indication to me that it failed to achieve what it intended to.
Warmeister wrote:also there is #4 that i have mentioned before - we don't even know if the drop is in the null sec population, other areas, or across the board. Absolutely, but we can certainly speculate. There's definitely been a 16% decrease in ships exploding in nullsec since june and an 11% decrease between last august and this august. Dotlan can show that much.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:53:58 -
[413] - Quote
Now that I really think about the problem without ships being locked on grid there will never be an escalation worth while...Ships that are locked on grid will provide escalation and promote fights lock the ships on grid according to their entosis range. Problem solved fun fights INC. That way someone has a reason to field a tanked ship and a reason to bring a fleet to defend it.
I think that would be a great solution at this point and provide a lot of content for everyone involved and if a node is being captured allow an opponent entosis to stalemate it locking both ships on grid until the link is deactivated promoting escalation on both sides or do just like the alliance torny if a ship leaves the max range of the entosis then Boom you are now flying a pod.
These changes would make the risk vs reward worth while on both sides. |
Captain ObviousS
Respawn Disabled
Initiative Mercenaries
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:54:50 -
[414] - Quote
My Lap wrote:Skit Khamsi wrote:I think you should advance to start searching for a new job. Thank you for the death of my favorite games. I hear RIOT takes bad ex CCP devs
Yup! That and Riot promotes a culture equivalent to that of a frat house. If you don't like being hazed your fired for no reason because it's legal in the USA. "At will employment". Ex CCP devs fit right in! I bed you could throw a rock in any direction in their office and hit an Ex CCP dev! lol
In terms of all this I'm still in the fense about this crap. Love reading the tears though. :)
|
Kalen Pavle
Quam Singulari
Triumvirate.
67
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:56:28 -
[415] - Quote
I have an idea I both hate and really like.
For initial reinforce only: ADM increases the number of active entosis links necessary to reinforce something by 1 for each level. Spawned command nodes would still only require 1 link per. Initial reinforcement should require a committed attack, not just one ******* flying through.
On the same note, I agree that entosis links should not be able to be fit on anything that's nullified. Not just removing nullification while fit, but actively prohibited. Somethingsomething the neural interface of the entosis link uses the same circuitry that nullification uses #lore. |
Marcus Covinus
The Blood Ankhs
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 14:58:51 -
[416] - Quote
It's hilarious to continue to watch groups like MOA chestbeat like an ape about how great the new sov system is when all they do is troll the system with no intention of actually holding any sov.
I repeat my earlier statement.
Entosis Link should have the following side effects while active.
1) Ship cannot move for the duration of the cycle
2) Ship cannot receive remote assistance for the duration of the cycle.
And the Entosis Link should be limited to cruiser or larger hulls. Force them to put at least a little isk on the field.
Now for those who say
Quote:A solo ship on the grid has won the field
Then you should have no problem waiting defenseless while your cycle for a warm-up and a capture takes place. I mean you have all your friends there to defend you after all. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
111
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:03:19 -
[417] - Quote
i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed! I got caught by one like this. I was doing just over 4k m/s...How is ok? |
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:11:43 -
[418] - Quote
Icycle wrote:i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed!
I agree I hate restristions but if your going to have risk something needs to be done if you lock the ship on grid that would fix the problem then a defender could start a counter entosis to stalemate locking the troll ship on grid in turn you or another ship could then have the option of running it down and killing it or waiting for reinforcements to come. The attacker cannot leave the grid until the node is captured one way or another and same for the defender its a fight and once you get in the ring your committed.
Two ships enter 1 ship leaves. |
Lime Ijonen
In Dock We Trust
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:11:45 -
[419] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s.
So any links, implants, boosters, bonuses, overheat, whatever being applied to entosis ship won't break this limit too?
|
aussieftw
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:11:51 -
[420] - Quote
Thank you CCP, you are on good way. But 4000m/s speed for entosis ship is still too much i think. Attackers should fight if they want sov, not run around like rabbits. |
|
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
33
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:15:55 -
[421] - Quote
aussieftw wrote:Thank you CCP, you are on good way. But 4000m/s speed for entosis ship is still too much i think. Attackers should fight if they want sov, not run around like rabbits.
One might say they're flying around something like a swarm of bees, amirite?
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
111
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:19:31 -
[422] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:Icycle wrote:i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed! I agree I hate restristions but if your going to have risk something needs to be done if you lock the ship on grid that would fix the problem then a defender could start a counter entosis to stalemate locking the troll ship on grid in turn you or another ship could then have the option of running it down and killing it or waiting for reinforcements to come. The attacker cannot leave the grid until the node is captured one way or another and same for the defender its a fight and once you get in the ring your committed. Two ships enter 1 ship leaves.
Not sure if its a troll or not...
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:23:30 -
[423] - Quote
aussieftw wrote:Thank you CCP, you are on good way. But 4000m/s speed for entosis ship is still too much i think. Attackers should fight if they want sov, not run around like rabbits.
Two ships enter 1 ship leaves. |
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:31:22 -
[424] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:Icycle wrote:i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed! I agree I hate restristions but if your going to have risk something needs to be done if you lock the ship on grid that would fix the problem then a defender could start a counter entosis to stalemate locking the troll ship on grid in turn you or another ship could then have the option of running it down and killing it or waiting for reinforcements to come. The attacker cannot leave the grid until the node is captured one way or another and same for the defender its a fight and once you get in the ring your committed. Two ships enter 1 ship leaves. Not sure if its a troll or not...
The only thing thats a troll around here is this sov mechanic and risk free timer generation and node capturing. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14221
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:33:17 -
[425] - Quote
Marcus Covinus wrote:It's hilarious to continue to watch groups like MOA chestbeat like an ape about how great the new sov system is when all they do is troll the system with no intention of actually holding any sov.
I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know.
It's pretty telling of the system in general. But CCP never did learn to take into account where feedback is coming from.
For me, the really funny part is how literally all of this was foreseen in the first three pages of the entosis announcement, but was ignored in the flood of "grr nullsec" drooling. That's genuinely hilarious.
"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.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1813
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:36:13 -
[426] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Marcus Covinus wrote:It's hilarious to continue to watch groups like MOA chestbeat like an ape about how great the new sov system is when all they do is troll the system with no intention of actually holding any sov.
I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know. It's pretty telling of the system in general. But CCP never did learn to take into account where feedback is coming from. For me, the really funny part is how literally all of this was foreseen in the first three pages of the entosis announcement, but was ignored in the flood of "grr nullsec" drooling. That's genuinely hilarious.
To be fair, we in the community shoulder part of the burden here -- most of the outcry against interceptors was based on the assumption that they'd be able to fit T2 entosis links. Once that became too punitive to work well, we were content to rest on our laurels.
In the future, it's probably important to keep the pressure on in this regard.
Honestly, I'd like to hear some rationalization for interdiction nullification existing at all in TYOOL 2015 from CCP. However, as it would constitute taking a position on something, I doubt this will happen.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:37:23 -
[427] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Marcus Covinus wrote:It's hilarious to continue to watch groups like MOA chestbeat like an ape about how great the new sov system is when all they do is troll the system with no intention of actually holding any sov.
I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know. It's pretty telling of the system in general. But CCP never did learn to take into account where feedback is coming from. For me, the really funny part is how literally all of this was foreseen in the first three pages of the entosis announcement, but was ignored in the flood of "grr nullsec" drooling. That's genuinely hilarious.
Its true and btw Long live JAMES315 Now a risk free Nullsec is killing eve as well.
Why a Risk-Free Highsec Would Kill EVE Online |
Michelle Audier
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:37:43 -
[428] - Quote
The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it. |
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:41:56 -
[429] - Quote
Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it.
I smell a salty super pilot. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14222
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:42:43 -
[430] - Quote
Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it.
If you only base your opinion on the system on who is or is not against it, then you don't really have an opinion at all. You're just a lemming with huge blinders on, like most anyone who defines themselves solely in opposition to something.
Also, I would like to reiterate the old idea of banning NPC corp posters from every forum but New Citizens. Just throwing it out there.
"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.
|
|
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:45:40 -
[431] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it. If you only base your opinion on the system on who is or is not against it, then you don't really have an opinion at all. You're just a lemming with huge blinders on, like most anyone who defines themselves solely in opposition to something. Also, I would like to reiterate the old idea of banning NPC corp posters from every forum but New Citizens. Just throwing it out there.
Agreed risk free posting is just as bad as risk free pvp. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14224
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:49:23 -
[432] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it. If you only base your opinion on the system on who is or is not against it, then you don't really have an opinion at all. You're just a lemming with huge blinders on, like most anyone who defines themselves solely in opposition to something. Also, I would like to reiterate the old idea of banning NPC corp posters from every forum but New Citizens. Just throwing it out there. Agreed risk free posting is just as bad as risk free pvp.
I'm not talking about risk, I'm talking about one particular demographic that is most commonly used for trolling. NPC corp alts.
Anyway, regarding the sov system. Does anyone else think that a full rebalance of the Dreadnaught class is in order at this point? With the incoming rollout of citadel structures to replace POSes, all of which will also require the jesus laser to contest, the Dreadnaught has just had it's one and only role in the game very literally removed.
"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.
|
Jenn aSide
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
12141
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:51:15 -
[433] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it. If you only base your opinion on the system on who is or is not against it, then you don't really have an opinion at all. You're just a lemming with huge blinders on, like most anyone who defines themselves solely in opposition to something. Also, I would like to reiterate the old idea of banning NPC corp posters from every forum but New Citizens. Just throwing it out there. Agreed risk free posting is just as bad as risk free pvp. I'm not talking about risk, I'm talking about one particular demographic that is most commonly used for trolling. NPC corp alts. Anyway, regarding the sov system. Does anyone else think that a full rebalance of the Dreadnaught class is in order at this point? With the incoming rollout of citadel structures to replace POSes, all of which will also require the jesus laser to contest, the Dreadnaught has just had it's one and only role in the game very literally removed.
Dreads are useful in killing the supers...... that no one will be using because of Aegis Sov.
Damn |
Spacial Girl
FinFleet
Northern Coalition.
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:59:26 -
[434] - Quote
Balthusdire Dominus wrote:The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work.
They'll still be unable to warp, and attackers can feast on their 4k/ms souls. Any reasonably fit ceptor/T3dessi should catch them. |
ToXicPaIN
Souls of Steel
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 15:59:37 -
[435] - Quote
4000m/s is still to fast ...
|
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
577
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:00:10 -
[436] - Quote
Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it.
There is a difference between using a strategy in a sandbox game and a mechanic which doesn't suit it's intended purpose. Many in the Imperium like the underlying concepts of Fozziesov, however can't get round the whole why is the trollceptor still a thing. It's not like the Imperium couldn't abuse the **** out of it as well. Just imagine if Mittens decrees that every Imperium member must be bought a trollceptor and we should go forth and sovlaser every node in every system just to prove the point that trollceptors is a terrible idea.
I guess you'll still think they are a good idea because you simply can't agree with the in-game bad guys. I guess money moons were a good idea as well and that Ishtars were balanced a year ago too? |
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:00:28 -
[437] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it. If you only base your opinion on the system on who is or is not against it, then you don't really have an opinion at all. You're just a lemming with huge blinders on, like most anyone who defines themselves solely in opposition to something. Also, I would like to reiterate the old idea of banning NPC corp posters from every forum but New Citizens. Just throwing it out there. Agreed risk free posting is just as bad as risk free pvp. I'm not talking about risk, I'm talking about one particular demographic that is most commonly used for trolling. NPC corp alts. Anyway, regarding the sov system. Does anyone else think that a full rebalance of the Dreadnaught class is in order at this point? With the incoming rollout of citadel structures to replace POSes, all of which will also require the jesus laser to contest, the Dreadnaught has just had it's one and only role in the game very literally removed.
Not sure what needs to be done here but we have used dreads just last week to kill triage carriers on a node. It was a great fight and they were needed but i would like to see something done about carrier damage now that the need to be on field to get fighters on grid.. the DPS from a carrier to a super is just silly.... 2 battleships can do carrier dps and project it better in most cases... I think most dreads are fine atm but carriers are really bad as far as being combat fit (not just for reps) but then again i think battleships need a damage buff as well.... I dont think CCP will do this for fear Nullbears will make to much isk and use more plex to sub their accounts.... Tinfoil hat activate. But realy most cruisers can do Battleship dps that seems wrong in almost every way considering your trading a ton of maneuverability.
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2284
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:03:38 -
[438] - Quote
So in the spirit of limiting things, why not limit the amount of people a defender can bring to a SoV system fight.
50 would be a good starting point.
If you think speed for a single pilot is a problem then corp, alliance, and coalition power certainly is.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Jenn aSide
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
12142
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:03:53 -
[439] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know.
Oh, I think you do sir (this is best read in Sherlock Holmes voice).
Same reason they were so happy at the announcement of siphons, they thought it it was a chance for the marginal/disenfranchised/impotent types to FINALLY strike at the "big bads" that they otherwise couldn't touch.
As it was then, it will be again , silence when the people who thought they were getting something find out that the changes only make the big bad blob people even stronger than they were before.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to killing NPCs by the boatload in my fortress like solar system made fortress like by my killing of boatloads of npcs. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
110
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:11:44 -
[440] - Quote
So after thinking about it a bit, why do nodes spawn constellation wide? How does this make sense? I think a better solution would be to have nodes spawn in the system attacked and the directly adjacent systems. This would keep the action close to the contested system but still spread it out enough to allow for the multiple front fight this system was supposed to deliver. There also needs to be EHP events still in game, I hope that they go back and look at the Citadels and change how the capture evens on these happen.
I am still very much not happy with the way this new system works because it has turned null sec into mining and ratting online just to make your space somewhat safe then after you do that all day you don't even want to experience the rest of eve. Slow the decay of mining and ratting. I am leaning to the side of buffer systems are a bad thing and alliances that can live in these systems shouldn't try to hold on to these. Maybe it is from the old way of thinking but there still need to be more carrots in Sov Null for the players and Alliance to want to hold onto the space you have.
I did have a thought about system generating a daily isk payout that would be paid to the Alliance/Corp owning that system at DT to give a reason to hold space. I know everyone and their brother are against passive free isk but there needs to be something unique to Sov Null that no other area of space has and right now we just do not have it. I think that is the biggest problem right now is besides super cap production which is cool but is not all that meaningful in the new system null has nothing to call its own, WH have T3 material, LS has FW LP Hi Sec and NPC Null has Mission agents, what does null have right now that is special for us. Maybe what could be done is a material that can only be sourced in null for the production of new deployables a gas or new material that needs to be harvested by players at first or a deployable structure made with (PI and this new material) placed there to mine the material like a giant vacuum cleaner. Have this site spawn in different systems as it is depleted but always 1 to 2 per constellation but only despawn if it is completely mined. This is then both a carrot for the members/alliance but also a clear content generation point as if you want to go the unmanned route in your fringe areas you might lose your structure and your potential income. |
|
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:13:01 -
[441] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know.
Oh, I think you do sir (this is best read in Sherlock Holmes voice). Same reason they were so happy at the announcement of siphons, they thought it it was a chance for the marginal/disenfranchised/impotent types to FINALLY strike at the "big bads" that they otherwise couldn't touch. As it was then, it will be again , silence when the people who thought they were getting something find out that the changes only make the big bad blob people even stronger than they were before. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to killing NPCs by the boatload in my fortress like solar system made fortress like by my killing of boatloads of npcs.
Npc's should be removed from the game. No more farming crosses. Mine something build something or kill something worth isk. if you cant do any of these buy a plex or mine a moon. true content from players only. |
maldearth
S.W.A.M.P.
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:18:14 -
[442] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:So you believe it was around may the drop was bigger than usual? I wonder what dev blog was released in may. We've know the changes are coming for a long time and people have been gradually dropping off since then. Announcements of the mechanics then implementation are more than likely driving the decline. the drop was end of may, not beginning. are you implying it took eve community a whole month to read it and decide they aren't going to play? here are the reasons why i think that blog isn't related to drop at all: 1) 1 month time difference
I'll take - what is the smallest length subscription for 1000 Alex.
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:28:59 -
[443] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know.
Oh, I think you do sir (this is best read in Sherlock Holmes voice). Same reason they were so happy at the announcement of siphons, they thought it it was a chance for the marginal/disenfranchised/impotent types to FINALLY strike at the "big bads" that they otherwise couldn't touch. As it was then, it will be again , silence when the people who thought they were getting something find out that the changes only make the big bad blob people even stronger than they were before. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to killing NPCs by the boatload in my fortress like solar system made fortress like by my killing of boatloads of npcs.
Actually, I have an opinion about the siphons. They would have been a cool harassment tool in theory; however, CCP decided to allow API data track whenever a siphon was set up on a POS. One of the dumbest decisions ever, since it allowed groups to idly track for siphons without keeping an eye on the POS. Totally killed the siphon as a proper harassment tool.
As for who is crying and who is cheering, it isn't that cut and dry.... though Imperium is generally against it and smaller groups are more along the wait and see camp. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
368
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:31:57 -
[444] - Quote
Spacial Girl wrote:Balthusdire Dominus wrote:The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work. They'll still be unable to warp, and attackers can feast on their 4k/ms souls. Any reasonably fit ceptor/T3dessi should catch them.
Wrong, have you heard about grid mechanics? Have you even noticed that in the amount of time for the hostile to enter system and land on the sov structure grid, the trollceptor is either very close to breaking grid and disappearing or has already disappeared from the grid?
Yeah. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:36:31 -
[445] - Quote
ToXicPaIN wrote:4000m/s is still to fast ...
People are uselss if they cant catch a ceptor with max 4k m/s and that cant warp.
If you cant do that, all I cant think is that you dont have mwd skills cos you should be able to do this easy even with a frigate or even a cruiser. You dont need a ceptor. And if you still can not do this, well I can only think something is wrong not with the game but with the pilot.... |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
466
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:36:49 -
[446] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Just read the original post. All of that sounds great till you realize that the underlying system is the thing that is bad, not individual mechanics or issues.
The problem is that this system is tantamount to CCP going "you know what, screw it" after 12 years of advertising huge space battles. Now we have a system to bends null sec into a crappier copy of faction warfare low sec.
They literally took a system that could be equal parts boredom (structure grinding) and Epicness and made it ALL boring (and then counted that as a win). I thought the change (ie massive over-reaction) from POS based sov to dominion was bad, but this one is worse, at least Dominion preserved the spirit of 0.0 space fighting.
This new system is EASIER to defend, my wallets have never been so fat from null sec isk, but Aegis SOV has sucked the 'awesome' out of the game. For some reason, some people think the opposition is about not liking change, or not wanting to adapt, or losing. But we HAVE all adapted , and no one of consequence has lost anything..
Dominion was only occasionally fun (while being heart breaking, I was in NCDot when Goons kicked us out of Tribute, didn't want that region anyways), Aegis is no fun at all..
In the grand scheme of life it's not a big deal however, and hell, we survived 6 years of the badness that was Dominion, we can survive another 6 years till CCP realizes that this one sucks too...undoubtedly after more inevitable personnel changes lol. But the ability to survive a bad situation doesn't make that situation any less bad.
There was nothing awesome about sitting in 10% TIDI, clicking your mods over and over again, wondering if they are going to to actually function.
There was nothing awesome about being sitting on a Titan for hours then told that fleet is cancelled yet again because the rallying cry of a certain alliance leader was "no fun allowed"
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.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1828
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:37:25 -
[447] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Spacial Girl wrote:Balthusdire Dominus wrote:The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work. They'll still be unable to warp, and attackers can feast on their 4k/ms souls. Any reasonably fit ceptor/T3dessi should catch them. Wrong, have you heard about grid mechanics? Have you even noticed that in the amount of time for the hostile to enter system and land on the sov structure grid, the trollceptor is either very close to breaking grid and disappearing or has already disappeared from the grid? Yeah.
It'll take about 90s +/- to break grid at 4k/s. It's catchable.
But the mass penalty NEEDS to come back. Legitimately instant aligning intys will actually be even worse. |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:37:47 -
[448] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Spacial Girl wrote:Balthusdire Dominus wrote:The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work. They'll still be unable to warp, and attackers can feast on their 4k/ms souls. Any reasonably fit ceptor/T3dessi should catch them. Wrong, have you heard about grid mechanics? Have you even noticed that in the amount of time for the hostile to enter system and land on the sov structure grid, the trollceptor is either very close to breaking grid and disappearing or has already disappeared from the grid? Yeah.
Really it depends on the grid. One of the first days of Aegis Sov I went about chasing trollceptors with my nano cynabal... usually the grid is more than big enough to not have that issue. Problems arouse if the ship was going 10k+ though. 4k should really help curb the lack of kills. HOWEVER, 4k orths on the edge of grid will still be an issue..... at least they are catchable now. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14228
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:37:50 -
[449] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:
Actually, I have an opinion about the siphons. They would have been a cool harassment tool in theory; however, CCP decided to allow API data track whenever a siphon was set up on a POS. One of the dumbest decisions ever, since it allowed groups to idly track for siphons without keeping an eye on the POS. Totally killed the siphon as a proper harassment tool.
That was changed because, unlike now, CCP realized that any mechanic that forces people to babysit structures is something that should not exist.
Babysitting structures is poison. It is neither using, nor living in your space, its a time tax to park a character at a particular spot while doing nothing. EVE needs players, not just people logged in.
"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.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
368
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:40:05 -
[450] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Spacial Girl wrote:Balthusdire Dominus wrote:The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work. They'll still be unable to warp, and attackers can feast on their 4k/ms souls. Any reasonably fit ceptor/T3dessi should catch them. Wrong, have you heard about grid mechanics? Have you even noticed that in the amount of time for the hostile to enter system and land on the sov structure grid, the trollceptor is either very close to breaking grid and disappearing or has already disappeared from the grid? Yeah. It'll take about 90s +/- to break grid at 4k/s. It's catchable. But the mass penalty NEEDS to come back. Legitimately instant aligning intys will actually be even worse.
And it will, on average, take a hostile to land on that sov structure grid at least 30 seconds. With that lead, escape is almost certain unless the trollceptor wasn't watching local and failed stop orbiting and align away in a certain direction. |
|
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:40:25 -
[451] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Just read the original post. All of that sounds great till you realize that the underlying system is the thing that is bad, not individual mechanics or issues.
The problem is that this system is tantamount to CCP going "you know what, screw it" after 12 years of advertising huge space battles. Now we have a system to bends null sec into a crappier copy of faction warfare low sec.
They literally took a system that could be equal parts boredom (structure grinding) and Epicness and made it ALL boring (and then counted that as a win). I thought the change (ie massive over-reaction) from POS based sov to dominion was bad, but this one is worse, at least Dominion preserved the spirit of 0.0 space fighting.
This new system is EASIER to defend, my wallets have never been so fat from null sec isk, but Aegis SOV has sucked the 'awesome' out of the game. For some reason, some people think the opposition is about not liking change, or not wanting to adapt, or losing. But we HAVE all adapted , and no one of consequence has lost anything..
Dominion was only occasionally fun (while being heart breaking, I was in NCDot when Goons kicked us out of Tribute, didn't want that region anyways), Aegis is no fun at all..
In the grand scheme of life it's not a big deal however, and hell, we survived 6 years of the badness that was Dominion, we can survive another 6 years till CCP realizes that this one sucks too...undoubtedly after more inevitable personnel changes lol. But the ability to survive a bad situation doesn't make that situation any less bad. There was nothing awesome about sitting in 10% TIDI, clicking your mods over and over again, wondering if they are going to to actually function. There was nothing awesome about being sitting on a Titan for hours then told that fleet is cancelled yet again because the rallying cry of a certain alliance leader was "no fun allowed"
The whole fascade of 4k person mega battles sounds fun and amazing until you live through it, especially as a run-o-a-mill F1 monkey. Sure, fleet commanders and people with special jobs likely had a kick out of it.... but for the button pushers that drove the dps or had to clear tackle, it was pure hell. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1828
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:43:27 -
[452] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:afkalt wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Spacial Girl wrote:Balthusdire Dominus wrote:The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.
Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work. They'll still be unable to warp, and attackers can feast on their 4k/ms souls. Any reasonably fit ceptor/T3dessi should catch them. Wrong, have you heard about grid mechanics? Have you even noticed that in the amount of time for the hostile to enter system and land on the sov structure grid, the trollceptor is either very close to breaking grid and disappearing or has already disappeared from the grid? Yeah. It'll take about 90s +/- to break grid at 4k/s. It's catchable. But the mass penalty NEEDS to come back. Legitimately instant aligning intys will actually be even worse. And it will, on average, take a hostile to land on that sov structure grid at least 30 seconds. With that lead, escape is almost certain unless the trollceptor wasn't watching local and failed stop orbiting and align away in a certain direction.
It is far from certain as you'll be able to go (significantly) faster.
What it is going to come down to, is how long the cycle has to go and how fast they are able to actually warp. |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:45:19 -
[453] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Hendrink Collie wrote:
Actually, I have an opinion about the siphons. They would have been a cool harassment tool in theory; however, CCP decided to allow API data track whenever a siphon was set up on a POS. One of the dumbest decisions ever, since it allowed groups to idly track for siphons without keeping an eye on the POS. Totally killed the siphon as a proper harassment tool.
That was changed because, unlike now, CCP realized that any mechanic that forces people to babysit structures is something that should not exist. Babysitting structures is poison. It is neither using, nor living in your space, its a time tax to park a character at a particular spot while doing nothing. EVE needs players, not just people logged in.
Who says you have to baby sit the structure? No one is making .... well, for most of us no one is making you visit that structure every day. Just stop by occasionally. If there is troll issues, put more defenses on the structure and visit more often until the troll goes away. I don't see why something that was made to be a harassment tactic (and possible a solid one at that) was made essentially useless because it can be easily tracked using API.
At this point, they might as well be deleted, and that's sad because they had so much potential. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1818
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:46:27 -
[454] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
There was nothing awesome about sitting in 10% TIDI, clicking your mods over and over again, wondering if they are going to to actually function.
There was nothing awesome about being sitting on a Titan for hours then told that fleet is cancelled yet again because the rallying cry of a certain alliance leader was "no fun allowed"
Considering your corp has only been in an Imperium alliance for 6 months, I call bullshit on this anecdote.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
466
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:46:33 -
[455] - Quote
gascanu wrote:TigerXtrm wrote:Cat silth wrote:More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not Okay I don't get this reasoning. Litterally the only difference between shooting and entosising in this game currently is the sound and visual effect of the weapon. When you're sieging a structure with 8 guns you're still orbiting and pressing F1, same as now. If they made the Entosis link make a pew pew sound, would that make it more fun for you? that's the only difference you can see? how about, for example one big difference is that shooting things give you a killmail while entosing things give you nothing; a killmaill in a pvp game, how about that difference? should i go on?
Actually I believe that F2 is more commonly pressed while entosisisisising.
So there's actually twice as many things to do.
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.
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:49:17 -
[456] - Quote
You guys just need to stop playing eve the wrong way, and start playing the way fozzie tells you to. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14228
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:50:36 -
[457] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:
Who says you have to baby sit the structure?
The part where you suggest that the owner have no way of knowing whether they are being siphoned short of actually being there.
They had no vulnerability timer requirements, or anything of the sort. They could be attached any time, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
That's why they were set to have the API show them.
Quote:At this point, they might as well be deleted, and that's sad because they had so much potential.
I would argue that they ought never have been released. They were a flawed concept, much like a lot of the deployables.
"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.
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2284
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:53:03 -
[458] - Quote
Querns wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
There was nothing awesome about sitting in 10% TIDI, clicking your mods over and over again, wondering if they are going to to actually function.
There was nothing awesome about being sitting on a Titan for hours then told that fleet is cancelled yet again because the rallying cry of a certain alliance leader was "no fun allowed"
Considering your corp has only been in an Imperium alliance for 6 months, I call bullsh it on this anecdote.
I bet you clowns think the sun revolves around you too.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6581
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:54:11 -
[459] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:There was nothing awesome about sitting in 10% TIDI, clicking your mods over and over again, wondering if they are going to to actually function.
There was nothing awesome about being sitting on a Titan for hours then told that fleet is cancelled yet again because the rallying cry of a certain alliance leader was "no fun allowed" In both cases Uncle Suas was awesome.
And there's nothing awesome about the current system either. Mining structures? Come on...
Their focus should be on encouraging more of the good large fights, less of the "DIE SERVERS DIE" fights and making the system work well. Instead they've basically admitted that the main thing their game had over others - having massive fleet battles - is dead.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
466
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:54:14 -
[460] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur. Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway. Fozziesov isn't the sole reason those battles aren't occurring. The players have to be willing to throw their fleets at one another, and presently it appears that's not happening because of a lack of value in winning whatever systems or regions. Since the current sov system is less than 8 weeks old, I'm willing to give CCP time to implement changes to make the systems valuable enough in terms of natural resources. That should have been done first before this tweak to Fozziesov though.
here is the real issue I think.
Most alliances are not short or resources or isk. the biggest like PL or Goons have more isk then they know what to do with. Many vet players seem to be extremely rich.
I think resources need to be more scarce so people fight over them again. They also need to deplete over time. Moon-mining needs to cease to be an AFK activity.
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.
|
|
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:58:32 -
[461] - Quote
What in the hell goes 4km/s besides an interceptor? So since someone decides to come troll sov in a single ship we have to bring multiple ships including boosters? Why do ships need to move to capture something anyway??
Entosis links should make you park your ass right where you started the process, like you lit a cyno. This will generate those ~gud fites~ you are wanting, forcing people to bring more ships for reinforcement/reps and creating a single point for a battle.
There was a story of a game in which the developers didn't listen to their consumers. The players offered helpful feedback and solutions to problems the game had given rise to. The devs didn't listen, and by the time they finally realized "oh wait, they are the people that bring our revenue!" it was too late. That game was Diablo 3. Don't be a Diablo 3. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14228
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:59:02 -
[462] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I think resources need to be more scarce so people fight over them again. They also need to deplete over time. Moon-mining needs to cease to be an AFK activity.
No offense, but this is an extremely bad idea. Take the idea to it's logical conclusion.
Existing players are, in your opinion, too wealthy. So if you tightly restrict resources, those players will use their existing wealth and assets to lock down the newly scarce resources, and we'll be right back where we started, except the "have nots" are in an even worse position.
"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.
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
466
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:59:25 -
[463] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Tallardar wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur. Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway. This is a bit inaccurate. "Fleet Fights" aren't just Asakai and BR-5 type deals, plenty of fleet fights involve only sub caps, and plenty happened over the coure of the last year. The Mittani website and EVE news detail those kinds of fights all the time. I've been in only 2 mid sized scraps since Aegis began (one involving my old alliance INIT fighting my new alliance lol). And that's it, the rest have been "Aegis style bullshit Nibble fights" (that phrase shall be copyrighted soon lol). I still find it odd that (from my perspective as someone who likes fleet fights) CCP could take a system of occasional fair sized to big fights and make them less occasional lol.
Is this really the fault of CCP, or the alliance leaders who blue up everything in sight and NIP the rest?
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.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1828
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 16:59:39 -
[464] - Quote
Have the newbros kill them:
[Atron, newbro kill farming]
Overdrive Injector System II
Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste
Damage Control II
5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I
X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S
Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S
Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S
[empty high slot]
Small Auxiliary Thrusters I
Small Auxiliary Thrusters I
Small Auxiliary Thrusters I
All Meta barring the OD (lol hull upgrades II) and the DC (lol hull upgrades IV).
4743/6781m/s with heat.
Feed the newbros delicious kills |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:04:49 -
[465] - Quote
Oh boy, tech 1 frigates and interceptors. Exactly what I started playing eve for. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14229
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:05:32 -
[466] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Is this really the fault of CCP, or the alliance leaders who blue up everything in sight and NIP the rest?
It's still CCP's fault, yes. It lies on them to incentivize conflict. If nullsec personal income weren't so lousy, people might find it worth fighting over more than Sort Dragon's wife, or other such personal dickery and flag waving.
"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.
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:09:39 -
[467] - Quote
This sov iteration would be better if it also included the 5 LY jump freighter adjustment to encourage local production. That way if you wanted to troll space, you'd be encouraged to live and work near the space you wanted to troll, instead of just shipping everything in from Jita. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1819
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:09:46 -
[468] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Querns wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
There was nothing awesome about sitting in 10% TIDI, clicking your mods over and over again, wondering if they are going to to actually function.
There was nothing awesome about being sitting on a Titan for hours then told that fleet is cancelled yet again because the rallying cry of a certain alliance leader was "no fun allowed"
Considering your corp has only been in an Imperium alliance for 6 months, I call bullsh it on this anecdote. I bet you clowns think the sun revolves around you too.
I'm not sure I understand the accusation here.
A guy posting on a forum claims that he was part of "weaponized boredom" tactics and didn't get a fight. The Imperium is the most widely-known user of said tactics, and unless specifically qualified, the status quo demands that any mention of "weaponized boredom" automatically means "the Imperium."
However, curiosity leads towards the poster's in-game corporate affiliations, and lo and behold, the poster's corporation has only been in the Initiative for 6 months, which is well past the point where his anecdote could have possibly taken place. As such, the poster is outed as a storyteller and a liar, possibly with an agenda that bears little value to the conversation.
How does what you said and what I'm implying connect?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
466
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:10:44 -
[469] - Quote
Querns wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
There was nothing awesome about sitting in 10% TIDI, clicking your mods over and over again, wondering if they are going to to actually function.
There was nothing awesome about being sitting on a Titan for hours then told that fleet is cancelled yet again because the rallying cry of a certain alliance leader was "no fun allowed"
Considering your corp has only been in an Imperium alliance for 6 months, I call bullsh it on this anecdote.
Call it what you like son, I and others have been in other corps and alliances.
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.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:12:39 -
[470] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Have the newbros kill them: [Atron, newbro kill farming] Overdrive Injector System II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Damage Control II 5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S [empty high slot] Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I All Meta barring the OD (lol hull upgrades II) and the DC (lol hull upgrades IV). 4743/6781m/s with heat. Feed the newbros delicious kills
My point exactly. Heck you dont even need the tech 2 stuff. You can easelly do this with tech 1 only. |
|
|
Jenn aSide
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
12146
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:13:38 -
[471] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Tallardar wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur. Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway. This is a bit inaccurate. "Fleet Fights" aren't just Asakai and BR-5 type deals, plenty of fleet fights involve only sub caps, and plenty happened over the coure of the last year. The Mittani website and EVE news detail those kinds of fights all the time. I've been in only 2 mid sized scraps since Aegis began (one involving my old alliance INIT fighting my new alliance lol). And that's it, the rest have been "Aegis style bullshit Nibble fights" (that phrase shall be copyrighted soon lol). I still find it odd that (from my perspective as someone who likes fleet fights) CCP could take a system of occasional fair sized to big fights and make them less occasional lol. Is this really the fault of CCP, or the alliance leaders who blue up everything in sight and NIP the rest?
CCP.
That "everyone is blue" thing has never been true, when I was in INIT and we were associated with HBC there was plenty to shoot, ,and people are shooting still. Of the two of us, I'm in the alliance with fewer blues,so if it was the fault of 'alliance leaders', those leaders are only enabled by YOU (line members who given alliance leaders power by existing).
Why would you complain about this while sitting comfortably in an Imperium Aligned group I do not know. It's a lot like protesting the burning of fossil fuels while owning a gas station. |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
466
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:14:42 -
[472] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I think resources need to be more scarce so people fight over them again. They also need to deplete over time. Moon-mining needs to cease to be an AFK activity.
No offense, but this is an extremely bad idea. Take the idea to it's logical conclusion. Existing players are, in your opinion, too wealthy. So if you tightly restrict resources, those players will use their existing wealth and assets to lock down the newly scarce resources, and we'll be right back where we started, except the "have nots" are in an even worse position.
You're probably right about that.
However my point that Alliances don't fight because there's not really anything they need to fight over is valid I think. They have everything they need already.
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.
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
174
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:17:27 -
[473] - Quote
This is just a change for changes sake.
It does not address the problem of Why Would you attack some one,why would you Defend something
until something changes so the WHY is not a WHY its all for nothing. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14231
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:20:38 -
[474] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I think resources need to be more scarce so people fight over them again. They also need to deplete over time. Moon-mining needs to cease to be an AFK activity.
No offense, but this is an extremely bad idea. Take the idea to it's logical conclusion. Existing players are, in your opinion, too wealthy. So if you tightly restrict resources, those players will use their existing wealth and assets to lock down the newly scarce resources, and we'll be right back where we started, except the "have nots" are in an even worse position. You're probably right about that. However my point that Alliances don't fight because there's not really anything they need to fight over is valid I think. They have everything they need already.
They don't fight because, for the few years, there has not been anything to fight over besides bragging rights, flag waving, various dickery, and irl grudges.
That's all sov has been, for the most part. And it's reached a critical mass where people are tired of fighting for trumped up reasons, and what do we do? We introduce jesus lasers, to add even more boring to something that is functionally pointless to begin with.
"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.
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
467
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:21:19 -
[475] - Quote
Might be time for CCP to dust off that no-sov option they were looking at.
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.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:23:38 -
[476] - Quote
Luckelly for us we dont have many blues and completelly surrounded by reds. We got more targets than we can shoot.
Maybe thats the secret to play the game and quit whining why no one will engage you?
Reset standing, get thousands of targets and get into a ship. Its your fault, not CCP.
Nobody wants blobs or TIDI. It destroys the game. In the old days this game had so much to offer cos there was no blue donut. Now its all about who has the largest coalition. Its perversed and I hope CCP mans up about it some day really destroys this blue blobs that has done nothing for the game but drive it to the ground |
Mischa Gau'ss Tesla
WHITE FLAG.
The Bastion
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:25:27 -
[477] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Now let's see another example of gewn tears we all love so much! Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:From my point of view, fozzie sov has just been a miss for now:
Before it, taking a system was starting a war, putting major fleets, firepower, a lot of man and effort on taking big objectives. Taking a system was something, you had to fight for it... Now, people just come with one or two fast ships and orbit a sov structure 250k off... no fighting, no strategy, no effort. 1. Ummmm... have you tried that in, you know, system people actually live in? And if you're not using that system, you don't need to own it. Working as intended. Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:What i liked and still like in eve is it's variety, and a thing that has been removed by fozzie is the actual BIG part of eve, two (or more) alliances fighting in huge fleets to get control of space. This is the so called blobbing, which is, even if you don't like it, a way of playing. Small gang always existed in ganking, factional warfare,... big fight just tend to disappear, just like dread, titans and other carriers will become useless (which is a shame, fighting around those ships is interesting, the fact they need support fleets making giving the fight a great aspect and making coordination critical). 2. "BAWW NOBODY FIGHTS MAH BLOOB BLOOB" Why don't you try deploying on someone's staging system and see if there'll be no major fight for it. Hint: gudfait in 3...2...1... Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:Empires where build by man followed by a thousands, not by some lonely pilot orbiting in a system. People like TLOTR because of it's big epic fights, star wars because of the huge fleets fighting around the deathstar; and the efforts of Frodon and Luke were supported by a lot of lives, they did not just took the control by themselves!
Fozzie sov on an other hand offers good ideas, but in a bad way. If entosis was limited to the biggest classes of ships, if there were a risk to take to entosis a system then it could be good... fozzie sov just need to bring the meaning of war back to new eden, for now, it just takes the meaning of "run". 3. Frodo has captured the uncontested mt. Doom in 2v1 fight against Gollum, working as intended. Fozziesov will be a war once alliances downsize to what they occupy. We'll come to burn Deklein then - and there will be a fight for every system in it. Unless you drop it like the fountain, that is. Mischa Gau'ss Tesla wrote:My suggestions:
- limit entosis to bigger ships (BC's ad over);
- bring back the fight, for example by giving "control points" when an ennemy entosis ship is destroyed, or just for destroying ennemies,... plenty of ideas can be used here, just think about it BEFORE releasing the new system...
What is bad in actual system:
- one lonely interceptor or recon can still entosis a system while being hard to catch... just because of speed and range;
- no fights for a system, in most of the case it is just a time attack;
- the actual system seems to not have been thought through...
Oh and before some whiners say it: yes, i'm from the imperium/cfc, and yes, I see blobbing as a way of playing, and yes, number is a force, that i think should be the most important in a mmo (MASSIVELY MULTIplayer online ;) ).
Ty for your reading! o7 4. Suggestions are just copy from the propagoonda and not worth reading. 5. But the tears! "qq we cannot use numbers qq give me ez numbers F1 win qq". I wonder what is stopping those number from spreading out and occupying all those systems to chase the trolls away and grind ratings? Can't handle the trollceptor? Keep the delicious tears coming.
1. Yeah people tried to entosis some of our systems at the begin, and stopped because it was boring for everyone... even them. What some guys do now is coming to see if anything reacts, which we do not do every time, but when timer ends, if we come to defend we see noone coming or the lonely guy running cuz he can't do **** alone, just as before fozzie... so not working as attended.
2. Why would we attack, we got all territories we need... But don't worry, we might do it soon or later.
3. Frodo did this because the last stand of free races was diverting the eye from mt. Doom... and this last stand regrouped most of the free people's armys. Downsizing big alliances is a good idea, we did it by "dropping" foutain as you say, but well, come to us and fight, you could do it before fozzie, and fozzie does not encourage it.
4. Oh phoque, i'm not a goon and do not even read their forum posts most of the time... oh wwait, I fogot, all Imperium/CFC is goon, my bad ^^
5. I am just exposing the fact that it as no sense to promote a way of playing that just takes a trolling guy to "take" a system... I often go defend by myself with no fleet because there is no need to fight, those guys just run away... you are crying more than me over "goon blobbing everywhere", as a reminder (again) this is a multiplayer game, if you can't play as a team, well this is more of your problem :)
See ya in space with your ceptor o7 |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14232
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:29:41 -
[478] - Quote
Icycle wrote:*yammer yammer*
Hush. I doubt even CCP fails to see past your self interested tripe. You're not going to convince anyone in the thread that didn't already agree with you, either.
"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.
|
Aurthes
M. Corp Engineering
Executive Outcomes
59
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:34:37 -
[479] - Quote
Its a good step in the right direction, but not nearly enough.
---
I do have some thoughts on getting players more engaged with the new sov system. Minigames
Why should we have to ALT-TAB out of game to play something else when maybe CCP could instead provide some mini-games that you could play with other members of your fleet?
While 1% of the fleet is doing entosis, the others could play
- Poker - where you could gamble with ISK with other members in your fleet...maybe extend it to an in fleet casino
- Eve Tanks - fleet is split in half and fights to last man standing
- PacCommandNode - Pretend you could eat the big pill and instantly consume a node
- Bonus Room
|
Jenn aSide
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
12149
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:40:08 -
[480] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Might be time for CCP to dust off that no-sov option they were looking at.
IMO this is what should have happened. In an interview fozzie said it came down to aegis-sov or "no-sov". Whatever coin they flipped was a bad coin. |
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:49:16 -
[481] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Icycle wrote:*yammer yammer* Hush. I doubt even CCP fails to see past your self interested tripe. You're not going to convince anyone in the thread that didn't already agree with you, either.
it was not about agreement, it was about fit. I was busy to make a fit. I tend to backup my statement instead of just spew something. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:52:41 -
[482] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Is this really the fault of CCP, or the alliance leaders who blue up everything in sight and NIP the rest?
It's still CCP's fault, yes. It lies on them to incentivize conflict. If nullsec personal income weren't so lousy, people might find it worth fighting over more than Sort Dragon's wife, or other such personal dickery and flag waving.
I agree with this.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
61
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:53:24 -
[483] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:Might be time for CCP to dust off that no-sov option they were looking at.
IMO this is what should have happened. In an interview fozzie said it came down to aegis-sov or "no-sov". Whatever coin they flipped was a bad coin.
Maybe we are all being rused and fozzie's plan all along was to make null into a no-sov system. The way to make us accept this was to roll out a system a vocal minority of players hate with a passion. 
Then again, I'm open to this no-sov concept. Could be very interesting.... |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6582
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:54:53 -
[484] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:here is the real issue I think.
Most alliances are not short or resources or isk. the biggest like PL or Goons have more isk then they know what to do with. Many vet players seem to be extremely rich.
I think resources need to be more scarce so people fight over them again. They also need to deplete over time. Moon-mining needs to cease to be an AFK activity. How will making resources more scarce help? All that does is stop players without isk from making as much as those that already have too much.
Also, most of us haven't made our isk from null. The vast majority of the isk I've made has been from trading in highsec. I'd be unaffected by nerfs to nullsec income.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:55:16 -
[485] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:
Diagnosis: OP.
Treatment: on top of suggested MWD-jamming feature of enthosis, maybe reducing its cargo and increasing strontium consumption on enthosis would do a trick. Tackling interceptor - yes, shuttle - yes, cyno-shuttle - no, sov-shuttle - no.
it's only OP when no one shows up to defend. if someone did show up, all they need is an entosis module to successfully prevent ceptor from capturing sov.
Let's not be dumb here.
The first notification goes out when the 'warm-up' cycle finishes. The defender's entosis link doesn't actually start contesting the capture until its warm-up cycle has finished. So on a newly taken system, the defender will have...
4 minutes.
So you undock... and hope you don't tidi yourself... and now you've got 3 minutes, 40 seconds (just timed the undocking in a system w/no tidi and only 10 people).
warp time can be another minute.
2 minutes 40 seconds to react. Yeah. that's gonna promote fights.
|
Alphaomega21
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:56:38 -
[486] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:Might be time for CCP to dust off that no-sov option they were looking at.
IMO this is what should have happened. In an interview fozzie said it came down to aegis-sov or "no-sov". Whatever coin they flipped was a bad coin. Maybe we are all being rused and fozzie's plan all along was to make null into a no-sov system. The way to make us accept this was to roll out a system a vocal minority of players hate with a passion. Then again, I'm open to this no-sov concept. Could be very interesting....
Based on what I have seen CCP and CCP Fozzie are not that smart. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 17:58:14 -
[487] - Quote
Querns wrote:A guy posting on a forum claims that he was part of "weaponized boredom" tactics and didn't get a fight. The Imperium is the most widely-known user of said tactics, and unless specifically qualified, the status quo demands that any mention of "weaponized boredom" automatically means "the Imperium."
?
Especially as the initial quote given was 'No Fun Allowed', which was used extensively - and almost exclusively on fleets - by Reagalan. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:01:00 -
[488] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Luckelly for us we dont have many blues and completelly surrounded by reds. We got more targets than we can shoot. Maybe thats the secret to play the game and quit whining why no one will engage you? Reset standing, get thousands of targets and get into a ship. Its your fault, not CCP. Nobody wants blobs or TIDI. It destroys the game. In the old days this game had so much to offer cos there was no blue donut. Now its all about who has the largest coalition. Its perversed and I hope CCP mans up about it some day really destroys this blue blobs that has done nothing for the game but drive it to the ground
Here, since you apparently failed grammar classes.
Quote:Luckily for us we don't have amny blue and are completely surrounded by reds. We have more targets than we can shoot. Maybe that's the secret to playing the game, and not whining when no one will engage you. Reset standings, get thousands of targets and get into a ship. It's your fault, not CCP's. Nobody wants blobs or TIDI , it destroys the game. In the old days , this game had so much to offer because there was no blue doughnut. Now it'sall about who has the largest coalition. It's perverted and I hope CCP man up about it some day , and really destroy this blue blob that has done nothing for the game but drive it into the ground.
It's really sad that the built in spellcheck for the forums didn't even give you the indication that your grammar was atrocious.
Edit - I'll also point out that 1) MoA were part of those "blue blob" doughnut groups for a while, and 2) you can't put artificial limits on social dynamics in a game.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:02:59 -
[489] - Quote
Icycle wrote: ~irrelevent hurf blurf~
Does MOA own sov? No.
Does MOA plan on owning sov? No.
Does MOA have any interest in sov mechanics? No.
Is this thread about sov? Yes.
Why are you guys even in here, much less commenting? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:05:32 -
[490] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:It's really sad that the built in spellcheck for the forums didn't even give you the indication that your grammar was atrocious.
Edit - I'll also point out that 1) MoA were part of those "blue blob" doughnut groups for a while, and 2) you can't put artificial limits on social dynamics in a game.
Dude, I so miss you sometimes. |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6582
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:05:54 -
[491] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Have the newbros kill them: [Atron, newbro kill farming] All Meta barring the OD (lol hull upgrades II) and the DC (lol hull upgrades IV). 4743/6781m/s with heat. Feed the newbros delicious kills You mean feed the trollceptors delicious kills. Many of them too have guns and will simply vaporise ships like this and move on.
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Might be time for CCP to dust off that no-sov option they were looking at. Why? No sov would be just as bad as broken sov. Either way it wouldn't generate fights.
Icycle wrote:Maybe thats the secret to play the game and quit whining why no one will engage you? There is no right or wrong way to play, that's what a sandbox is. Personally I don't want to play some ****** space arena game where I can fly some terrible fit ships provided to me a by an overly butthurt blogger to go after ratters. That may be your cup of tea, but it's certainly not mine.
Icycle wrote:Nobody wants blobs or TIDI. It destroys the game. Clearly that's false. Several thousands players at the very least DO want it, otherwise they wouldn't do it.
Icycle wrote:I hope CCP mans up about it some day really destroys this blue blobs So you want to see EVE stop being developed due to an enormous lack of subs? That's a bit mean.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:07:14 -
[492] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Dude, I so miss you sometimes.
I don't miss you though.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:11:50 -
[493] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote: ~irrelevent hurf blurf~ Does MOA own sov? No. Does MOA plan on owning sov? No. Does MOA have any interest in sov mechanics? No. Is this thread about sov? Yes. Why are you guys even in here, much less commenting? If you want ~gud fights~ you don't even need to attack our sov, just bring something other than blops bridges and interceptors.
lol
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Mordus_Angels
I dont have to say more. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6582
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:11:50 -
[494] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:IMO this is what should have happened. In an interview fozzie said it came down to aegis-sov or "no-sov". Whatever coin they flipped was a bad coin. Then they should flip the "hire a decent game designer" coin. I can;t believe the only options for a working space ownership system are "non-existent" and "terrible". Even just the basic "whoever has most amount of activity over rolling timescale owns the system" is a better mechanic than the current one. Or "activity scores points, points constantly decay, whoever has the most points at DT owns the system". There are literally hundreds of options and most of them are better than Aegis.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
35
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:12:36 -
[495] - Quote
Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote: ~irrelevent hurf blurf~ Does MOA own sov? No. Does MOA plan on owning sov? No. Does MOA have any interest in sov mechanics? No. Is this thread about sov? Yes. Why are you guys even in here, much less commenting? If you want ~gud fights~ you don't even need to attack our sov, just bring something other than blops bridges and interceptors. lol http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Mordus_Angels
I dont have to say more.
Looks like your systems are being taken back pretty quickly after you "captured" and lived in them.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
DARKNESS.
117
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:15:49 -
[496] - Quote
4k is so damned arbitrary. It doesn't do anything at all to solve the troll-ability of sov. You literally would have been better off attaching a "cannot activate propulsion modules" or "50% reduction to propulsion module speed bonus." At least that would have brought them down to base-catchable speeds or at least feel less arbitrary than a flat number cap. Either way, still does not SOLVE the problem people in null have with the system itself...
CCP, let me make this clear. Everyone who has skin in sov null has said the exact same thing many many times already any yet you still seem to be focused on what you percieve as the problem and not what we are telling you is the problem.
You have taken sov which revolved around fielding a fleet/large assets (the more you bring the faster it goes) and moved it into the realm of solo+ game play and applied an artificial penalty to use of large assets with a set time to RF/capture. (Large assets may I add, that no matter how you look at it would have much stronger computer systems to better handle the act of entosising)
-Nobody but the trolls are happy that sov can be contested by a single player who has no intention of fielding an asset of value to do so and has no intent on following up their attack.
-Sov should always be about the fleet (small or large) game play. As such entosising a structure should have always required multiple concurrent modules to at least begin the attack. Number of attackers required based on system index seems the most cut and dry way to address this.
-Sov is brutal and expensive, if the best the attacker can field are small frigates then they never had a role in holding sov to begin with. Hull locking to Recons, BC/CS, and Capitals - for one does not feel arbitrary - but requires the attacker to have some skin in the game but still allows for covert/light scale attacks to be made.
PLEASE CCP, listen to us! Don't say you're listening to us, actually LISTEN. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6812
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:16:37 -
[497] - Quote
Does moa actually rat and mine in the systems they take
Do they even rat or mine in 5z, I thought they made money in highsec whenever 5z gets camped
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Robert Warner
Back Door Burglars
The Otherworld
110
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:18:47 -
[498] - Quote
I'm terribly sorry, CCP, but these changes only highlight how out of touch the company have become with the community and with making an enjoyable gaming experience as a whole. I would like to elaborate as follows:
1. As sovereignty holders, the entire task of capturing command nodes for uncontested systems is a complete and utter waste of our time as players. Exactly who at CCP believes that players want to orbit a series of structures because some guy in an interceptor tripped the sovereignty and never returned?
2. Interceptors aren't fun. As a sovereignty holder I want some action. When someone is tripping my sovereignty I want to expect at least some fight, even if it's only a decent 1 vs 1. Warping in to find an interceptor burning away at speed is hardly quality game time.
Fixes are simple:
1. Uncontested sov falls back to original owner after a time lapse.
2. Entosis links fit only on larger ships (at the very least, cruiser).
Until this happens, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to continue to complain and null sec is going to continue to empty.
The core problem is not only the number of command nodes and time to claim them - it's that your sovereignty system is crap!
We don't want to spend any time making responses to 'sov trolls' - NONE! Unless someone is making a half decent attempt and we're likely to get at least some content, we can't be bothered playing with it.
I must say I am extremely disappointed at the extremely slow response and disconnected nature of the company of late. I think you need to all sit down and think about how a company which used to be so in touch with player aspirations has become completely resolute to follow its own ends blindly, at the expense of player loyalty.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
369
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:20:26 -
[499] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote: Back when every MAJOR power bloc started rolling out their own versions of Brave Dojo because
I need to make a slight correction on history & the chronology about this tidbit: Certain major power blocs already had programs similar to Brave Dojo before Brave was established. Moreover, there were also other in-game non-aligned venues such as Rookie Help channel that functioned similarly. However, if Dojo was a place where applications and classes were frequent, maybe that would be a proper differentiator regarding history.
Just a thought. :P |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:20:59 -
[500] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Does moa actually rat and mine in the systems they take
Do they even rat or mine in 5z, I thought they made money in highsec whenever 5z gets camped
no, instead we go to your home system and kill all your ratters and laugh at you while you are camping 5z thats full of alts. 
It is no secret that we actually kill more CFC when we are hell camped than when we are not
Same as its no secret that we kill at least twise as more CFC than you do us
It is also no secret that CFC has had many ops to get rid off MOA and all failed on its head |
|
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:21:35 -
[501] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dude, I so miss you sometimes. I don't miss you though.
You never shoot at me! |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:22:14 -
[502] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:
CCP, let me make this clear. Everyone who has skin in sov null has said the exact same thing many many times already any yet you still seem to be focused on what you perceive as the problem and not what we are telling you is the problem.
This. This needs to be repetitively copied and pasted throughout the thread.
Nasar Vyron wrote:To that, I do recognize and greatly appreciate the reduction in rf capture timers as that was one of the complaints brought up.
...and this too I guess. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:24:01 -
[503] - Quote
Robert Warner wrote:1. Uncontested sov falls back to original owner after a time lapse.
Build this into node decay: if a node decays, it counts as a defensive win. |
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:26:28 -
[504] - Quote
Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote: ~irrelevent hurf blurf~ Does MOA own sov? No. Does MOA plan on owning sov? No. Does MOA have any interest in sov mechanics? No. Is this thread about sov? Yes. Why are you guys even in here, much less commenting? If you want ~gud fights~ you don't even need to attack our sov, just bring something other than blops bridges and interceptors. lol http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Mordus_Angels
I dont have to say more.
You have no ihubs you idiot, TCU's are worthless in the current system. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:30:15 -
[505] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Tallardar wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dude, I so miss you sometimes. I don't miss you though. You never shoot at me!
That would require undocking.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:30:43 -
[506] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote: ~irrelevent hurf blurf~ Does MOA own sov? No. Does MOA plan on owning sov? No. Does MOA have any interest in sov mechanics? No. Is this thread about sov? Yes. Why are you guys even in here, much less commenting? If you want ~gud fights~ you don't even need to attack our sov, just bring something other than blops bridges and interceptors. lol http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Mordus_Angels
I dont have to say more. You have no ihubs you idiot, TCU's are worthless in the current system.
I am not doing your job for you! I dont need no facilitate your structure grinding. |
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:32:26 -
[507] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Luckelly for us we dont have many blues and completelly surrounded by reds. We got more targets than we can shoot. Maybe thats the secret to play the game and quit whining why no one will engage you? Reset standing, get thousands of targets and get into a ship. Its your fault, not CCP. Nobody wants blobs or TIDI. It destroys the game. In the old days this game had so much to offer cos there was no blue donut. Now its all about who has the largest coalition. Its perversed and I hope CCP mans up about it some day really destroys this blue blobs that has done nothing for the game but drive it to the ground
HI, hello. There are approximately 40 people that believe and support and feel the way you do about 0.0, the 40 of you that roam everyday
Compared to 107,881 people that are currently members of some kind of coalition (a gathering of alliances)
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:33:10 -
[508] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote: ~irrelevent hurf blurf~ Does MOA own sov? No. Does MOA plan on owning sov? No. Does MOA have any interest in sov mechanics? No. Is this thread about sov? Yes. Why are you guys even in here, much less commenting? If you want ~gud fights~ you don't even need to attack our sov, just bring something other than blops bridges and interceptors. lol http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Mordus_Angels
I dont have to say more. You have no ihubs you idiot, TCU's are worthless in the current system. They get a name on there so their overlord can claim they are winning. They'll be CONDI soon enough, even moa themselves know they don't stand a chance of holding them.
Actually we do it cos we can mostly but also to anoy CFC. Its a distraction and when we dont get blobed we do have fun |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:33:19 -
[509] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Arrendis wrote:Tallardar wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dude, I so miss you sometimes. I don't miss you though. You never shoot at me! That would require undocking.
Wait... how can you dock, all you guys have are supercapitals!
WAITAMINNIT! When did you go PHorde? Yer ruinin' mah illusions here, man! |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
69
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:35:40 -
[510] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Actually we do it cos we can mostly but also to anoy CFC. Its a distraction and when we dont get blobed we do have fun
And we finally arrive to the issue at hand, sov trolling. Thank you for ironically agreeing with the mass opinion. |
|
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
369
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:36:23 -
[511] - Quote
What is this verb 'anoy' you've used? What does it mean?
Jesus H. Christ, how come nobody in the entirety of Mordus Angels alliance is able to write or speak properly? It is just surreal. |
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:37:09 -
[512] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I dont need no facilitate your structure grinding.
I'll remember you said that three months from now when you are in G Club, The Kadeshi or Darkness like all your predecessors before you.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:37:35 -
[513] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote:Actually we do it cos we can mostly but also to anoy CFC. Its a distraction and when we dont get blobed we do have fun And we finally arrive to the issue at hand, sov trolling. Thank you for ironically agreeing with the mass opinion.
well we will try and take the space in PB if possible, althought its not our primary goal. Its not a secret. I mean if you cant figger that out by yourself... I strongly disagree with holding onto unused space. Thats what drives me personally to entos the systems. I dont think you should hold on on systems out of spite. I have said this over and over before. Its nothing new. Specially when you dont live in it. |
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:40:37 -
[514] - Quote
Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote:Actually we do it cos we can mostly but also to anoy CFC. Its a distraction and when we dont get blobed we do have fun And we finally arrive to the issue at hand, sov trolling. Thank you for ironically agreeing with the mass opinion. well we will try and take the space in PB if possible, althought its not our primary goal. Its not a secret. I mean if you cant figger that out by yourself... I strongly disagree with holding onto unused space. Thats what drives me personally to entos the systems. I dont think you should hold on on systems out of spite. I have said this over and over before. Its nothing new. Specially when you dont live in it.
You entosis a system because you are told to, you are no different than an F1 fleet monkey. |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
61
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:40:54 -
[515] - Quote
Hmm... this topic needs some serious cleaning. The past five pages has been nothing but MOA and goons bitching and gloating at each other. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
370
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:41:23 -
[516] - Quote
Icycle wrote:if you cant figger that out by yourself
I don't know who or what a figger is, but I strongly suspect you wanted to spell figure properly, but you couldn't. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:43:02 -
[517] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote:Actually we do it cos we can mostly but also to anoy CFC. Its a distraction and when we dont get blobed we do have fun And we finally arrive to the issue at hand, sov trolling. Thank you for ironically agreeing with the mass opinion. well we will try and take the space in PB if possible, althought its not our primary goal. Its not a secret. I mean if you cant figger that out by yourself... I strongly disagree with holding onto unused space. Thats what drives me personally to entos the systems. I dont think you should hold on on systems out of spite. I have said this over and over before. Its nothing new. Specially when you dont live in it. You entosis a system because you are told too, you are no different than an F1 fleet monkey.
lol. Ask anyone in MOA. Everybody knows that I am for it. I actually like doing it but I wont spend the whole night at it. Not cos I am told to but mostly cos I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. Thats what drives me. That and that I dont like the CFC policies. I mean who does not like killing CFC? I know I do. Otherwise I would have joined another alliance |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:43:14 -
[518] - Quote
Taram Caldar wrote:1: Reduce the speed limit to 3k/s
2: Make it so that if a ship is nullified it cannot fit an entosis link
3: Make it so that a ship cannot fit a cloak and an entosis link (mutually exclusive modules)
I'm not thrilled with this announcement. It doesn't do a damn thing about the 'trollceptor' phenomena and still doesn't address the issue of systems that someone comes and triggers capture nodes but never following up on. Systems should reset to fully defended (non vulnerable) if someone sov wands them but doesn't come do the anoms within X amount of time.
1. Sounds reasonable
2. No. The module should be usable on any ship as designed. Gate camps should not be able to keep out all entosis ships. You shouldn't need bubbles to defend Sov.
3. I understand why you want this, but again it could remove valid game play, because of one trolling tactic. I want to be able to bring in a cloaked fleet to attack a system if I want to, without having to refit.
Solutions to abused mechanic are tricky because you potentially limit valid tactics due to the abusers. Cloaks and nullified ships should be allowed, but they need to find a way to make them less of a harassing troll ship. I think speed limits and link range limits are key to this. If they can't warp, fly too fast and are in a reasonable range, that should be enough for any group to counter. Will some ships still troll and escape, yes. But as long as it is not as easy as it is now, then that should be allowed. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:43:50 -
[519] - Quote
MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners.
Do you guys seriously think we can't just fit a bunch of trollceptors ourselves and do the same? Just imagine our ~blobs~, except instead of feroxes or domis (or whatever the flavor of the month is) it's trollceptors. We could literally form one single fleet and take an entire region in a day, much less these three systems. In order to effectively illustrate how this is broken, I guess it needs to happen. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:43:59 -
[520] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Tallardar wrote:Arrendis wrote:Tallardar wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dude, I so miss you sometimes. I don't miss you though. You never shoot at me! That would require undocking. Wait... how can you dock, all you guys have are supercapitals! WAITAMINNIT! When did you go PHorde? Yer ruinin' mah illusions here, man!
https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Tallardar
https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Hendrick%20Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
|
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
108
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:44:31 -
[521] - Quote
Amy Garzan wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:Reagalan wrote:Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end. TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1. system working as intended. News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills? Think that over.
Can I has yer stuff... |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14236
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:44:40 -
[522] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I strongly disagree with holding onto unused space. Thats what drives me personally to entos the systems. I dont think you should hold on on systems out of spite. I have said this over and over before. Its nothing new. Specially when you dont live in it.
We both know you don't actually believe that, it's merely a convenient excuse that you lot latched onto to try and justify the bullshit system we have in place right now.
You're just towing the party line, basically, which is even funnier considering how constantly you lot accuse others of doing precisely that. I don't particularly like the CFC, but I find most of it's stalwart detractors to be buffoons and hypocrite white knights, which is what MoA has repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be.
"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.
|
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:45:24 -
[523] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Ask anyone in MOA. Everybody knows that I am for it. I actually like doing it but I wont spend the whole night at it. Not cos I am told to but mostly cos I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. Thats what drives me. That and that I dont like the CFC policies. I mean who does not like killing CFC? I know I do. Otherwise I would have joined another alliance
You're not good enough to get in any other alliance, thats why you joined Mordus Angels.
They take bad players and F1 monkeys like you as long as they drink the koolaid.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:45:59 -
[524] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:MASSADEATH wrote:Reagalan wrote:Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.
Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us. More goon BLOB ... just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now Y-C3EQ 7RM-N0 GA-P6C the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best. IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners. Do you guys seriously think we can't just fit a bunch of trollceptors ourselves and do the same? Just imagine our ~blobs~, except instead of feroxes or domis (or whatever the flavor of the month is) it's trollceptors. We could literally form one single fleet and take an entire region in a day, much less these three systems. In order to effectively illustrate how this is broken, I guess it needs to happen.
Do you seriosuly think we will be chasing a 50K alliance?
You know what, we might do it for the laugh. After we do kill a LOT of CFC..
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1820
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:46:50 -
[525] - Quote
Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote:Actually we do it cos we can mostly but also to anoy CFC. Its a distraction and when we dont get blobed we do have fun And we finally arrive to the issue at hand, sov trolling. Thank you for ironically agreeing with the mass opinion. well we will try and take the space in PB if possible, althought its not our primary goal. Its not a secret. I mean if you cant figger that out by yourself... I strongly disagree with holding onto unused space. Thats what drives me personally to entos the systems. I dont think you should hold on on systems out of spite. I have said this over and over before. Its nothing new. Specially when you dont live in it.
Pure Blind, unused? Then why are the ADMs so high?
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind#adm
Wishing for something to be true so much that you start believing it is true doesn't actually make it true.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6582
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:48:01 -
[526] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Actually we do it cos we can mostly but also to anoy CFC. Its a distraction and when we dont get blobed we do have fun Last I checked, you grinding down TnT sov that we are transferring to goons doesn't annoy us so much as help us out.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1820
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:48:49 -
[527] - Quote
Icycle wrote:That and that I dont like the CFC policies
What, like the policy where alliances in the Imperium are expected to participate in mutual defense? You know, the thing that MOA failed to do even in a token fashion, leading to their removal from the coalition.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:50:14 -
[528] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:Ask anyone in MOA. Everybody knows that I am for it. I actually like doing it but I wont spend the whole night at it. Not cos I am told to but mostly cos I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. Thats what drives me. That and that I dont like the CFC policies. I mean who does not like killing CFC? I know I do. Otherwise I would have joined another alliance You're not good enough to get in any other alliance, thats why you joined Mordus Angels. They take bad players and F1 monkeys like you as long as they drink the koolaid.
These days you can get to almost any alliance. In the old days it was more strict.
I dont know what koolaid is...I drink water or juice. Is there anything else you want to know about me? |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:50:46 -
[529] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live.
According to the data, CFC live in the systems you seem to think they aren't inhabiting.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
370
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:52:07 -
[530] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:Ask anyone in MOA. Everybody knows that I am for it. I actually like doing it but I wont spend the whole night at it. Not cos I am told to but mostly cos I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. Thats what drives me. That and that I dont like the CFC policies. I mean who does not like killing CFC? I know I do. Otherwise I would have joined another alliance You're not good enough to get in any other alliance, thats why you joined Mordus Angels. They take bad players and F1 monkeys like you as long as they drink the koolaid. These days you can get to almost any alliance. In the old days it was more strict. I dont know what koolaid is...I drink water or juice. Is there anything else you want to know about me?
I'd recommend drinking whatever it is that can aid in mental development, which would finally make it possible for MoA posters to spell words out correctly in anything they type.
How come you guys all manage to fail in spelling and grammar despite spellcheck virtually being built in with every modern web browser out there? |
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:52:09 -
[531] - Quote
Querns wrote:Icycle wrote:That and that I dont like the CFC policies What, like the policy where alliances in the Imperium are expected to participate in mutual defense? You know, the thing that MOA failed to do even in a token fashion, leading to their removal from the coalition.
Look the manifesto. We do our own thing. We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:53:40 -
[532] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Icycle wrote:Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:Ask anyone in MOA. Everybody knows that I am for it. I actually like doing it but I wont spend the whole night at it. Not cos I am told to but mostly cos I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. Thats what drives me. That and that I dont like the CFC policies. I mean who does not like killing CFC? I know I do. Otherwise I would have joined another alliance You're not good enough to get in any other alliance, thats why you joined Mordus Angels. They take bad players and F1 monkeys like you as long as they drink the koolaid. These days you can get to almost any alliance. In the old days it was more strict. I dont know what koolaid is...I drink water or juice. Is there anything else you want to know about me? I'd recommend drinking whatever it is that can aid in mental development, which would finally make it possible for MoA posters to spell words out correctly in anything they type. How come you guys all manage to fail in spelling and grammar despite spellcheck virtually being built in with every modern web browser out there?
I type. I dont run spell checker. Not a grammar nazi. Besides english is not my first language. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:54:20 -
[533] - Quote
Icycle wrote:We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch.
But you'll be told to take systems in Pure Blind by a blogger because....
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14237
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:54:35 -
[534] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Querns wrote:Icycle wrote:That and that I dont like the CFC policies What, like the policy where alliances in the Imperium are expected to participate in mutual defense? You know, the thing that MOA failed to do even in a token fashion, leading to their removal from the coalition. Look the manifesto. We do our own thing. We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch.
And yet, you work for Gevlon Goblin not just willingly, but wholeheartedly.
Sounds like you're someone's ***** to me.
"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.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1820
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:55:15 -
[535] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Querns wrote:Icycle wrote:That and that I dont like the CFC policies What, like the policy where alliances in the Imperium are expected to participate in mutual defense? You know, the thing that MOA failed to do even in a token fashion, leading to their removal from the coalition. Look the manifesto. We do our own thing. We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch.
Which is why you joined the then-CFC in the first place.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:55:43 -
[536] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Do you seriosuly think we will be chasing a 50K alliance? You know what, we might do it for the laugh. After we do kill a LOT of CFC..
I bet if you put 50,000 fish in a single pond, you'll catch one. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:56:18 -
[537] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. According to the data, CFC live in the systems you seem to think they aren't inhabiting.
No they dont. They moved a few miners in and are activelly trying to raise the system level to make it harder to entosis. |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:58:31 -
[538] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. According to the data, CFC live in the systems you seem to think they aren't inhabiting. No they dont. They moved a few miners in and are activelly trying to raise the system level to make it harder to entosis.
So... they're using the systems then?
Got it. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
40
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:59:06 -
[539] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. According to the data, CFC live in the systems you seem to think they aren't inhabiting. No they dont. They moved a few miners in and are activelly trying to raise the system level to make it harder to entosis.
That's exactly the point of the sov system. CFC are using those systems, which is what I said. Thanks for agreeing.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:59:11 -
[540] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Icycle wrote:Querns wrote:Icycle wrote:That and that I dont like the CFC policies What, like the policy where alliances in the Imperium are expected to participate in mutual defense? You know, the thing that MOA failed to do even in a token fashion, leading to their removal from the coalition. Look the manifesto. We do our own thing. We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch. And yet, you work for Gevlon Goblin not just willingly, but wholeheartedly. Sounds like you're someone's ***** to me.
lol. I never met the guy. Never even spoke to him. To me its nothing to do with Gevlon. I do like watching his web site from time to time thoguht cos he is good with stats. Kinda offers something the rest of eve does not. Also I love to see all the hate posts he get. I find it funny. |
|
|
Ted McManfist
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 18:59:19 -
[541] - Quote
Icycle wrote: We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch.
Unless Gooble Gobble pays you. Then you seem OK with it. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1823
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:01:03 -
[542] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. According to the data, CFC live in the systems you seem to think they aren't inhabiting. No they dont. They moved a few miners in and are activelly trying to raise the system level to make it harder to entosis.
Please enlighten us, then GÇö if that doesn't count as "living in a system" then what does?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Ama Zing
Black Scorpions Inc
Fidelas Constans
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:01:06 -
[543] - Quote
Hi Fozzie,
you did it wrong!
If you want content, immobilize the entosis users and let them receive reps. That will lead to fleets fighting for sov and defenders have to react.
But that 4k/s ceptor concept is just supporting trolls. And lowering the timers is even worse!
I guess you have tried to catch a ceptor - so look at it from a fair perspective.
Running around and hitting entosis links on whatever is reachable and run away will break your small fights concept.
cheers |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6583
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:02:09 -
[544] - Quote
Icycle wrote:[quote=Querns]Look the manifesto. We do our own thing. We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch. Lol? Yet you do whatever gen eve and gevlon tell you to do.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:02:26 -
[545] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. According to the data, CFC live in the systems you seem to think they aren't inhabiting. No they dont. They moved a few miners in and are activelly trying to raise the system level to make it harder to entosis. That's exactly the point of the sov system. CFC are using those systems, which is what I said. Thanks for agreeing.
I am not waisting my time raising the system. I like more to pvp or talking rather than ratting. I am ok with been poor. I dont think you need to be rich to have fun in this game. Thats my personal view. You can waist all your time if you want, I will not, except to cause pain. I like to be more offensive than defensive. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14240
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:02:54 -
[546] - Quote
Icycle wrote:To me its nothing to do with Gevlon.
Cool. You're still his *****, at least he certainly seems to think so(as do your leadership, who is more than happy to do his bidding), which puts the lie to your anti authority rant a while ago.
"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.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
373
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:03:27 -
[547] - Quote
Alright, it is our understanding that our beloved friends in Mordus Angels alliance had an issue fully comprehending Reagalan's previous post. As such, one of our spies in Mordus Angels came up with a proper translation of the post to usual MoA lingo.
Reagalan wrote: i'm sayenng this ass nicely ass pussiblele. fozziesov is e broken and fundamentally flawead system. naoh amount of tweakenng will evar makae it work ass well ass eithar of teh two previous sov systems. fozziesov is not engagenng for teh averagae fleet member, hwo has to wait around hwilele teh magical sov hackers do awl teh work. undar dominion sov, yoeur averagae fleet membar got to contributa vie dps, and at least got killmails at teh end. fozziesov is not fun for e sov defender, hwo has to racae to defend buffar zoneis from entitis hwo havae naoh intention of actually takenng yoeur space, or holdenng it, or even usenng it. it's not fun to chasae interceptors around. this has also been e problem ass far back ass sincae interceptors recievead bubblele ammunty hwich was also onae of teh worst design decisions in teh heistory of evae. fozziesov lacks pwermanencae. undar dominion sov, losenng e system was putentially, for awl intents and purposes, pwermanent. it could putentially fall into e timezonae from hwich you would Nefer buh ablele to takae it back. undar fozziesov, you can losae systems and takae them back latar. losenng yoeur spacae therefoare has far less valuae. theare is less on teh linae. sincae losenng spacae has less value, fewar pweoplele givae e **** about their spacae. this is readily apparent in teh mass exodus from nullsec. fozziesov discourageis fightenng becausae it doeis not forcae an entity to control e grid in ordar to win an objectivae. ironically, this was onae of teh statead goals of teh system. it discourageis fightenng becausae theare is naoh naeead to commit anythenng nomare to win an objectivae than e singlele sovhackar. any fleet that splits itself to covar multiplele nodes, and protect multiplele sovhackers, will fall prey to e fleet that maintains coherency, and rolls ass onae largae group winnenng multiplele small fights. it's therefoare in teh best interest of e defendar to not engage, to retain e "fleet-in-being" to discouragae an attackar from splittenng uep. by preventenng an attackar from splittenng uep, hue can therefoare maximizae teh tedium on part of teh attackers. dominion sov, at least, forcead both teh attackar and defendar to commit to e grid to fight ovar an objective, naoh mattar how adamant teh defendenng fc was at attemptenng to blueball teh attackers. theare was always e final timer, and teh defendar must show uep for it in force, or losae. fozziesov's focus on teh "small entities" detracts from teh ammensae amount of organization that has gonae into teh maintenancae of largae spacae empireis. teh idee that small, disorganizead entitis should havae an easiar timeam defendenng their space, or advantageis hwen attackenng someonae else's, is contrary to teh concept of "effort vs reward". this blind focus on teh "small entities" has also directly lead to far fewar largae fights in nullsec, and indeed, teh naeead for them. largae fights, largae wars, largae empires, and largae fleets, havae always been far greatar content producers than small gangs, or "small entities". largae fleets makae stragglers, targets for small gangs to catch, and reasons for industrialists to build things. largae wars involvae thousands of pelayers, given them reasons to log in, reasons to fight, and reasons for largae battleis involvenng mass destruction of ships to occeur. largae empireis drivae e metagameam that is not found in any othar gameam in teh world, and providae organizations and structureis hwich unita largae numbers of pelayers and providae e support naetwork for naew ones, and causeis and reasons for oldar oneis to log in. eve's metagameam has been teh numbar onae drivar of content for teh gameam. teh metagameam produceis hueadlines, teh metagameam produceis naew pelayers. fozziesov, and teh focus on "small entities", aims to systematically destroy awl of these, and, by extension, destroys e largae part of hwy wae pelay evae at awl. despita teh focus on "small entities", fozziesov hueavily favors largae entitis witht largae numbers of pweoplele hwo aare capablele of providenng extre ships to fit sovlasers to, and to rat and keep uep adms. thae adms of fozziesov aim to restrict teh sizae of e spacae empiare on teh concept of "occupancy sov". in heindsight, "occupancy sov" was e misguidead and flawead concept. teh sizae of e spacae empiare should not buh limitead to teh amount of spacae it can utilize, but by teh military pressuare exertead by teh othar pelayers and their spacae empireis. entosis links, teh cornerstonae of fozziesov, aare e major contributor to teh flaws of fozziesov, and aare also e fundamentally flawead concept that should Nefer havae been amplementead. thae idee of e "magical spacae laser" that determineis hwosae flag is pelantead in spacae is, even on it's face, e laughablele concept. wae dumpead millions of skillpoints into combat skills for e reason. citadels, hwich so-far louk likae e goud re-work of pus/stations, aare greatly hamstrung in their putential becausae of their reliancae on entosis link mechanics. thae issuae of "trollceptors" is e direct result of entosis links. teh ehp grind of dominion sov, and of pus, was an inherent inhibitor of "troll" tactics. heighar dps ships inherently cost nomare nomney. ehp grinds were, by design, inherently conducivae to risk-reward concepts. to effect e changae in sov, you naeedead to commit. this commitment was e major drivar of conflict. hwen e sov war occured, it was e big deal. ehp grinds may not has been that much fun, but that wasn't teh puint. evae was Nefer e "fun" gameam. evae inherently is incapablele of beenng e "fun" gameam. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:04:31 -
[548] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:[quote=Querns]Look the manifesto. We do our own thing. We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch. Lol? Yet you do whatever gen eve and gevlon tell you to do.
Ask anyone or maybe you can listen in with your spies on TS. I actually do like this. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14240
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:06:12 -
[549] - Quote
Quote:i'm sayenng this ass nicely ass pussiblele.
And I couldn't read anymore, because I cracked up. Well done.
"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.
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
109
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:07:02 -
[550] - Quote
Reagalan wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:Dominion sov was flawed. The investment required to be a player in the Sov game at that time was a massive super fleet.....
This is mostly true, and was a major issue in Dominion, however, multiple exceptions exist. A great many entities were able to hold space in Dominion sov without the use of supercaps, or even regular caps. They held their space by leveraging comparative advantages or by following strategies other than simple "shooting things". This gave the system very deep and emergent gameplay. Diplomacy was one of the largest factors. Prior to the rise of the rental empire, the majority of smaller entities got their foot in the door by joining up with established entities, or forming coalitions to challenge established powers. The inherent need to organize such campaigns meant those who put in the effort would reap the rewards. Examples exist throughout the Dominion period. Intrepid Crossing took and held Cobalt Edge due to deals with the old DRF. Parallels exist between the "guests" of the old Northern Coalition and many members of the earlier incarnations of N3. TEST originally was granted Fountain via a diplomatic exchange. Provibloc holds it's space via diplomatic means. The Imperium has always put a high value of diplomacy. Even BRAVE was able to take Catch due to diplomatic relations with N3. The problems came about because of the rise of the rental empire. Rental empires, however, were a symptom of a much deeper problem. Rental empires did run counter to diplomacy, and worked actively against the ability of smaller entities to leverage diplomatic means to gain sov. Why would you treat with these smaller entities when you can just force them into your rental empire? Rental empires, however, require an overwhelming military advantage to work. The owners of the space must be able to easily crush any possible opposition that might come against it, without losing too much in the war to make holding and renting the space unprofitable.This is where the issue comes from. The game provided the means by which an entity could easily make such a war happen. Without these means, rental empires would never have become a thing. These means, the issue, that has plagued Eve since 2009, has been, and remains, the overwhelming concentration of wealth and power in the form of supercarriers and titans. Every single issue with Dominion sov, the stagnation, the reliance on supercaps, the rental empires, "power projecion", were all symptoms of the underlying cause: the overwhelming wealth and power concentration in the form of supercaps and titans. Had this issue been tackled in November 2014, instead of the red-herring problems of "power projection" and the sov system, we would not be in the scenario we are today. The massive collateral damage of both Fatigue and Fozziesov would never had occurred.
lol - ah, good'ol day syndrome and revisionist history all rolled into one...
...but seriously, dominion sov + moon income = fat dumb and happy sprawling empires of emptiness, the rest are just details
The old world is dead, move on, think smaller, be happy (just hope to god they kill passive income and nuke moon mining into the stone age, or atleast make it an active task, that'll atleast finally relegate afk Empire building farmville....er...eveville...into the history books) |
|
|
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:08:06 -
[551] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:We dont like to be told what to do. I would say we got a problem with authority or been someones b*tch.
But you'll be told to take systems in Pure Blind by a blogger because....
Tallardar pls, they get in their entosis troll ships every night and orbit that beacon for hours, run away if someone comes in and go to another system because its fun and engaging gameplay and they like to pvp...a beacon. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
46
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:08:12 -
[552] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:I concider wrong when you hold on to a system you dont live. According to the data, CFC live in the systems you seem to think they aren't inhabiting. No they dont. They moved a few miners in and are activelly trying to raise the system level to make it harder to entosis. That's exactly the point of the sov system. CFC are using those systems, which is what I said. Thanks for agreeing. I am not waisting my time raising the system. I like more to pvp or talking rather than ratting. I am ok with been poor. I dont think you need to be rich to have fun in this game. Thats my personal view. You can waist all your time if you want, I will not, except to cause pain. I like to be more offensive than defensive.
So you have no interest in the sov or holding it, and are more so interested in the "trolling" you claim you aren't interested in but don't want to do the work to own a system or defend it. Gotcha. Thanks for proving Goons right all along.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:09:08 -
[553] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Icycle wrote:To me its nothing to do with Gevlon. Cool. You're still his *****, at least he certainly seems to think so(as do your leadership, who is more than happy to do his bidding), which puts the lie to your anti authority rant a while ago.
Nope. You are wrong. The other day there was an entosis fleet and I joined, then there was a second one. Instead I joined other guys to do pvp. I pick and chose to what I am in the mood for. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14243
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:10:49 -
[554] - Quote
Icycle wrote:
Nope. You are wrong.
"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.
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
376
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:11:15 -
[555] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Icycle wrote:To me its nothing to do with Gevlon. Cool. You're still his *****, at least he certainly seems to think so(as do your leadership, who is more than happy to do his bidding), which puts the lie to your anti authority rant a while ago. Nope. You are wrong. The other day there was an entosis fleet and I joined, then there was a second one. Instead I joined other guys to do pvp. I pick and chose to what I am in the mood for.
So you mean, you had the ability to choose between a sovtrolling fleet and an AFK ratter ganking fleet, and you chose the latter? Well done, we're all very proud of you. And thanks for basically backing up the point we've been raising.
I love MoA. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
46
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:11:24 -
[556] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Ask anyone or maybe you can listen in with your spies on TS. I actually do like this.
So you actually like being told what to do. Which is the opposite of you saying you don't like being told what to do, which is something you said earlier.
Gella Delon wrote:
Talladar pls, they get in their entosis troll ships every night and orbit that beacon for hours because its fun and engaging gameplay and they like to pvp...a beacon.
Well apparently it's an elite PVP thing to do that only MoA are capable of.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:14:18 -
[557] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I pick and chose to what I am in the mood for.
Haha what, were you in the mood for shooting that pos in interceptors i see on your killboard?
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
999
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:14:26 -
[558] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:Hmm... this topic needs some serious cleaning. The past five pages has been nothing but MOA and goons bitching and gloating at each other.
Agreed - it's now the last 8 pages of nothing other than:
GrrGoon
GrrMOA
GRRGOON
lolMOA
GRR......
Get a room, or a region. Hug (or fight) it out. Whatever. But the forum-based "proxy war" is almost as boring as the "weaponized boredom" that has been bandied about more than thrice.
I'm right behind you
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:16:07 -
[559] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:
So you have no interest in the sov or holding it, and are more so interested in the "trolling" you claim you aren't interested in but don't want to do the work to own a system or defend it. Gotcha. Thanks for proving Goons right all along.
You are just twisting words to your benefit. Reepating again....
1-I do not like CFC.
2-I do not approve of holding of sov when you dont live in it by any alliance.
3-I like killing CFC.
4-I like entosing
5-I select what I am in the mood to do.
6- I will take sov if I take everything if I can. Sov is not the only thing I would claim if i could.
7-I will do anything(within the law cos we got to be civilized ) that hurts, anoys my enemy. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:16:51 -
[560] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Icycle wrote:To me its nothing to do with Gevlon. Cool. You're still his *****, at least he certainly seems to think so(as do your leadership, who is more than happy to do his bidding), which puts the lie to your anti authority rant a while ago. Nope. You are wrong. The other day there was an entosis fleet and I joined, then there was a second one. Instead I joined other guys to do pvp. I pick and chose to what I am in the mood for.
So instead of doing a single thing your were told to do, you had the choice of choosing from two things you were told to do? No matter how many different way or different things you are told to do, you are still doing something you were told to do. |
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:19:30 -
[561] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:I pick and chose to what I am in the mood for. Haha what, were you in the mood for shooting that pos in interceptors i see on your killboard?
That one I must admit. I thoguht it was going to be a fast thing. Initially it was reported it was 3 poses that were offlined. Then more and lucky for us CFC came to defend it, which made it really fun when trying to kill more pos modules while been bloped by CFC. CFC guys actualy made it fun. I forgot to thank you for it! |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:22:20 -
[562] - Quote
Awright, now, you stop making sense this instant! |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:22:40 -
[563] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Icycle wrote:To me its nothing to do with Gevlon. Cool. You're still his *****, at least he certainly seems to think so(as do your leadership, who is more than happy to do his bidding), which puts the lie to your anti authority rant a while ago. Nope. You are wrong. The other day there was an entosis fleet and I joined, then there was a second one. Instead I joined other guys to do pvp. I pick and chose to what I am in the mood for. So instead of doing a single thing your were told to do, you had the choice of choosing from two things you were told to do? No matter how many different way or different things you are told to do, you are still doing something you were told to do.
lol. Is this a troll?
No I had other choices like hunt the renters or do covert ops. And even more. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:26:07 -
[564] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:
CCP, let me make this clear. Everyone who has skin in sov null has said the exact same thing many many times already any yet you still seem to be focused on what you percieve as the problem and not what we are telling you is the problem.
I just wanted to re-post this quote again, I think it's a great tl;dr of everything. |
Ted McManfist
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
69
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:27:01 -
[565] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Gella Delon wrote:Haha what, were you in the mood for shooting that pos in interceptors i see on your killboard?
That one I must admit. I thoguht it was going to be a fast thing. Initially it was reported it was 3 poses that were offlined. Then more and lucky for us CFC came to defend it, which made it really fun when trying to kill more pos modules while been bloped by CFC. CFC guys actualy made it fun. I forgot to thank you for it!
Better "elite PvP" those offline POS mods! If your ISK efficiency isn't high enough, Genny and Uncle Goobles will be super angry!
Fozziesov: So boring, I'd rather shoot an offline POS. Working as intended! |
Gella Delon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:28:33 -
[566] - Quote
Icycle wrote:No I had other choices like hunt the renters or do covert ops. And even more.
You were told that those are the bad guys over there and you need to do.. what was the words you used
7-I will do anything(within the law cos we got to be civilized ) that hurts, anoys my enemy.[/quote]
anything to hurt and annoy your enemy. Which makes you no different than anyone else is 0.0, just a little less brave and more cowardly because you never leave you npc staging (for 8 years) and stick to the low hanging fruit: renters and ratters. Its like handicap-accessible pvp. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:35:07 -
[567] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote: Its like handicap-accessible pvp.
Hey, Gommel Nox comes out and does his part on Reaver ops. No lumping the handicapped in w/MOA.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:36:15 -
[568] - Quote
Ted McManfist wrote:Icycle wrote:Gella Delon wrote:Haha what, were you in the mood for shooting that pos in interceptors i see on your killboard?
That one I must admit. I thoguht it was going to be a fast thing. Initially it was reported it was 3 poses that were offlined. Then more and lucky for us CFC came to defend it, which made it really fun when trying to kill more pos modules while been bloped by CFC. CFC guys actualy made it fun. I forgot to thank you for it! Better "elite PvP" those offline POS mods! If your ISK efficiency isn't high enough, Genny and Uncle Goobles will be super angry! Fozziesov: So boring, I'd rather shoot an offline POS. Working as intended!
I am sure thats what you would like to belive. Frantically if i did not like the guy I would have left. Gevlon as I said I dont know him and frantically I dont care much what he thinks since I never met the guy. I do care though about killing more and more and more CFC. If your spies have access to our thread, you can see it there.
I forgot to mention this, but when we did it I was looking for moon goo and nother thing that kept me laughing is the poor bastard that will have to go and spend all the time anchoring all the modules cos he did not bother with fuel. Thank you for reminding me that too. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
72
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:38:37 -
[569] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Frantically if i did not like the guy I would have left....
I do not believe that is the word you are looking for. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:43:02 -
[570] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote:
anything to hurt and annoy your enemy. Which makes you no different than anyone else is 0.0, just a little less brave and more cowardly because you never leave your npc staging (for 8 years) and stick to the low hanging fruit: renters and ratters. Its like handicap-accessible pvp.
I personally feel sorry for renters. They are stupid enough to give you money instead of taking it or at least give you a kick in the teeth for it. I take no pride in going after renters but when you allie with an enemy, you become part of the problem and become the enemy. I dont have to leave here cos I got 50k people to kill! Why would I leave Pure Blind, Deklein or Branch. We got so much targets, that we actually are not efficient enough to kill them. We got more targets than we got people to do the killing. This is what i call a rich target area! |
|
|
Ted McManfist
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:48:09 -
[571] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I forgot to mention this, but when we did it I was looking for moon goo and nother thing that kept me laughing is the poor bastard that will have to go and spend all the time anchoring all the modules cos he did not bother with fuel. Thank you for reminding me that too.
Like Genny would have let you keep any of it. I can't count how many times I've heard "Contract all loot to Gen" as you were running away from Dek Defense |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2285
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:49:35 -
[572] - Quote
Never before have so many cried because they have to log in.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:52:22 -
[573] - Quote
Ted McManfist wrote:Icycle wrote:I forgot to mention this, but when we did it I was looking for moon goo and nother thing that kept me laughing is the poor bastard that will have to go and spend all the time anchoring all the modules cos he did not bother with fuel. Thank you for reminding me that too. Like Genny would have let you keep any of it. I can't count how many times I've heard "Contract all loot to Gen" as you were running away from Dek Defense
by that he means faction loot. There has been cases if you catch a freighter or a JF he will tell you keep it all. I think thats very fair. Again as I said. I am not rich. I make suffient isk to get into a ship and blow stuff up. I do not care about isk. |
Capitaltini
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 19:57:36 -
[574] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Ted McManfist wrote:Icycle wrote:I forgot to mention this, but when we did it I was looking for moon goo and nother thing that kept me laughing is the poor bastard that will have to go and spend all the time anchoring all the modules cos he did not bother with fuel. Thank you for reminding me that too. Like Genny would have let you keep any of it. I can't count how many times I've heard "Contract all loot to Gen" as you were running away from Dek Defense by that he means faction loot. There has been cases if you catch a freighter or a JF he will tell you keep it all. I think thats very fair. Again as I said. I am not rich. I make suffient isk to get into a ship and blow stuff up. I do not care about isk.
I wondered where the isk for that revenant came from, that explains it all. I didnt know you were slaves |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:00:37 -
[575] - Quote
Capitaltini wrote:Icycle wrote:Ted McManfist wrote:Icycle wrote:I forgot to mention this, but when we did it I was looking for moon goo and nother thing that kept me laughing is the poor bastard that will have to go and spend all the time anchoring all the modules cos he did not bother with fuel. Thank you for reminding me that too. Like Genny would have let you keep any of it. I can't count how many times I've heard "Contract all loot to Gen" as you were running away from Dek Defense by that he means faction loot. There has been cases if you catch a freighter or a JF he will tell you keep it all. I think thats very fair. Again as I said. I am not rich. I make suffient isk to get into a ship and blow stuff up. I do not care about isk. I wondered where the isk for that revenant came from, that explains it all. I didnt know you were slaves
That rev was owner by a CFC guy. There was some dispute about who really owner it in the CFC. So they decided to blow it up but they did not wanted it in their killboard and thought if they join MOA it will look better. The same character rejoined CFC the day after.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1085
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:05:14 -
[576] - Quote
Icycle wrote:That rev was owner by a CFC guy. There was some dispute about who really owner it in the CFC. So they decided to blow it up but they did not wanted it in their killboard and thought if they join MOA it will look better. The same character rejoined CFC the day after.
Had nothing to do with our killboards. We just thought it'd look funnier on yours. |
Capitaltini
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:05:28 -
[577] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Capitaltini wrote:Icycle wrote:Ted McManfist wrote:Icycle wrote:I forgot to mention this, but when we did it I was looking for moon goo and nother thing that kept me laughing is the poor bastard that will have to go and spend all the time anchoring all the modules cos he did not bother with fuel. Thank you for reminding me that too. Like Genny would have let you keep any of it. I can't count how many times I've heard "Contract all loot to Gen" as you were running away from Dek Defense by that he means faction loot. There has been cases if you catch a freighter or a JF he will tell you keep it all. I think thats very fair. Again as I said. I am not rich. I make suffient isk to get into a ship and blow stuff up. I do not care about isk. I wondered where the isk for that revenant came from, that explains it all. I didnt know you were slaves That rev was owner by a CFC guy. There was some dispute about who really owner it in the CFC. So they decided to blow it up but they did not wanted it in their killboard and thought if they join MOA it will look better. The same character rejoined CFC the day after.
Oooooh okay, so between lying about being slaves and evading any possible chance of providing the CFC with kills while entosising nodes there's a few people benefiting from their line members loot and hard work without spending any of it on the corporation. I don't believe you about the revenant there seems to just be too much money floating around that isn't accounted for. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:06:39 -
[578] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Icycle wrote:That rev was owner by a CFC guy. There was some dispute about who really owner it in the CFC. So they decided to blow it up but they did not wanted it in their killboard and thought if they join MOA it will look better. The same character rejoined CFC the day after. Had nothing to do with our killboards. We just thought it'd look funnier on yours.
like i care... |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:09:41 -
[579] - Quote
Hey Fozzie, I got an idea (to get back on topic) -
Since you guys are all hyped up about these new 'ship skins' and what not, make skins a blue print. Once you purchase the blueprint, you have to manufacture it. Now you have to introduce a new resource into the game - throw it in nullsec and TA DA! you just created new rewarding content for sov. You could even make certain style/category skins regionally exclusive.
Also, I am a firm believe that Entosis links should work like a cyno, siege, triage etc. and restrain all movement but allow reps, all modules, you can even let your interceptors fit them. |
Capitaltini
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:13:18 -
[580] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Hey Fozzie, I got an idea (to get back on topic) -
Since you guys are all hyped up about these new 'ship skins' and what not, make skins a blue print. Once you purchase the blueprint, you have to manufacture it. Now you have to introduce a new resource into the game - throw it in nullsec and TA DA! you just created new rewarding content for sov.
Also, I am a firm believe that Entosis links should work like a cyno, siege, triage etc. and restrain all movement but allow reps, all modules, you can even let your interceptors fit them.
Entosis links should shut down the stargates to the system you are in and boot everyone else from it, that way you dont have to burn off of the node when someone enters local. It would be no different than it is now. I think they already have this implemented well with "socket closed" so its just a minor change. There would be absolutely no risk of creating tidi from blobbing! All of CCP's master plans would follow through and capitals would truly be useless! |
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
114
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:19:48 -
[581] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Hey Fozzie, I got an idea (to get back on topic) -
Since you guys are all hyped up about these new 'ship skins' and what not, make skins a blue print. Once you purchase the blueprint, you have to manufacture it. Now you have to introduce a new resource into the game - throw it in nullsec and TA DA! you just created new rewarding content for sov. You could even make certain style/category skins regionally exclusive.
Also, I am a firm believe that Entosis links should work like a cyno, siege, triage etc. and restrain all movement but allow reps, all modules, you can even let your interceptors fit them.
I believe there is something similar. Its not a blueprint but it is an item you can carry in the cargohold....So I am not sure whats the point of it unless you want it to get a BPO and make isk out of coping blue prints....
I personally think its a bit too expensive for a cyno ship
Besides you should not be able to kill everything you just happen to gaze at. The target should be able to escape. Althought I think hardly this will be the case now unless a pilot is a complete moron. You should be able to do it now with a t1 frigate easelly.
|
2Impact
Repercussus
Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:33:17 -
[582] - Quote
So:
you (CCP) want us (people) to commit in taking SOV, and yet you give the SINGLE and not the GROUP the abilty to disrupt SOV for no reason.
As long as you are giving the possibility to a single one player in a tiny, nullfied ship to go around unpunished and play with SOV without commtting to its consenquences AND/OR reasons behind his intentions, you are STILL giving all the nullsec players base A VALID REASON to leave 0.0 space AND A VALID REASON for external entities to NOT COMMIT to it.
A small entity that wants to play with SOV has to be able to field more than frigates AND must be composed of at least a number of players, NOT A SINGLE individual going around in a damn frigate , otherwise it's just a small entity AND/OR a single player that his only purpose is to troll around people to make their life as miserable as it can be in an environment that is pushing patience far away the natural human borders.
As things are now, you must either have a very, very large group of SOV-committed players that - in their nerdish nature - will committ to even the most unbearable of the jobs, or holding SOV is rewarding only to trollers, because holding it is just plain miserable. We are talking about time Vs joy, this thing you did give us has a lot of potential but you're still failing at making it worth the time Vs joy equation.
IT'S NOT FUN.
DO YOU LISTEN TO US?
We told you I don't know how many times NO TROLLCEPTORS, you even did a survey and we all said NO TROLLCEPTORS.
WE ASKED ALL TOGHETER - odd enough - ONLY FOR 1 THING and yet you didn't deliver/listen.
A single individual doesn't make a small entity. As things are now, anyone with a corporation, could form an alliance and go in a damn ceptor capturing SOV. Do you think it's good? It's not.
Groups make fights, a single individual can make a match, if ever, at its best, and trollceptors don't make any of the two.
We've come up all togheter - odd enough - again, giving you almost the same identical feedback: no trollceptors, less nodes to make fights happen -if ever- somewhere at some point, channeling of things to a valid, sustainable, joyful point for both parties involved.
There is a specific summary about all that the SOV holding player are basically saying
http://denofiniquity.net/?p=70
Yet you're coming out with absurd proposals and ideas that will solve nothing, but maybe, just maybe make the whole fire burn people a little less than what it is now.
But still burn.
Nero burned his city because he liked to play with fire, don't forget it. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2286
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:47:27 -
[583] - Quote
2Impact wrote:
IT'S NOT FUN.
You lost the right to fun when you joined Goons.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14244
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 20:54:46 -
[584] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:2Impact wrote:
IT'S NOT FUN.
You lost the right to fun when you joined Goons.
You probably don't care, but your posting is actively hurting your side of the argument. You're pretty much confirming it for anyone who suspected that the only people in favor of this awful system are those fueled by butthurt against various parts of nullsec.
And that's nothing we should base any game mechanic on.
"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.
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
109
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:10:10 -
[585] - Quote
...smells like a herd of cattle just wandered through this thread... |
Vic Jefferson
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
540
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:24:33 -
[586] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:2Impact wrote:
IT'S NOT FUN.
You lost the right to fun when you joined Goons.
Blind hate of nullsec enthusiasts is misguided and not at all productive.
Most sov people aren't so conceited and bitter that they call all other play styles garbage - they wouldn't want to impose on the small gang enthusiasts of low or npc null or whatever, nor do they generally claim to be experts on those play styles or speak for them.
How would small gang people like it if they were all forced to join a coalition and take and defend systems for the strategic value or narrative, rather than just the sake of pew and chaos and hilarity? I'd wager they would not like it at all, so its not too hard to understand where it's wrong to force the small gang play style on people who were looking for something else.
Small minds see the dissolution of play styles as good for the sandbox. Big minds realize that a sandbox should allow as many possibilities as possible. When you have such blind and unsophisticated hate for one inflection of the sandbox, you really paint yourself as incredibly small minded.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2287
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:37:32 -
[587] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Sentamon wrote:2Impact wrote:
IT'S NOT FUN.
You lost the right to fun when you joined Goons. You probably don't care, but your posting is actively hurting your side of the argument.
Not really, Goons have bragged for years about being anti-fun, to see them crying about that lack of fun they're having is hilarious. CCP should give them as much as no-fun as they can handle since that's what they've thrived on.
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Blind hate of nullsec enthusiasts is misguided and not at all productive.
You guys are about the most negative people about nullsec that I've seen, and the amount of tedium you've gone though to establish power if amazing. I don't hate you, I feel pity for you
CCP constantly listening to you and only about 7% of the game's population in a stagnant nullsec doesn't say much for your ideas.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled
Initiative Mercenaries
783
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:45:49 -
[588] - Quote
Alundil wrote:Hendrink Collie wrote:Hmm... this topic needs some serious cleaning. The past five pages has been nothing but MOA and goons bitching and gloating at each other. Agreed - it's now the last 8 pages of nothing other than: GrrGoon GrrMOA GRRGOON lolMOA GRR...... Get a room, or a region. Hug (or fight) it out. Whatever. But the forum-based "proxy war" is almost as boring as the "weaponized boredom" that has been bandied about more than thrice.
^ Exactly. This is why we can't have nice forums!
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled
Initiative Mercenaries
783
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:47:02 -
[589] - Quote
Ted McManfist wrote:Icycle wrote:Gella Delon wrote:Haha what, were you in the mood for shooting that pos in interceptors i see on your killboard?
That one I must admit. I thoguht it was going to be a fast thing. Initially it was reported it was 3 poses that were offlined. Then more and lucky for us CFC came to defend it, which made it really fun when trying to kill more pos modules while been bloped by CFC. CFC guys actualy made it fun. I forgot to thank you for it! Better "elite PvP" those offline POS mods! If your ISK efficiency isn't high enough, Genny and Uncle Goobles will be super angry! Fozziesov: So boring, I'd rather shoot an offline POS. Working as intended!
Because shooting a ******* Ihub was such engaging gameplay
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Grorious Reader
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:47:32 -
[590] - Quote
Why don't they just make the entosis link require 2000pwg (same as a heavy neut). Then you can't fit it on an interceptor, and if you fit it on a cruiser or BC, you're not gonna fit a large prop. Trolling problem solved. Oh look, and a reason to use battleships. Bonus! |
|
|
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1023
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 21:53:51 -
[591] - Quote
I have removed a troll post and those quoting it.
Quote:5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
ISD Decoy
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Vic Jefferson
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
544
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:03:32 -
[592] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Vic Jefferson wrote:
Blind hate of nullsec enthusiasts is misguided and not at all productive.
You guys are about the most negative people about nullsec that I've seen, and the amount of tedium you've gone though to establish power if amazing. I don't hate you, I feel pity for you CCP constantly listening to you and only about 7% of the game's population in a stagnant nullsec doesn't say much for your ideas.
Yes. Generally people who actually try to live in null and play the null play style would be the most authoritative on what's wrong with it. Likewise I'd want to hear from wormhole people what's wrong with wormholes, and from low or NPC null people what's wrong with those areas. Nullsec people are not only the most qualified people to speak of its ills, they are the only people qualified to speak of its ills. As it stands, those same null people have done a pretty damn good job of outlining and dissecting every single thing that is wrong with the current system; such a complete understanding could not come from arm chairing.
I'm not sure about that whole CCP listening thing, as everyone and their alt, predicted the rise of the trollceptor, and look where we are now.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
699
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:08:09 -
[593] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply. does this 'sharp drop' manifests itself in ways other than people like yourself whining on forums? Because the status monitor doesn't show any sharp drops in the past 6 months.
Actually it does. Although more gradual dropping rather than sharp - Until you look at the same period last year, then it is a sharp drop.
It is strange that when you break Average online for period down into monthly increments you get different figures to the overall average.
9/2 to 9/8 inclusive = 32k average
yet
February 25k
March 24k
April 24k
May 24k
June 22k
July 21k
August to date 21k
It seems the average is taken from, 1 day per week for and hour or so where the player population reaches 30k. Average peak online is not average players online for a 24hr period. It is a shame when you look at EveOffline (the only figures we have access to) it shows average peak as average online for period.
Then if you compare the same period from 2014 where the average was considered 40k, there has been a pretty sharp drop.
I would imagine if real online figures were available they would show a very different picture.
Eve EU is alive and thrashing for life. Since starting this post, players currently online has dropped from 28.6k to 22.8k, in 25 mins. Two hours from now it will be under 20k and there it will stay until EUTZ, where number are likely to peak at 30k for around 75 mins. which somehow seems to end up being average online for period (that 24hrs)
** Eve isn't dying - It is simply adapting to less numbers online.
NB; The figures are as accurate as possible and may be slightly off (by a few hundred here and there) due to movement of the slider on EveOffline and lack of raw data. I'm pretty sure those who have been active the last 6 months would agree the numbers are reasonably accurate, despite what EveOffline states for the casual observer.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3258
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:10:13 -
[594] - Quote
29 pages of YES IT IS and NO IT ISN'T. Good job guys.
So ignoring all that, one query: Fozzie, why are arbitrary hull-type limitations on users of Entosis links a no-no, but arbitrary speed limits on those players are a-ok?
Rather than a flat speed limit, wouldn't a proportional reduction be more open-ended? Say a ship with an active Entosis Link gets a percentage reduction in their base velocity, or the speed boost granted by any propulsion mod. We can argue over the numbers if you wish but this seems a better starting point for limiting the ability of attackers to flee the second anyone shows up to stop them. In turn there's no particularly good reason to disallow remote repping of Entosis users, especially since logistics platforms aren't generally known for their ability to outrun everything and their presence is more liklely to escalate the situation to actual combat than an interceptor or overpropped HAC.
Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
199
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:12:51 -
[595] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Michelle Audier wrote:The group most responsible for popularizing the use of 'weaponized boredom' disapproves en masse? To me, that implies that CCP is on the right track.
Posting on an alt because I'm ashamed of (almost) all of you - don't want my main(s) tainted with the stench from this thread. Lately, the EVE Online community has been setting new lows for behavior - stop it. If you only base your opinion on the system on who is or is not against it, then you don't really have an opinion at all. You're just a lemming with huge blinders on, like most anyone who defines themselves solely in opposition to something. Also, I would like to reiterate the old idea of banning NPC corp posters from every forum but New Citizens. Just throwing it out there. Agreed risk free posting is just as bad as risk free pvp. I'm not talking about risk, I'm talking about one particular demographic that is most commonly used for trolling. NPC corp alts. Anyway, regarding the sov system. Does anyone else think that a full rebalance of the Dreadnaught class is in order at this point? With the incoming rollout of citadel structures to replace POSes, all of which will also require the jesus laser to contest, the Dreadnaught has just had it's one and only role in the game very literally removed. Dreads are useful in killing the supers...... that no one will be using because of Aegis Sov. Damn
Everyone Kept Screaming Death to All supers... CCP Fozzie and Team 5-0 Took it a Step further and Killed the usage of all of them with the new FozzieSov system.
The Sov Little things List
Player Request: Death to all Supers
1) Made Capitals Useless via Jump Nerf.
2) Capital Escalation no longer needed in Sov Warfare.
3) Pilots no longer want to log in Capital ships due to Fatigue
4) DPS no longer needed to take Sov
Upon Completion of checklist Capitals will be effectively Killed off solving one item from the players constant request. Please work on this ASAP. - CCP Fozzie "They got what they asked for, they're dead"
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
36
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:13:31 -
[596] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Is this really the fault of CCP, or the alliance leaders who blue up everything in sight and NIP the rest?
It's still CCP's fault, yes. It lies on them to incentivize conflict. If nullsec personal income weren't so lousy, people might find it worth fighting over more than Sort Dragon's wife, or other such personal dickery and flag waving.
So the real reason there is no conflict is because people like mittani don't earn enough Isk from ratting? That's a believable story |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14246
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:18:10 -
[597] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Is this really the fault of CCP, or the alliance leaders who blue up everything in sight and NIP the rest?
It's still CCP's fault, yes. It lies on them to incentivize conflict. If nullsec personal income weren't so lousy, people might find it worth fighting over more than Sort Dragon's wife, or other such personal dickery and flag waving. So the real reason there is no conflict is because people like mittani don't earn enough Isk from ratting? That's a believable story
Watchlist him sometime, see how often he logs in and rats.
"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.
|
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
5656
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:19:42 -
[598] - Quote
2Impact wrote:So: you (CCP) want us (people) to commit in taking SOV, and yet you give the SINGLE and not the GROUP the abilty to disrupt SOV for no reason. As long as you are giving the possibility to a single one player in a tiny, nullfied ship to go around unpunished and play with SOV without commtting to its consenquences AND/OR reasons behind his intentions, you are STILL giving all the nullsec players base A VALID REASON to leave 0.0 space AND A VALID REASON for external entities to NOT COMMIT to it. A small entity that wants to play with SOV has to be able to field more than frigates AND must be composed of at least a number of players, NOT A SINGLE individual going around in a damn frigate , otherwise it's just a small entity AND/OR a single player that his only purpose is to troll around people to make their life as miserable as it can be in an environment that is pushing patience far away the natural human borders. As things are now, you must either have a very, very large group of SOV-committed players that - in their nerdish nature - will committ to even the most unbearable of the jobs, or holding SOV is rewarding only to trollers, because holding it is just plain miserable. We are talking about time Vs joy, this thing you did give us has a lot of potential but you're still failing at making it worth the time Vs joy equation. IT'S NOT FUN. DO YOU LISTEN TO US? We told you I don't know how many times NO TROLLCEPTORS, you even did a survey and we all said NO TROLLCEPTORS. WE ASKED ALL TOGHETER - odd enough - ONLY FOR 1 THING and yet you didn't deliver/listen. A single individual doesn't make a small entity. As things are now, anyone with a corporation, could form an alliance and go in a damn ceptor capturing SOV. Do you think it's good? It's not. Groups make fights, a single individual can make a match, if ever, at its best, and trollceptors don't make any of the two. We've come up all togheter - odd enough - again, giving you almost the same identical feedback: no trollceptors, less nodes to make fights happen -if ever- somewhere at some point, channeling of things to a valid, sustainable, joyful point for both parties involved. There is a specific summary about all that the SOV holding player are basically saying http://denofiniquity.net/?p=70
Yet you're coming out with absurd proposals and ideas that will solve nothing, but maybe, just maybe make the whole fire burn people a little less than what it is now. But still burn. Nero burned his city because he liked to play with fire, don't forget it.
I TOO can capitalise RANDOM PARTS of my SENTENCES so that to the casual observer they will appear to be FAR MORE IMPORTANT and INSIGHTFUL than they actually are.
Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.
Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.
Andreus Ixiris > ...
Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
199
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:25:26 -
[599] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote: Back when every MAJOR power bloc started rolling out their own versions of Brave Dojo because I need to make a slight correction on history & the chronology about this tidbit: Certain major power blocs already had programs similar to Brave Dojo before Brave was established. Moreover, there were also other in-game non-aligned venues such as Rookie Help channel that functioned similarly. However, if Dojo was a place where applications and classes were frequent, maybe that would be a proper differentiator regarding history. Just a thought. :P
I was Corrected earlier :P I stayed silent and accepted the lesson. I will tho say Dojo was the Well Known out of them all, never participated in it since I was well into my years in this game already. But Dojo was the more Advertised would probably be better wording. You heard about it everywhere compared to Waffles or other areas. But I accept my history lesson from the other gentleman a few pages back and yourself! |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
200
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:32:43 -
[600] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Icycle wrote: ~irrelevent hurf blurf~ Does MOA own sov? No. Does MOA plan on owning sov? No. Does MOA have any interest in sov mechanics? No. Is this thread about sov? Yes. Why are you guys even in here, much less commenting? If you want ~gud fights~ you don't even need to attack our sov, just bring something other than blops bridges and interceptors. lol http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Mordus_Angels
I dont have to say more. You have no ihubs you idiot, TCU's are worthless in the current system.
Hey they worked hard for those TCU's! Just because they can't fully take the system, just because they are not organized enough to hold a system, just because they are not skilled enough to hold a system, just because they are to risk-averse to hold a system means nothing! They got the TCU! It's their flag planted in the middle of something screaming
"HAI! Attention Whore here! HAI! HAI! HAI! I did Something! Hai! See us! Can you now! We're somewhat relevant as NPC station dwellers goes! No other NPC Station dwelling organization can claim holding a TCU! No Hi-Sec Corp can claim a TCU, We did! We dock up just the same as they do.. but we got a flag on the map! You can see us now! We're an Elite Hi-Sec Alliance! Talk to you tomorrow, were going back to NPC to dock up"
But it's theirs! they *coughs* Battled *coughs* long and hard to win that! Let them have their moment so Goblin pays them. |
|
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
200
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:35:13 -
[601] - Quote
Gella Delon wrote:Icycle wrote:I dont need no facilitate your structure grinding. I'll remember you said that three months from now when you are in G Club, The Kadeshi or Darkness like all your predecessors before you.
Or begging to rejoin the Imperium .. they are only around because they are a Bitter Ex-Girlfriend who can't move on. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
202
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 22:44:03 -
[602] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Alright, it is our understanding that our beloved friends in Mordus Angels alliance had an issue fully comprehending Reagalan's previous post. As such, one of our spies in Mordus Angels came up with a proper translation of the post to usual MoA lingo. Reagalan wrote: MoA translated text
Whoever did this deserves a week off from his RL Job and plenty of liquor that week. Simply Brilliant. My eyes are bleeding from Reading near Authentic MoA writing and laughing at the same time. |
Boroth Kindeze
NED-Clan
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:13:00 -
[603] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.
system working as intended.
Thats the whole point dummie! We are still being flown around, but we cannot even press F1 anymore, cause there is nothing to shoot at!!
just 5 people with a link doing their thing and the rest sitting on a gate somewhere because nobody is showing up to actually take the system. It's like a perma-blueball mechanic and boring like hell. Then you have to run somewhere else because of a trollceptor only to sit at a gate again.
It has nothing to do with how much space you have. You will get this if you own 10, 20 or 100 systems. For some reason Fossie seems to believe that other entities want that space, instead of griefing other players. And there it shows he has no f*****ng clue what nullsec life is all about.
I really don't know what Fozzie was thinking, but if it was to motivate me to unsub my accounts like the rest of Eve seems to be doing, he is doing a very good job. If it was to make my game fun because I don't have to grind... He is the pure definition of failure.
just my 2 cents from a very bored logi pilot |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:19:08 -
[604] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:
So the real reason there is no conflict is because people like mittani don't earn enough Isk from ratting? That's a believable story
You do realize people, like Tappits, have been saying the same thing for months/years right? You need something to fight over rather than your name on a map because that's just superficial thing. Having resources in Null worth taking is what drove conflict and some sandbox related things like OTEC. As it stands there's little incentive to take systems from your neighbors or push your way into Null as the income levels are lower than other areas of the game.
You're better off doing WH gas harvesting in a C1 than taking a Null system in terms of ISK income.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:31:40 -
[605] - Quote
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.
system working as intended.
The entirety of null sec is not goon, there are many other entities.
CCP please just listen to the games elected representatives on the CSM. They represent the overall feelings represented by your game's community. |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
111
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:47:03 -
[606] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.
system working as intended.
The entirety of null sec is not goon, there are many other entities. CCP please just listen to the games elected representatives on the CSM. They represent the overall feelings represented by your game's community.
...not so much...certainly not the CFC elected pets |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.19 23:51:20 -
[607] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.
system working as intended.
The entirety of null sec is not goon, there are many other entities. CCP please just listen to the games elected representatives on the CSM. They represent the overall feelings represented by your game's community. ...not so much...certainly not the CFC elected pets
If there weren't large numbers of players agreeing with CSM members, those members would never have been voted in. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
Goonswarm Federation
207
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:03:40 -
[608] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Warmeister wrote:
So the real reason there is no conflict is because people like mittani don't earn enough Isk from ratting? That's a believable story
You do realize people, like Tappits, have been saying the same thing for months/years right? You need something to fight over rather than your name on a map because that's just superficial thing. Having resources in Null worth taking is what drove conflict and some sandbox related things like OTEC. As it stands there's little incentive to take systems from your neighbors or push your way into Null as the income levels are lower than other areas of the game. You're better off doing WH gas harvesting in a C1 than taking a Null system in terms of ISK income.
True Story.
Faction warfare pays better than Sov and your AFK most of the time alone in a site...
Wormholes Significantly pay more then Null-Sec and you can just go on day trips in and out of em.
Incursions pay better than Null-sec and it is all PVE.
Depending on your luck.. Chasing Tags and BPC's in Low-sec can also be more lucrative than null-sec.
No reason to go to war and kick over a sandcastle when that Castle has nothing worth pillaging. As more and more new entities move out into Null-sec they will learn that the large isk faucets have been greatly reduced. Holding Sov to build and sell supers? For what reason do we have to buy them? Looking to hold Sov for .. well.. supers was really the reason to hold Sov. Moons are everywhere.
Null-sec is not stagnant because of a Big Blue Donut. Null-sec was not Stagnant because of Dominion and Structure Grinding. Null-sec became Stagnant when everything being Fought for was removed or greatly nerfed. Put in something worth breaking NIPS/NAPS for... watch how quick people start breaking them. Give alliance leaders reasons to risk assets for better rewards, and we will have fights all the time again, at least until the next OTEC or something is built.
Just like in real life.. Empires need a reason to invade another Empire. Resources are always a good motivator. Moons at one time were, but now moons for everyone \o/ Something new needs to be added to fight over. Hi-sec has Incursions, Faction warfare has the LP points, Soon we have Drifter content. Something needs to be added that will make a group want to pull its stakes and fly across the galaxy and open fire upon someone to stake claim. Currently this Everyone Vs Everyone game lacks any real Conflict Driver. |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
111
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:04:55 -
[609] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Harry Saq wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.
system working as intended.
The entirety of null sec is not goon, there are many other entities. CCP please just listen to the games elected representatives on the CSM. They represent the overall feelings represented by your game's community. ...not so much...certainly not the CFC elected pets If there weren't large numbers of players agreeing with CSM members, those members would never have been voted in.
lol, that's cute, and utterly disingenuous... |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:10:14 -
[610] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Kystraz wrote:Harry Saq wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.
system working as intended.
The entirety of null sec is not goon, there are many other entities. CCP please just listen to the games elected representatives on the CSM. They represent the overall feelings represented by your game's community. ...not so much...certainly not the CFC elected pets If there weren't large numbers of players agreeing with CSM members, those members would never have been voted in. lol, that's cute, and utterly disingenuous...
So they became CSM members without being voted in by large numbers of players who agree with their viewpoints?
Is that what you're trying to say? |
|
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage
RAZOR Alliance
601
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:24:03 -
[611] - Quote
RatKnight1 wrote:So, we can still fly trollceptors?
Yeah.
A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.
Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game.
Holy **** man just fit an oracle or a naga. 2/3 hits they're dead honestly.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:53:21 -
[612] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know.
And here we have an opinion of great sov holding CODE...
But knowing Kaarous, he's from people who likes to talk his butt, but not into thinking.
In case you missed it, I'm from a sov holding null alliance perfectly fine with fozziesov. Been trollceptored once, put some guards on, after trollceptors got rekt, they never came again.
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:It's pretty telling of the system in general. But CCP never did learn to take into account where feedback is coming from.
CCP were doing a good job not listening to tear-filled tearswarm qqderation until that speedlimit came in.
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:For me, the really funny part is how literally all of this was foreseen in the first three pages of the entosis announcement, but was ignored in the flood of "grr nullsec" drooling. That's genuinely hilarious.
So what happened to your "adapt or die" bravado? We adapted and doing fine. Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. |
Thrassoss
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:59:05 -
[613] - Quote
So after 30 pages it's bascially:
MoA (an alliance of like 80 dudes)- LOLOLOLOL th1s 1s aw3s0m3 !! give move tears please!1!!
Lots of others(numbers unknown): A good balance pass but will probably need more iterations.
A few others(myself included, Imp+Russians at least, idk 30-40k?): The system is inherently flawed because orbiting buttons is for low sec and even there it wasn't liked.
Regardless of how Sov war could be fought, the easiest way now is small gangs of fast ships spread across a dozen systems chased by other small gangs of fast ships. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1087
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 00:59:46 -
[614] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended.
It's really kind of disingenuous to claim some minor hiccups during a sov transfer is 'fail pathetically'. Where are all the timers in Deklein? |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:01:05 -
[615] - Quote
And we have another gewn tears gem here!
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Faction warfare pays better than Sov and your AFK most of the time alone in a site...
Wormholes Significantly pay more then Null-Sec and you can just go on day trips in and out of em.
Incursions pay better than Null-sec and it is all PVE.
Depending on your luck.. Chasing Tags and BPC's in Low-sec can also be more lucrative than null-sec.
2013 nerf hisec tears, and here I thought after all those hisec nerfs CCP landed I won't taste those anymore. He must have been frozen for 2 years...
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:No reason to go to war and kick over a sandcastle when that Castle has nothing worth pillaging. As more and more new entities move out into Null-sec they will learn that the large isk faucets have been greatly reduced. Holding Sov to build and sell supers? For what reason do we have to buy them? Looking to hold Sov for .. well.. supers was really the reason to hold Sov. Moons are everywhere.
So why are there wars all over south from fountain to drone regions?
Some people must have not heard there is no reason to fight yet, I guess.
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Null-sec is not stagnant because of a Big Blue Donut. Null-sec was not Stagnant because of Dominion and Structure Grinding. Null-sec became Stagnant when everything being Fought for was removed or greatly nerfed. Put in something worth breaking NIPS/NAPS for... watch how quick people start breaking them. Give alliance leaders reasons to risk assets for better rewards, and we will have fights all the time again, at least until the next OTEC or something is built.
Isn't propagoonda's official position is that there is no blue donut?
It seems like it's not as strong as usual, not being able to convince even average gewnie anymore...
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Just like in real life.. Empires need a reason to invade another Empire. Resources are always a good motivator. Moons at one time were, but now moons for everyone \o/ Something new needs to be added to fight over. Hi-sec has Incursions, Faction warfare has the LP points, Soon we have Drifter content. Something needs to be added that will make a group want to pull its stakes and fly across the galaxy and open fire upon someone to stake claim. Currently this Everyone Vs Everyone game lacks any real Conflict Driver.
There is a myriad of reasons. Boredom is a valid reason.
It's not the game's fault that your coalition is more into fear than boredom and would rather drop half the galaxy than fight. |
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development
Sev3rance
118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:01:08 -
[616] - Quote
All told I just love how the people making the most noise about the new Sov system are the big power blocs. Of course they're the ones who are annoyed, because this system of mechanics gives The Little Guys power over them that they've never enjoyed. Sure, the overall chances that they (The Little Guys) will actually take and hold a meaningful amount of space from these blocs for any length of time is fairly low (though some outlying space will do doubt fall or become permanently contested), but that's not what this is about. It's about putting thorns in the side of the Big Guys, repeatedly. And judging by all the whines and tears, these new mechanics are doing that perfectly. |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:08:33 -
[617] - Quote
Syri Taneka wrote:All told I just love how the people making the most noise about the new Sov system are the big power blocs. Of course they're the ones who are annoyed, because this system of mechanics gives The Little Guys power over them that they've never enjoyed. Sure, the overall chances that they (The Little Guys) will actually take and hold a meaningful amount of space from these blocs for any length of time is fairly low (though some outlying space will do doubt fall or become permanently contested), but that's not what this is about. It's about putting thorns in the side of the Big Guys, repeatedly. And judging by all the whines and tears, these new mechanics are doing that perfectly.
The little guys who want sov take some fine. Then, because of giant vulnerability windows, they can't do anything but rat, mine, and chase off sov trolls in nano junk.
Tons of fun. Obviously if they don't enjoy that they're just playing the game wrong. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:10:58 -
[618] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. It's really kind of disingenuous to claim some minor hiccups during a sov transfer is 'fail pathetically'. Where are all the timers in Deklein?
SOON
Kystraz wrote:The little guys who want sov take some fine. Then, because of giant vulnerability windows, they can't do anything but rat, mine, and chase off sov trolls in nano junk.
Tons of fun. Obviously if they don't enjoy that they're just playing the game wrong.
You know that chasing "nano junk" away is surprisingly easy when you actually live in the system?
Probably not. Must own that useless sov. Dominion thinking. Bound to qq. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14249
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:21:48 -
[619] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
You know that chasing "nano junk" away is surprisingly easy when you actually live in the system?
How would you know? You're in an NPC corp.
Let me guess, here comes the "my main is in nullsec" trope.
"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.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:31:25 -
[620] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Warmeister wrote:
So the real reason there is no conflict is because people like mittani don't earn enough Isk from ratting? That's a believable story
You do realize people, like Tappits, have been saying the same thing for months/years right? You need something to fight over rather than your name on a map because that's just superficial thing. Having resources in Null worth taking is what drove conflict and some sandbox related things like OTEC. As it stands there's little incentive to take systems from your neighbors or push your way into Null as the income levels are lower than other areas of the game. You're better off doing WH gas harvesting in a C1 than taking a Null system in terms of ISK income.
you are making same mistake as a previous poster, confusing personal income with alliance income.
in order for alliances to fight for a resource it needs to be an alliance level income, not a personal income.
that's why alliances fight for moons, and used to fight for territories where they could put renters in.
now that all the major players have got enough renters, there is no economical drivers for them anymore.
i'm tired of people using "null is dead because there is no money in it".
if there was no money, all the big players you see on the map would've dropped their sov and moved to WH to harvest C1 gas like u suggest.
|
|
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2287
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:49:47 -
[621] - Quote
Boroth Kindeze wrote:
I really don't know what Fozzie was thinking, but if it was to motivate me to unsub my accounts like the rest of Eve seems to be doing, he is doing a very good job. If it was to make my game fun because I don't have to grind... He is the pure definition of failure.
just my 2 cents from a very bored logi pilot
Nobody will ever take you on, ever ... unless CCP starts giving out free Titans and someone else wants to run a 50k coalition.
A 1v1 with entosis pilots is about the best you can hope for, but you send overwhelming numbers at him too and cant figure out why he runs.
But keep on recruiting and blueing and don't let the door hit you on the ass when you leave.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Prolapse.
2711
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 01:52:28 -
[622] - Quote
PopplerRo wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:What does a 4km/s speed limit on atrollceptor actually mean? You can ECM the ceptor using a 16M ISk Dragoon and break his lock, scuppering his warm-up timer. Quote:[Dragoon, test]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
5MN Microwarpdrive II
Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Drone Link Augmentor II
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
[Empty High slot]
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Ionic Field Projector II
Hornet EC-300 x 5
.. while the idea is sound that fit is plain stupid. 1.You have no active ecm mod, and those rigs don't work on the drones. 2. The drones are too slow to even catch up to jam the target. For the cost just use a griffin, or an instawarp 'ceptor with active jams in the mids. Land, jam, warp out. Troll 'ceptors with even more cancerous ones
Dumbass, those rigs increase your ship's lock range. You'll need this to lock something orbiting at 4km/s at 250km with a T2 Entosis. Sic your drones onto them, job done. Now go back to playing wow, child-man.
Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob
We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1829
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 02:07:29 -
[623] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:
Nobody will ever take you on, ever ... unless CCP starts giving out free Titans and someone else wants to run a 50k coalition.
A 1v1 with entosis pilots is about the best you can hope for, but you send overwhelming numbers at him too and cant figure out why he runs.
But keep on recruiting and blueing and don't let the door hit you on the ass when you leave.
I love that the idea that the Imperium's invincibility is so assured that even people who hate the coalition are accepting it as gospel.
It's probably our most successful piece of agitprop ever, and it's at its strongest when the barrier to entry for sov warfare is at its lowest.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 02:59:58 -
[624] - Quote
Icycle wrote:afkalt wrote:Have the newbros kill them: [Atron, newbro kill farming] Overdrive Injector System II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Damage Control II 5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S [empty high slot] Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I All Meta barring the OD (lol hull upgrades II) and the DC (lol hull upgrades IV). 4743/6781m/s with heat. Feed the newbros delicious kills My point exactly. Heck you dont even need the tech 2 stuff. You can easelly do this with tech 1 only.
You guys have never played eve? Your not going to catch a ceptor with a 250 Km headstart going 750ms faster......Get your head out of jita 4-4
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 03:15:51 -
[625] - Quote
There are no big fights in fozziesov, move on people, nothing to see here. |
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
192
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 03:45:27 -
[626] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Tallardar wrote:Warmeister wrote:
So the real reason there is no conflict is because people like mittani don't earn enough Isk from ratting? That's a believable story
You do realize people, like Tappits, have been saying the same thing for months/years right? You need something to fight over rather than your name on a map because that's just superficial thing. Having resources in Null worth taking is what drove conflict and some sandbox related things like OTEC. As it stands there's little incentive to take systems from your neighbors or push your way into Null as the income levels are lower than other areas of the game. You're better off doing WH gas harvesting in a C1 than taking a Null system in terms of ISK income. True Story. Faction warfare pays better than Sov and your AFK most of the time alone in a site... Wormholes Significantly pay more then Null-Sec and you can just go on day trips in and out of em. Incursions pay better than Null-sec and it is all PVE. Depending on your luck.. Chasing Tags and BPC's in Low-sec can also be more lucrative than null-sec. No reason to go to war and kick over a sandcastle when that Castle has nothing worth pillaging. As more and more new entities move out into Null-sec they will learn that the large isk faucets have been greatly reduced. Holding Sov to build and sell supers? For what reason do we have to buy them? Looking to hold Sov for .. well.. supers was really the reason to hold Sov. Moons are everywhere. Null-sec is not stagnant because of a Big Blue Donut. Null-sec was not Stagnant because of Dominion and Structure Grinding. Null-sec became Stagnant when everything being Fought for was removed or greatly nerfed. Put in something worth breaking NIPS/NAPS for... watch how quick people start breaking them. Give alliance leaders reasons to risk assets for better rewards, and we will have fights all the time again, at least until the next OTEC or something is built. Just like in real life.. Empires need a reason to invade another Empire. Resources are always a good motivator. Moons at one time were, but now moons for everyone \o/ Something new needs to be added to fight over. Hi-sec has Incursions, Faction warfare has the LP points, Soon we have Drifter content. Something needs to be added that will make a group want to pull its stakes and fly across the galaxy and open fire upon someone to stake claim. Currently this Everyone Vs Everyone game lacks any real Conflict Driver.
CCP has no clue of real life lol. They all live in Becauseisayso land.
...on a second tought, who would NOT want to live in his own utopia, where live gods wich Saysotrue?
Props, CCP, now i understand what's going on. |
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 03:50:42 -
[627] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:And we have another gewn tears gem here! Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Faction warfare pays better than Sov and your AFK most of the time alone in a site...
Wormholes Significantly pay more then Null-Sec and you can just go on day trips in and out of em.
Incursions pay better than Null-sec and it is all PVE.
Depending on your luck.. Chasing Tags and BPC's in Low-sec can also be more lucrative than null-sec. 2013 nerf hisec tears, and here I thought after all those hisec nerfs CCP landed I won't taste those anymore. He must have been frozen for 2 years... Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:No reason to go to war and kick over a sandcastle when that Castle has nothing worth pillaging. As more and more new entities move out into Null-sec they will learn that the large isk faucets have been greatly reduced. Holding Sov to build and sell supers? For what reason do we have to buy them? Looking to hold Sov for .. well.. supers was really the reason to hold Sov. Moons are everywhere. So why are there wars all over south from fountain to drone regions? Some people must have not heard there is no reason to fight yet, I guess. Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Null-sec is not stagnant because of a Big Blue Donut. Null-sec was not Stagnant because of Dominion and Structure Grinding. Null-sec became Stagnant when everything being Fought for was removed or greatly nerfed. Put in something worth breaking NIPS/NAPS for... watch how quick people start breaking them. Give alliance leaders reasons to risk assets for better rewards, and we will have fights all the time again, at least until the next OTEC or something is built. Isn't propagoonda's official position is that there is no blue donut? It seems like it's not as strong as usual, not being able to convince even average gewnie anymore... Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Just like in real life.. Empires need a reason to invade another Empire. Resources are always a good motivator. Moons at one time were, but now moons for everyone \o/ Something new needs to be added to fight over. Hi-sec has Incursions, Faction warfare has the LP points, Soon we have Drifter content. Something needs to be added that will make a group want to pull its stakes and fly across the galaxy and open fire upon someone to stake claim. Currently this Everyone Vs Everyone game lacks any real Conflict Driver. There is a myriad of reasons. Boredom is a valid reason. It's not the game's fault that your coalition is more into fear than boredom and would rather drop half the galaxy than fight.
I Live and just took sov in the south.. We did it because our players had nothing to do. There is no isk to be made here other than building caps( that are not really in high demand).As a line member we have no SRP, are forced to rat in pipe systems, and have no reason to mine because the zombie dead in highsec mine more than you could ever want. In fact most of our line members run incursions in highsec to make isk to fund the pvp in null that they once loved or station trade at crazy prices to make some profit for the insane time it takes to get things moved in. Everything about the (Null Food Chain) is broken mainly because highsec has an unlimited supply of ATM machine wealth to feed all of eve.
I agree with everyone that says null is dry when it comes to isk. Highsec is the best risk vs reward out there incursions still make null look silly and you are not generating content for anyone but NPC's and yourself why risk a ship or inconsistent isk cycles in null when you can farm endlessly (now with insurance as well) in highsec with no risk.
CCP says risk Vs reward is there drive but nothing could be farther from the truth. The theme park MMO that James315 foretold has arrived. Now its time to move to highsec and go afk with your macro's on.
The risk vs reward is so bad in null that FOZZI FORCES PEOPLE TO RAT !!!!! if you have to force someone to rat then clearly there are a million better ways to make isk... how is that rewarding.
Why a Risk-Free Highsec Would Kill EVE Online its finally effecting null in a major way.
Emergent game play is dead its only arranged PVP from here on out. that's what these times are. |
Mitchellion Saroir
Sudden Buggery
Prolapse.
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 04:27:42 -
[628] - Quote
While its been kind of hinted at earlier in this thread (before the MoA Goons headbutting contest started up) the main issues of the trollceptor are its sub-warp speed and its interdiction immunity. The way i see it there are several possible answers to this and while the 4000m/s hard limit would work to stop the trolling of space that has anyone home in it (which is kind of the idea behind fozzie sov, you live in it) I'm not a massive fan of hard limits on things.
To me, a better option would be to apply the same code that limits the number of propulsion modules you can have active at one time to entosis links. This uses code that is already in game to prevent the activation of the entosis link while a prop mod is cycling or vice versa. this counters the trollceptor as well as the 500mn cruiser fits that have been mentioned but not quite so loudly decried.
On another note the idea of the entosis link either being unable to be fit to ships with interdiction nullification would remove trollceptors from the current equation without removing the ability to fit the entosis link to other ships or influence their doctrine possibilities through limiting mechanics such as mass increases or disabling of propulsion modules. However, it is entirely likely that other kite ships would replace the trollceptor such as the garmur, which is why I prefer the disabling of the propulsion module.
It is also worth mentioning that disabling the propulsion module encourages control of the grid before entosising begins which fozzie has stated should be what happens. not that anything prevents entosising while not being in control of the grid but it should be pretty obvious who to shoot. |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
417
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 04:50:35 -
[629] - Quote
And..........CCP caves !!!!!
Surprised, nope. Just go back to before. You surrendered in what one month?
Way to hold out there CCP.
Lets do this, since you are spineless cowards just let the CSM tell you what they want and you code it. Time to end the charade that you CCP are in any semblance of control of the game's direction and just admit nullsec owns you to the core.
CCP your pathetic groveling sickens me, i can only assume none of you have mirrors in your homes because staring cowardice in the face every morning would be just be too much for anyone to deal with on a daily basis.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 04:57:15 -
[630] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:I Live and just took sov in the south.. We did it because our players had nothing to do. There is no isk to be made here other than building caps( that are not really in high demand).As a line member we have no SRP, are forced to rat in pipe systems, and have no reason to mine because the zombie dead in highsec mine more than you could ever want. In fact most of our line members run incursions in highsec to make isk to fund the pvp in null that they once loved or station trade at crazy prices to make some profit for the insane time it takes to get things moved in. Everything about the (Null Food Chain) is broken mainly because highsec has an unlimited supply of ATM machine wealth to feed all of eve.
Yeah I'm in the neighborhood. Probably shot your buds a few times.
Hear, hear, there is no ISK to be made in nullsec... I wonder where those trillions of ratting bounties that are paid out monthly come from... where is the moons... where are those super big respawning mining anoms, icefields, exlcusive PI planets...
"zombie dead hisec" mines almost NO zydrine and NO megacyte. Takes a real pve failure to not know that.
Hear, hear, moving stuff into Catch is hard... you are less than 20 LY from hisec, get a grip. FFS I checked your systems and you can jump there right from HED-GP, so just confirm no bubble, gate your JF in, and go. Super easy compared to my place.
Wolfensrevenge wrote:I agree with everyone that says null is dry when it comes to isk. Highsec is the best risk vs reward out there incursions still make null look silly and you are not generating content for anyone but NPC's and yourself why risk a ship or inconsistent isk cycles in null when you can farm endlessly (now with insurance as well) in highsec with no risk.
CCP says risk Vs reward is there drive but nothing could be farther from the truth. The theme park MMO that James315 foretold has arrived. Now its time to move to highsec and go afk with your macro's on.
Nerf hisec qq is so 2013 mate. It's been nerfed and nerfed and nerfed from there on. It's no longer possible to mine for profit in hisec, but I guess you were frozen in time and still haven't caught up.
I made 1.6b yesterday in 2 hours by buying a few escalations from ratters and looting them. Not much ratting involved aside from complex clearing.
Try that in hisec...
Wolfensrevenge wrote:The risk vs reward is so bad in null that FOZZI FORCES PEOPLE TO RAT !!!!! if you have to force someone to rat then clearly there are a million better ways to make isk... how is that rewarding. Why a Risk-Free Highsec Would Kill EVE Online its finally effecting null in a major way. Emergent game play is dead its only arranged PVP from here on out. that's what these times are. Now that i think about it i haven't even logged on unless its a vulnerability window...
That nerf hisec qq is so 2013 mate.... so 2013... in fact 2013 called and wants it back.
And yeah, how dare he to force you to take all that ISK you cannot make. Here's a solution, recruit some ratters. We did, and it worked out beautifully - they rat, mine, make stuff, and call you when there's pew to be had.
Fozziesov is full of emergent gameplay you simply suck at. I gotta say it very much benefits me, who just lives in a system and only boards a pvp ship voluntary when there's a trollceptor I have to volley out of existence, and it never troubles me to do so.
There is a new nullsec out there where you have to occupy a system instead of having a ghost town with your name on it. Dominion thinking patterns are gone and it makes people who are bad at adaption mad, which makes me feel good actually. |
|
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 04:58:31 -
[631] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:And..........CCP caves !!!!!
Surprised, nope. Just go back to before. You surrendered in what one month?
Way to hold out there CCP.
Lets do this, since you are spineless cowards just let the CSM tell you what they want and you code it. Time to end the charade that you CCP are in any semblance of control of the game's direction and just admit nullsec owns you to the core.
CCP your pathetic groveling sickens me, i can only assume none of you have mirrors in your homes because staring cowardice in the face every morning would be just be too much for anyone to deal with on a daily basis.
A bit too harsh on the outside but incredibly correct at the core. QFT. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:03:23 -
[632] - Quote
Querns wrote:Sentamon wrote:
Nobody will ever take you on, ever ... unless CCP starts giving out free Titans and someone else wants to run a 50k coalition.
A 1v1 with entosis pilots is about the best you can hope for, but you send overwhelming numbers at him too and cant figure out why he runs.
But keep on recruiting and blueing and don't let the door hit you on the ass when you leave.
I love that the idea that the Imperium's invincibility is so assured that even people who hate the coalition are accepting it as gospel. It's probably our most successful piece of agitprop ever, and it's at its strongest when the barrier to entry for sov warfare is at its lowest.
The Imperium leadership are the heroes we need and deserve.
It's the best <3
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Pandora Myuki
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:34:02 -
[633] - Quote
fix for the ceptor issue, 1 is just as good as the other. 1. Reduce the cargo hold capacity of ceptors and increase the stront amount required that would exceed cargo capacity of interceptors or 2. Entosis links can only be fit on Cruisers or larger. either one should be an easy fix. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:37:37 -
[634] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote: Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended.
I like how you had to tack on a bit of homophobia in your descriptor to express how upset you are that active players are sharing their opinions on their mains.
CCP and the ISD should probably remove this bit of of aspersion that calls a person a homophobic slur.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:47:22 -
[635] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. I like how you had to tack on a bit of homophobia in your descriptor to express how upset you are that active players are sharing their opinions on their mains. CCP and the ISD should probably remove this bit of of aspersion that calls a person a homophobic slur.
Recent examples show that people who look for homophobia will find it even in theater shows for kids with no sexual context whatsoever.
But it is lovely that instead of the meaningful part you want to remove it for some non-existent homophobia. It shows I'm right. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
56
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:54:49 -
[636] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Tallardar wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. I like how you had to tack on a bit of homophobia in your descriptor to express how upset you are that active players are sharing their opinions on their mains. CCP and the ISD should probably remove this bit of of aspersion that calls a person a homophobic slur. Recent examples show that people who look for homophobia will find it even in theater shows for kids with no sexual context whatsoever. But it is lovely that instead of the meaningful part you want to remove it for some non-existent homophobia. It shows I'm right.
Actually, "fags", which you added at the end of "dominion", isn't "finding homophobia where it doesn't exist" since it's quite literally used as a pejorative towards homosexuals. I'm sorry you can't comprehend that and are assuming me pointing out that it breaks the forum posting rules is somehow trying to censor you or somehow proves your asinine claims right.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 06:08:31 -
[637] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:
Actually, "fags", which you added at the end of "dominion", isn't "finding homophobia where it doesn't exist" since it's quite literally used as a pejorative towards homosexuals. I'm sorry you can't comprehend that and are assuming me pointing out that it breaks the forum posting rules is somehow trying to censor your inane "Grr Goon" posts rife with grammatical errors.
only in American English. in proper english it has different meanings |
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
182
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 06:33:32 -
[638] - Quote
These fights have nearly nothing to do with sov. It's goodfight in it's finest.
G-Club dudes are great frenemies and I give them huge kudos. No-one would ever want to purge them out of their regions while they ignite such conflicts. The sheer amount of fun all involved side have can only be merited to the event-makers of corresponding alliances, and if anythig, such fights are happening despite the efforts of certain CCP developers. Fozziesov battles should be, by design, spread across the constellation - while what we see is a good old blob slugfest.
By the way, a new battle happened just recently. Once again, sov was not a factor, we just wanted to brawl. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 07:12:23 -
[639] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:These fights have nearly nothing to do with sov. It's goodfight in it's finest. G-Club dudes are great frenemies and I give them huge kudos. No-one would ever want to purge them out of their regions while they ignite such conflicts. The sheer amount of fun all involved side have can only be merited to the event-makers of corresponding alliances, and if anythig, such fights are happening despite the efforts of certain CCP developers. Fozziesov battles should be, by design, spread across the constellation - while what we see is a good old blob slugfest. By the way, a new battle happened just recently. Once again, sov was not a factor, we just wanted to brawl.
So as long as you feed someone killmails they won't have to troll your sov huh
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
240
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 07:25:40 -
[640] - Quote
why would anyone fit an entosis link on a bs? or a bc? why would anyone fit an entosis on any other type of ship except a frig or a recon/t3?
even if you are really trying to take sov, why would you fit the entosis on a bs for example? much easyer to fit it on a frig and buzz around till the fight is over(if there is a fight), and if you win, you go and entosis stuff, if you lose you run away;
the problem that CCP fail to understand is that some ships are much better at entosising stuff than the others; and in entosis case, frigs can do exactlly the same work a bs/bc will do, but with much less risk and much faster(faster aka traveling times)
|
|
|
Freelancer117
so you want to be a Hero
317
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:01:27 -
[641] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
EDIT: The main thing this system needs, just as Dominion needed, is a sov transfer function so peaceful transfers of sov can be conducted quickly and easily. But I'm sure CCP's keenly aware of this and said tweak will occur.
Indeed 
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.
source: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5934032#post5934032
Regards, a Freelancer
The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1833
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:07:26 -
[642] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. It's really kind of disingenuous to claim some minor hiccups during a sov transfer is 'fail pathetically'. Where are all the timers in Deklein?
The lack of timers on Deklein demonstrates just how right you guys are playing it.
So the question is.....why are certain other entities toiling so bad? |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1833
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:12:31 -
[643] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:Icycle wrote:afkalt wrote:Have the newbros kill them: [Atron, newbro kill farming] Overdrive Injector System II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Damage Control II 5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S [empty high slot] Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I All Meta barring the OD (lol hull upgrades II) and the DC (lol hull upgrades IV). 4743/6781m/s with heat. Feed the newbros delicious kills My point exactly. Heck you dont even need the tech 2 stuff. You can easelly do this with tech 1 only. You guys have never played eve? Your not going to catch a ceptor with a 250 Km headstart going 750ms faster......Get your head out of jita 4-4
4kms interceptor which can't warp and needs to be with 25km of the structure. It'll be 145km off the object when you land, assuming a 30s warp time.
So you heat the MWD, you'll close the cap to scram range in 50-51 seconds (145/2.781km/s = ~52.1). The interceptor is now 350km off the structure, which is near breaking grid, but you'd pop right after it but frankly it's more likely the grid would just extend.
Not much margin of error, but then, that's a meta Atron....a faster ship would rip into it even quicker. Hell I'm sure you could use a condor so you'll only need to get to LML range because it's self tackled.
And that's worst case "no-one in system when ping goes out". If you're in system it'll be easier again to catch. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
532
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:19:49 -
[644] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Oh boy, tech 1 frigates and interceptors. Exactly what I started playing eve for.
Well you havent even been accepted to a player corp yet, so maybe even T1 frigs are more than you can handle, stick to rookie ships until you learn the basics. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
532
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:22:39 -
[645] - Quote
Querns wrote:Sentamon wrote:
Nobody will ever take you on, ever ... unless CCP starts giving out free Titans and someone else wants to run a 50k coalition.
A 1v1 with entosis pilots is about the best you can hope for, but you send overwhelming numbers at him too and cant figure out why he runs.
But keep on recruiting and blueing and don't let the door hit you on the ass when you leave.
I love that the idea that the Imperium's invincibility is so assured that even people who hate the coalition are accepting it as gospel. It's probably our most successful piece of agitprop ever, and it's at its strongest when the barrier to entry for sov warfare is at its lowest.
Being universally despised as an opponent is not exaclty the same as being invincible. Nobody wants to play with you or like you play, we prefer enjoying our lives and computer games. |
xttz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
654
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:30:36 -
[646] - Quote
gascanu wrote:why would anyone fit an entosis link on a bs? or a bc? why would anyone fit an entosis on any other type of ship except a frig or a recon/t3?
even if you are really trying to take sov, why would you fit the entosis on a bs for example? much easyer to fit it on a frig and buzz around till the fight is over(if there is a fight), and if you win, you go and entosis stuff, if you lose, you run away;
the problem that CCP fail to understand is that some ships are much better at entosising stuff than the others; and in entosis case, frigs can do exactlly the same work a bs/bc will do, but with much less risk and much faster(faster aka traveling times), and also, much much cheaper
Players will always take the avenue that affords least risk from their point of view. Right now the best way to do that is to fit for speed, as it allows the player to ignore combat the majority of the time. When you incentivise speed in this way you're also removing any need to bring more than one ship to that grid; in every case your best option is to disengage and run away so why bother bringing additional forces?
The simplest way to encourage players to invest into an attack is to replace the no remote assistance penalty with a no-MWD penalty. Now the most reliable way to survive is to bring friends along to help keep you alive.
Of course this doesn't resolve the sov-trolling aspect; even with no MWD, disposable ships with Entosis links are still affordable. If you hate someone enough 50m a pop to harass them constantly is hardly going to break the bank. After all players have been doing this for ages with siphons, dictors and anchorable bubbles.
The simplest solution here is to make such disposable ships harder to maintain. Bump up the stront cost for Entosis mods so that a typical frigate or cruiser would struggle to contest any ADM higher than 1-2 without reloading their fuel (a good starting point is 2 stront per minute). This either forces them to gimp their fits with cargo expanders, bring another ship entirely, or bring friends along who can refuel them. In every case the effort involved from the attacker is a little higher. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1797
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:32:55 -
[647] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:You guys have never played eve? Your not going to catch a ceptor with a 250 Km headstart going 750ms faster......Get your head out of jita 4-4
Then you at least drive them outside of entosis range. You cannot stay within 25km range on any structure (you cannot fit a T2 EL on a frig, let alone a ceptor.) when one or two other ceptors are chasing you. Fight won. Where's the problem? No killmail? Get over it.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
xttz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
654
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:44:02 -
[648] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:You guys have never played eve? Your not going to catch a ceptor with a 250 Km headstart going 750ms faster......Get your head out of jita 4-4 Then you at least drive them outside of entosis range. You cannot stay within 25km range on any structure (you cannot fit a T2 EL on a frig, let alone a ceptor.) when one or two other ceptors are chasing you. Fight won. Where's the problem? No killmail? Get over it.
I can't help but think you would have defended pre-2007 Titans using the same logic.
Rivr Luzade would have said: wrote:
Just tank for their racial doomsday damage. They only get one shot to kill you and if you tank it you're fine. Fight won. Where's the problem? You have to go to ridiculous lengths to catch / kill them? No killmail? Get over it.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1833
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:48:41 -
[649] - Quote
xttz wrote:gascanu wrote:why would anyone fit an entosis link on a bs? or a bc? why would anyone fit an entosis on any other type of ship except a frig or a recon/t3?
even if you are really trying to take sov, why would you fit the entosis on a bs for example? much easyer to fit it on a frig and buzz around till the fight is over(if there is a fight), and if you win, you go and entosis stuff, if you lose, you run away;
the problem that CCP fail to understand is that some ships are much better at entosising stuff than the others; and in entosis case, frigs can do exactlly the same work a bs/bc will do, but with much less risk and much faster(faster aka traveling times), and also, much much cheaper Players will always take the avenue that affords least risk from their point of view. Right now the best way to do that is to fit for speed, as it allows the player to ignore combat the majority of the time. When you incentivise speed in this way you're also removing any need to bring more than one ship to that grid; in every case your best option is to disengage and run away so why bother bringing additional forces?
That'll happen right up until someone actually wants the system.
Like happened here:
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4825,4830,4828,4826,4824,4829,4827,4815&b=6643920&e=120&t=WrmIauqLc&r=1
You see, as people have been trying to point out, when the chips come down, it's not nanoships doing the fighting.
I still don't think sov owners should be able to be essentially immune to harassment, virtually all the suggestions to "fix" this would create a world where you can hide behind passive defences - bubbles and low effort bottleneck camps and harassment becomes an impossible thing. That's not healthy. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
1093
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:51:58 -
[650] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Arrendis wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. It's really kind of disingenuous to claim some minor hiccups during a sov transfer is 'fail pathetically'. Where are all the timers in Deklein? The lack of timers on Deklein demonstrates just how right you guys are playing it. So the question is.....why are certain other entities toiling so bad?
Just wait until they go on campaign...
EDIT: I hope...
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!!!!
|
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1797
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:53:55 -
[651] - Quote
I do not see how fitting highest possible resists against actual incoming damage is in any way comparable to driving a ship off the field or catch it and destroy it. Please enlighten me how a "fight is won" with a titan on field that you can kill or get other people to kill and how this compares to actually preventing people from attacking what they want to attack. I also do not see how there's any "ridiculous lengths to catch/kill them" involved. In particular after the coming changes, any ceptor is easily catchable by other ceptors.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Arkady Romanov
Hole Violence
Whole Squid
628
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:55:18 -
[652] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:afkalt wrote:Arrendis wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. It's really kind of disingenuous to claim some minor hiccups during a sov transfer is 'fail pathetically'. Where are all the timers in Deklein? The lack of timers on Deklein demonstrates just how right you guys are playing it. So the question is.....why are certain other entities toiling so bad? Just wait until they go on campaign... EDIT: I hope...
I kind of hope we do a surprise buttsex of all of Providence and capture like 95% of it over a weekend. Using trollceptors just to twist the knife.
Whole Squid: Get Inked.
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1797
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:56:33 -
[653] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:I kind of hope we do a surprise buttsex of all of Providence and capture like 95% of it over a weekend. Using trollceptors just to twist the knife.
CFC wanted to do it. They realized how infeasible it is. Good luck with your ceptors.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1606
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:05:45 -
[654] - Quote
Arkady Romanov wrote:I am curious about something.
Why has CCP decided that the minimum barrier to entry as a Sov holding entity is a 50 mill, T2 frigate?
Dominion sov was flawed. The investment required to be a player in the Sov game at that time was a massive super fleet, and the logistic acumen of a real life medium sized business. This was absolutely unsustainable and needed to change. I don't think too many people would disagree.
It did have some advantages however. Wars required commitment, both in time and assets. The wars and politics were unlike anything any other game has offered. They were in many ways, EVE's unique selling point. They were the narrative for the history of the game. They gave the game a prestige. That's gone now. You can obtain Sov using an unarmed ship.
To me, contesting sov should be a game of thrones. Sov wars should require commitment to initiate. 50 mill of T2 frigate is not a commitment. My corp, which doesn't live in null, should not have been able to take sov just for yuks.
Dominion had limited life left in it because there were only a finite number of entities that could reasonably contest it. It had to change, but I think it was a mistake to abandon everything learned from it. There is no sense of occasion in fozzie sov. There is no sense of loss when a system changes hands or accomplishment when it is taken. Somewhere, between the obscene commitment of dominion and the laughable execution of fozziesov must be a happy medium.
Bring back the game of thrones. Bring "epic" back.
Well put.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1606
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:12:49 -
[655] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I just realized what the problem is. Since the T20 scandal, CCP employees have been forbidden to join sov holding alliances, right? So, as far as sov is concerned, they literally don't play their own game, and they haven't for years.
A good point.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1798
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:26:36 -
[656] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I just realized what the problem is. Since the T20 scandal, CCP employees have been forbidden to join sov holding alliances, right? So, as far as sov is concerned, they literally don't play their own game, and they haven't for years. A good point.
Is it? How much truth lies in the rumors of some of them having alts in such organizations? Even if not, it's an unsolvable problem with human nature as the biggest obstacle.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
114
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:34:16 -
[657] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Wolfensrevenge wrote:Icycle wrote:afkalt wrote:Have the newbros kill them: [Atron, newbro kill farming] Overdrive Injector System II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Damage Control II 5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Electron Particle Accelerator I, CN Antimatter Charge S [empty high slot] Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I Small Auxiliary Thrusters I All Meta barring the OD (lol hull upgrades II) and the DC (lol hull upgrades IV). 4743/6781m/s with heat. Feed the newbros delicious kills My point exactly. Heck you dont even need the tech 2 stuff. You can easelly do this with tech 1 only. You guys have never played eve? Your not going to catch a ceptor with a 250 Km headstart going 750ms faster......Get your head out of jita 4-4 4kms interceptor which can't warp and needs to be with 25km of the structure. It'll be 145km off the object when you land, assuming a 30s warp time. So you heat the MWD, you'll close the cap to scram range in 50-51 seconds (145/2.781km/s = ~52.1). The interceptor is now 350km off the structure, which is near breaking grid, but you'd pop right after it but frankly it's more likely the grid would just extend. Not much margin of error, but then, that's a meta Atron....a faster ship would rip into it even quicker. Hell I'm sure you could use a condor so you'll only need to get to LML range because it's self tackled. And that's worst case "no-one in system when ping goes out". If you're in system it'll be easier again to catch.
30 seconds is a loooooong warp =). Maybe x-70 has this but that one of very few systems.
The average is probably about 15 secs. But lets use worst case scenario JUST to make you happy.
"So you heat the MWD, you'll close the cap to scram range in 50-51 seconds (145/2.781km/s = ~52.1). The interceptor is now 350km off the structure,"
But how close are you know in your frigate/ceptor by the time target is 350km from structure?
The answer is you are equal 145km from it. Correct? Your distance will only decrease now. So now you fly 52 sec and now you already caught it. The distance from struture is meaning less. Your fleet is within an easy warp range. More than perfectly double even when you select a noob ship and select ridiculous initial warp ranges. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1833
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:36:11 -
[658] - Quote
It's not that long actually. Pretty average the time you accelerate, decelerate then regain ship control.
It is fairly neat, but certainly doable. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1833
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:50:15 -
[659] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:I am curious about something.
Why has CCP decided that the minimum barrier to entry as a Sov holding entity is a 50 mill, T2 frigate?
Dominion sov was flawed. The investment required to be a player in the Sov game at that time was a massive super fleet, and the logistic acumen of a real life medium sized business. This was absolutely unsustainable and needed to change. I don't think too many people would disagree.
It did have some advantages however. Wars required commitment, both in time and assets. The wars and politics were unlike anything any other game has offered. They were in many ways, EVE's unique selling point. They were the narrative for the history of the game. They gave the game a prestige. That's gone now. You can obtain Sov using an unarmed ship.
To me, contesting sov should be a game of thrones. Sov wars should require commitment to initiate. 50 mill of T2 frigate is not a commitment. My corp, which doesn't live in null, should not have been able to take sov just for yuks.
Dominion had limited life left in it because there were only a finite number of entities that could reasonably contest it. It had to change, but I think it was a mistake to abandon everything learned from it. There is no sense of occasion in fozzie sov. There is no sense of loss when a system changes hands or accomplishment when it is taken. Somewhere, between the obscene commitment of dominion and the laughable execution of fozziesov must be a happy medium.
Bring back the game of thrones. Bring "epic" back.
Well put.
Does this not fit the bill? A somewhat serious fight over a station: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3hn4n5/fozzisov_fight_pretty_awesome_clash_going_on/
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4825,4830,4828,4826,4824,4829,4827,4815&b=6643920&e=120&t=WrmIauqLc&r=1
Machariel, T3, HAC fleets, not interceptors dancing around field here.
"Epic"? No, I'd say not - but certainly an indicator that when people REALLY want something and the owners REALLY want to keep it it's not the small ships which are wheeled out.
The system is in its infancy, this is the first actual fight I'm aware of and it's sure as hell not nano-games. |
Wolfensrevenge
Black Aces
I N F A M O U S
19
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:57:42 -
[660] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:These fights have nearly nothing to do with sov. It's goodfight in it's finest. G-Club dudes are great frenemies and I give them huge kudos. No-one would ever want to purge them out of their regions while they ignite such conflicts. The sheer amount of fun all involved side have can only be merited to the event-makers of corresponding alliances, and if anythig, such fights are happening despite the efforts of certain CCP developers. Fozziesov battles should be, by design, spread across the constellation - while what we see is a good old blob slugfest. By the way, a new battle happened just recently. Once again, sov was not a factor, we just wanted to brawl.
Was a good Fight they came we fought everyone had fun but they were coming to get the reinforce timer. In a proper fleet not a troll ceptor... Hats off to G-Club for the fun. |
|
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
471
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 09:59:48 -
[661] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Tallardar wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur. Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway. This is a bit inaccurate. "Fleet Fights" aren't just Asakai and BR-5 type deals, plenty of fleet fights involve only sub caps, and plenty happened over the coure of the last year. The Mittani website and EVE news detail those kinds of fights all the time. I've been in only 2 mid sized scraps since Aegis began (one involving my old alliance INIT fighting my new alliance lol). And that's it, the rest have been "Aegis style bullshit Nibble fights" (that phrase shall be copyrighted soon lol). I still find it odd that (from my perspective as someone who likes fleet fights) CCP could take a system of occasional fair sized to big fights and make them less occasional lol. Is this really the fault of CCP, or the alliance leaders who blue up everything in sight and NIP the rest? CCP. That "everyone is blue" thing has never been true, when I was in INIT and we were associated with HBC there was plenty to shoot, ,and people are shooting still. Of the two of us, I'm in the alliance with fewer blues,so if it was the fault of 'alliance leaders', those leaders are only enabled by YOU (line members who given alliance leaders power by existing). Why would you complain about this while sitting comfortably in an Imperium Aligned group I do not know. It's a lot like protesting the burning of fossil fuels while owning a gas station.
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
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.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
114
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:03:07 -
[662] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Agree. Reset standing of your neighbour or at least deploy to an enemy space and put up a POS. But if you dont do anything, well dont be suprised nothing happens....The fault is with your alliance that decided to blue all your area and not CCP! Take an example from us. We got very few allies and a very rich target environment 50000 to kill |
B0RG 0VERLORD
Viziam
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:27:34 -
[663] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Agree. Reset standing of your neighbour or at least deploy to an enemy space and put up a POS. But if you dont do anything, well dont be suprised nothing happens....The fault is with your alliance that decided to blue all your area and not CCP! Take an example from us. We got very few allies and a very rich target environment 50000 to kill . I have never been so happy!
that reset would be nice and sure would generate content for all.but i think ccp needs to do that with the removal of standings,allow 1 blue alliance,1 red alliance and the rest is nuetral.. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
384
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:33:05 -
[664] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:
You know that chasing "nano junk" away is surprisingly easy when you actually live in the system?
How would you know? You're in an NPC corp. Let me guess, here comes the "my main is in nullsec" trope.
MoA NPC corp alt. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
384
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:36:06 -
[665] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Tallardar wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. I like how you had to tack on a bit of homophobia in your descriptor to express how upset you are that active players are sharing their opinions on their mains. CCP and the ISD should probably remove this bit of of aspersion that calls a person a homophobic slur. Recent examples show that people who look for homophobia will find it even in theater shows for kids with no sexual context whatsoever. But it is lovely that instead of the meaningful part you want to remove it for some non-existent homophobia. It shows I'm right.
Not even a sub-atomic particle of reality comes close to proving you are right on anything you have argued under this thread, and you repeatedly saying that you are right will not change that. :)
But hey, please do keep up with your plan, maybe it will work on the 493125th try. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
385
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:38:21 -
[666] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Tallardar wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. I like how you had to tack on a bit of homophobia in your descriptor to express how upset you are that active players are sharing their opinions on their mains. CCP and the ISD should probably remove this bit of of aspersion that calls a person a homophobic slur. Recent examples show that people who look for homophobia will find it even in theater shows for kids with no sexual context whatsoever. But it is lovely that instead of the meaningful part you want to remove it for some non-existent homophobia. It shows I'm right. Actually, "fags", which you added at the end of "dominion", isn't "finding homophobia where it doesn't exist" since it's quite literally used as a pejorative towards homosexuals. I'm sorry you can't comprehend that and are assuming me pointing out that it breaks the forum posting rules is somehow trying to censor your inane "Grr Goon" posts rife with grammatical errors.
Quelle surprise: Homophobia is ripe within his organization, which is led by a genius who's a war criminal/genocide committer fanboy. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
385
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:42:06 -
[667] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Agree. Reset standing of your neighbour or at least deploy to an enemy space and put up a POS. But if you dont do anything, well dont be suprised nothing happens....The fault is with your alliance that decided to blue all your area and not CCP! Take an example from us. We got very few allies and a very rich target environment 50000 to kill . I have never been so happy!
I don't see anyone proposing "Mordus Angels members need to develop further brain cells" as a solution against the deficiencies of Fozzie Sov, therefore, you will not find many people that take your ridiculous suggestions such as "unblue your allies" or "undock your alts and shoot them with your main" and such seriously. |
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
385
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:46:54 -
[668] - Quote
B0RG 0VERLORD wrote:nuetral..
Hello MoA NPC alt #8.
|
B0RG 0VERLORD
Viziam
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:53:09 -
[669] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:B0RG 0VERLORD wrote:nuetral.. Hello MoA NPC alt #8.
typical goon nub,im not a moa alt infact
sorry to mess up "your" thread,are you bitter about your loss? |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
62
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:09:46 -
[670] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:These fights have nearly nothing to do with sov. It's goodfight in it's finest. G-Club dudes are great frenemies and I give them huge kudos. No-one would ever want to purge them out of their regions while they ignite such conflicts. The sheer amount of fun all involved side have can only be merited to the event-makers of corresponding alliances, and if anythig, such fights are happening despite the efforts of certain CCP developers. Fozziesov battles should be, by design, spread across the constellation - while what we see is a good old blob slugfest. By the way, a new battle happened just recently. Once again, sov was not a factor, we just wanted to brawl.
Oh suuuuuuuure. Station timer was not involved at all.
blob slugfests are going to happen anyway, once alliances shrink sov to what they occupy, where sov trolling will be no longer possible due to occupants blapping anything short of blob.
If your sov can be threatened by trollceptor, you own too much sov, simple as that.
CCP don't cave in to tears pls. You never caved to mine, don't go play favorites now.
Alp Khan wrote:Quelle surprise: Homophobia is ripe within his organization, which is led by a genius who's a war criminal/genocide committer fanboy.
Those accusations are quite funny considering I explicitly specified being a southbear since 2013. |
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
114
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:12:30 -
[671] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Icycle wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Agree. Reset standing of your neighbour or at least deploy to an enemy space and put up a POS. But if you dont do anything, well dont be suprised nothing happens....The fault is with your alliance that decided to blue all your area and not CCP! Take an example from us. We got very few allies and a very rich target environment 50000 to kill . I have never been so happy! I don't see anyone proposing "Mordus Angels members need to develop further brain cells" as a solution against the deficiencies of Fozzie Sov, therefore, you will not find many people that take your ridiculous suggestions such as "unblue your allies" or "undock your alts and shoot them with your main" and such seriously.
It was said we wont b*tch about it an we will adapt. It says alot more than CFC tears have
I am not sure of the context you are usingf deficiency.
But what CCP said, this will give a bit more advantages to the attacker than the defender which is a step in the right direction I think. So far it does what it says.
I am not going to care if you dont like it cos you dont care that I like it
It is true CCP did not supply in game tools and we have to use external ones. That needs fixing.
The lack of content its not a new thing. It has been happening for years. Several years back you guys reseted temporarelly to create content cos too many blues. Its not the first time it has happened. Again, its YOUR and YOUR Alliance fault, not CCP.
You create content, not CCP! |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
471
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:16:31 -
[672] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Tallardar wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Tallardar wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: Gewns and UAxDEATH try being dominionfags and fail pathetically. Working as intended. I like how you had to tack on a bit of homophobia in your descriptor to express how upset you are that active players are sharing their opinions on their mains. CCP and the ISD should probably remove this bit of of aspersion that calls a person a homophobic slur. Recent examples show that people who look for homophobia will find it even in theater shows for kids with no sexual context whatsoever. But it is lovely that instead of the meaningful part you want to remove it for some non-existent homophobia. It shows I'm right. Actually, "fags", which you added at the end of "dominion", isn't "finding homophobia where it doesn't exist" since it's quite literally used as a pejorative towards homosexuals. I'm sorry you can't comprehend that and are assuming me pointing out that it breaks the forum posting rules is somehow trying to censor your inane "Grr Goon" posts rife with grammatical errors. Quelle surprise: Homophobia is ripe within his organization, which is led by a genius who's a war criminal/genocide committer fanboy.
Irony alert!
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.
|
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
242
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:19:52 -
[673] - Quote
question for all those ppl teaching the rest of us how to catch trollceptors: what happens when a trollceptor orbiting a structure at 24.5 km move let's say 20km away and breaks his locking range? can he warp away or not? |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6587
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:20:19 -
[674] - Quote
Icycle wrote:It was said we wont b*tch about it an we will adapt. It says alot more than CFC tears have You've spent years bitching about it. The reason you're not bitching (about the mechanics at least) now isn't because you've adapted, it's because the changes support your playstyle because you don't want sov, you just want to troll. From a perspective of fighting over the ownership of space, the mechanics are terrible which is almost unanimously agreed by people interested in holding sov.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Biggle Wondersnap
Bearded BattleBears
I N F A M O U S
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:20:28 -
[675] - Quote
Is there a good reason why not to add a requirement for attacking to be at war with the alliance you are attacking?
concord is already involved with the new sov mechanics, so adding a requirement for people to declare war would make logical sense. and it would force trolls to put in a bit of extra effort before attacking.
thoughts? |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
114
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:26:07 -
[676] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:It was said we wont b*tch about it an we will adapt. It says alot more than CFC tears have You've spent years bitching about it. The reason you're not bitching (about the mechanics at least) now isn't because you've adapted, it's because the changes support your playstyle because you don't want sov, you just want to troll. From a perspective of fighting over the ownership of space, the mechanics are terrible which is almost unanimously agreed by people interested in holding sov.
I have b*tched about blue donut. Big deal! I think everybody knows that this is what killing the game and not every other lame excuse you come up with. Simple, reset or redeploy, but dont sit your and just whine about it. We have adapted over time. Let see you adapting over the time for a change |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:27:27 -
[677] - Quote
gascanu wrote:question for all those ppl teaching the rest of us how to catch trollceptors: what happens when a trollceptor orbiting a structure at 24.5 km move let's say 20km away and breaks his locking range? can he warp away or not?
Not until entosis cycle completes.
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:It was said we wont b*tch about it an we will adapt. It says alot more than CFC tears have You've spent years bitching about it. The reason you're not bitching (about the mechanics at least) now isn't because you've adapted, it's because the changes support your playstyle because you don't want sov, you just want to troll. From a perspective of fighting over the ownership of space, the mechanics are terrible which is almost unanimously agreed by people interested in holding sov.
They had a valid reason to ***** about it, now situation has changed to the better.
From a perspective of dominionfags, situation is terrible indeed - it is so hard to hold all those systems you don't use, don't need, don't live in, but need so much for... what again?
Once again, downsize to what you use, and viola - trollceptor immunity has been achieved.
And MoA doesn't really want to troll - they just want to help you downsize, that's it. |
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled
Initiative Mercenaries
784
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:29:02 -
[678] - Quote
Wolfensrevenge wrote:
You guys have never played eve? Your not going to catch a ceptor with a 250 Km headstart going 750ms faster......Get your head out of jita 4-4
250km? Try fitting a T2 entosis and an MWD on an interceptor. Go on, let me know how that works out.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6587
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:31:11 -
[679] - Quote
Icycle wrote:I have b*tched about blue donut. Big deal! I think everybody knows that this is what killing the game and not every other lame excuse you come up with. Simple, reset or redeploy, but dont sit your and just whine about it. We have adapted over time. Let see you adapting over the time for a change For you the mecanics is terrible. For me this is better than we had before by a long stretch. Prove that it's killing the game. The only people that believe that are your "grr goons" type who are typically butthurt over being rejected by the larger coalitions. Large groups with large fleets aren't just good for the game, they are what makes EVE stand out from the rest.
An no, we don;t need to reset or redeploy. We can simply continue to sit in our big groups being untouchable by groups like you. The new sov mechanics have made the game more boring, but not more difficult.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:34:49 -
[680] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:I have b*tched about blue donut. Big deal! I think everybody knows that this is what killing the game and not every other lame excuse you come up with. Simple, reset or redeploy, but dont sit your and just whine about it. We have adapted over time. Let see you adapting over the time for a change For you the mecanics is terrible. For me this is better than we had before by a long stretch. Prove that it's killing the game. The only people that believe that are your "grr goons" type who are typically butthurt over being rejected by the larger coalitions. Large groups with large fleets aren't just good for the game, they are what makes EVE stand out from the rest. An no, we don;t need to reset or redeploy. We can simply continue to sit in our big groups being untouchable by groups like you. The new sov mechanics have made the game more boring, but not more difficult.
If you got to be proven that fact specially when everybody says null is boring....I wont say anymore not to offend...
Good for you! Dont do anything. Dont reset or redeploy. Stay at home whining about why you cant kill stuff. More targets I have to shoot. See if I care. In the end its your loss not mine. I got more than enough targets to shoot. |
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:47:35 -
[681] - Quote
gascanu wrote:question for all those ppl teaching the rest of us how to catch trollceptors: what happens when a trollceptor orbiting a structure at 24.5 km move let's say 20km away and breaks his locking range? can he warp away or not?
if he was entosing, he cant warp away. All it can do is burn away until cycle finishes. The cycles are very long 
So all you have to do is have a faster ship. Example I got caught by a ship was doing 7000m/s and by another doing 13000m/s in another day |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14260
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:49:47 -
[682] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I just realized what the problem is. Since the T20 scandal, CCP employees have been forbidden to join sov holding alliances, right? So, as far as sov is concerned, they literally don't play their own game, and they haven't for years. A good point. Is it? How much truth lies in the rumors of some of them having alts in such organizations? Even if not, it's an unsolvable problem with human nature as the biggest obstacle.
I'd put more stock in the rumor that Mr. T plays EVE, than believe that the devs are in the nullsec game.
"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.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
CODE.
14260
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 11:57:51 -
[683] - Quote
Icycle wrote:We have adapted over time.
Not from what I can see. Biting ankles and talking unjustified amounts of smack has not changed in any way so as to require adaptation.
"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.
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:04:02 -
[684] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Icycle wrote:We have adapted over time. Not from what I can see. Biting ankles and talking unjustified amounts of smack has not changed in any way so as to require adaptation.
I dont see any smack talk here. At least not from my side...It maybe sound like smack to you defenetly not me.
So there is a change to entosis ships among others. Its far from ideal from what it was before but we will adapt. We can still work under these changes. We will adapt. Like to see you try that for a change. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
699
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:12:30 -
[685] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Damn that must have been one tough solo pvp myrm, 34 of eves best to kill him.
Now that's some pretty awesome content right there.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6587
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:14:47 -
[686] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:They had a valid reason to ***** about it, now situation has changed to the better.
From a perspective of dominionfags, situation is terrible indeed - it is so hard to hold all those systems you don't use, don't need, don't live in, but need so much for... what again?
Once again, downsize to what you use, and viola - trollceptor immunity has been achieved.
And MoA doesn't really want to troll - they just want to help you downsize, that's it. Only in your opinion has it change for the better. Objectively, kill numbers in nullsec are down by 16% compared to last year and 11% compared to last month and the server population is continuing to decline.
And no, it's not hard to hold systems. This is what you fail to understand by not being part of sov. We can hold a large number of systems each with more potential for use by players with an even greater ease, because sov trolling doesn't actually mean sov gets taken. You still need a bigger stick than the other guy to take and hold sov. The new system is even more of a reason to get more blues and sign more non-invasion agreements.
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
6588
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:19:21 -
[687] - Quote
Icycle wrote:If you got to be prooven that fact specially when everybody says null is boring....I wont say anymore not to offend... It's boring now, with the new mechanics. That tells me that the new mechanics are what are killing the game, not that we are blue. Coalitions have existed for a long time and the population has gone up. Now that coalitions are being aggressively attacked though mechanics changes the population is going down. You can't prove that coalitions are bad for the game because they aren't.
Icycle wrote:Good for you! Dont do anything. Dont reset or redeploy. Stay at home whining about why you cant kill stuff. More targets I have to shoot. See if I care. In the end its your loss not mine. I got more than enough targets to shoot. We're not whining about why we can't kill stuff. As we always have, we can roam around and find fight just like you do. What we are doing here is pointing out that the mechanics will increase the level of stagnation in null because they are badly thought out. People like you are happy to see the game lose subscribers as long as it benefits you.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
41
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:40:25 -
[688] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:If you got to be prooven that fact specially when everybody says null is boring....I wont say anymore not to offend... It's boring now, with the new mechanics. That tells me that the new mechanics are what are killing the game, not that we are blue.
your coalition policy is creating boredom for it's members and foes. embrace it. that's how your leaders want it to be. no fun allowed.
do the same thing you did when you were forced to grind structures in bombers |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:41:01 -
[689] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:If you got to be prooven that fact specially when everybody says null is boring....I wont say anymore not to offend... It's boring now, with the new mechanics. That tells me that the new mechanics are what are killing the game, not that we are blue. Coalitions have existed for a long time and the population has gone up. Now that coalitions are being aggressively attacked though mechanics changes the population is going down. You can't prove that coalitions are bad for the game because they aren't. Icycle wrote:Good for you! Dont do anything. Dont reset or redeploy. Stay at home whining about why you cant kill stuff. More targets I have to shoot. See if I care. In the end its your loss not mine. I got more than enough targets to shoot. We're not whining about why we can't kill stuff. As we always have, we can roam around and find fight just like you do. What we are doing here is pointing out that the mechanics will increase the level of stagnation in null because they are badly thought out. People like you are happy to see the game lose subscribers as long as it benefits you.
The new mechanics killing the game? So after DRF seized to exist and a blue blob formed in the north and a series of blue blobs in the south, the game subscription began to take a tomble. There was some events that did not really measured up to their hipe and some disapointments began. There was very few actual good events. Before 2013, eve is full of series of great events.
In 2013 the game so famous chart of user subscription that people keep showing on an on, it shows a steady decrease for ages of pilots. I am a been playing this game forever. So it shows a steadelly decreasing since before Sep 2013. It not this sov. So thats debunked! No more lies plz. This is put to rest!
You cant fight fight cos there is no one to shoot. How many times i got to say this? You got too many blues! Its your fault not CCP! The level of stagnation is defined by level acitivty. If players like you are so bent on staying and set everyone to blue well what do you get? I mean seriously what you expect? Another DRF? Maybe who knows but you still got old DRF members blue or friendly. So i dont see how this is going to happen....Agin your fault, just in case you miss that too!
I am not happy to lose game subscription even thought I was one of the people shooting Jita monument in the riot.
Thats one reason I want people to reset to go back to the old chaotic eve, that was much more fun. These were the days when there was not so much blues. |
Arkady Romanov
Hole Violence
Whole Squid
630
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:47:27 -
[690] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Icycle wrote:If you got to be prooven that fact specially when everybody says null is boring....I wont say anymore not to offend... It's boring now, with the new mechanics. That tells me that the new mechanics are what are killing the game, not that we are blue. your coalition policy is creating boredom for it's members and foes. embrace it. that's how your leaders want it to be. no fun allowed. do the same thing you did when you were forced to grind structures in bombers
No, our policy is to create boredom for our enemies. When we talk about no fun allowed, we're talking about you.
Whole Squid: Get Inked.
|
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6588
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:55:05 -
[691] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:your coalition policy is creating boredom for it's members and foes. embrace it. that's how your leaders want it to be. no fun allowed.
do the same thing you did when you were forced to grind structures in bombers Do you honestly believe this? For it's members, fun is a priority. You think you'd really hold on to this meany members if you couldn't entertain them? As for enemies, that's more propaganda than anything else, but yeah, the most efficient way of winning a battle is making your enemies choose not to fight. The goal of game mechanics is to make sure that fighting is always a good choice. That's called driving conflict. These new mehcanics make that even less important. Honestly I didn't think they could come up with a way to drive less conflict than dominion, but CCP surprises us once again.
Icycle wrote:The new mechanics killing the game? So after DRF seized to exist and a blue blob formed in the north and a series of blue blobs in the south, the game subscription began to take a tomble. There was some events that did not really measured up to their hipe and some disapointments began. There was very few actual good events. Before 2013, eve is full of series of great events.
In 2013 the game so famous chart of user subscription that people keep showing on an on, it shows a steady decrease for ages of pilots. I am a been playing this game forever. So it shows a steadelly decreasing since before Sep 2013. It not this sov. So thats debunked! No more lies plz. This is put to rest! They aren't the only reason for the drop in population, but they are certainly a contributing factor to the recent dip. Go ahead and pull out the stats and there's a clear drop at each stage of this sov release.
And if you've been around for a long time, you should know that a major selling point of EVE has always been the massive fleet battles. Those are almost dead now and will be further reduced if these mechanics continue to be rolled out.
Icycle wrote:You cant fight fight cos there is no one to shoot. How many times i got to say this? You got too many blues! Its your fault not CCP! The level of stagnation is defined by level acitivty. If players like you are so bent on staying and set everyone to blue well what do you get? I mean seriously what you expect? Another DRF? Maybe who knows but you still got old DRF members blue or friendly. So i dont see how this is going to happen....Agin your fault, just in case you miss that too!
I am not happy to lose game subscription even thought I was one of the people shooting Jita monument in the riot.
Thats one reason I want people to reset to go back to the old chaotic eve, that was much more fun. These were the days when there was not so much blues. Of course there's people to fight! If we want to fight we can easily find one. Everyone hates us remember. Just because we have a lot of allies, it doesn't mean we don't also have a lot of enemies.
It will not happen. If CCP aren't putting in reasons for us to fight, we're not going to do it. That's like asking a shopkeeper to stop selling his best selling products just for a challenge. It makes no sense. If null stagnates further it's all on CCP. If they can't design a game that drives conflict then their game will die. It's really that simple.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1832
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:58:38 -
[692] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Querns wrote:Sentamon wrote:
Nobody will ever take you on, ever ... unless CCP starts giving out free Titans and someone else wants to run a 50k coalition.
A 1v1 with entosis pilots is about the best you can hope for, but you send overwhelming numbers at him too and cant figure out why he runs.
But keep on recruiting and blueing and don't let the door hit you on the ass when you leave.
I love that the idea that the Imperium's invincibility is so assured that even people who hate the coalition are accepting it as gospel. It's probably our most successful piece of agitprop ever, and it's at its strongest when the barrier to entry for sov warfare is at its lowest. Being universally despised as an opponent is not exaclty the same as being invincible. Nobody wants to play with you or like you play, we prefer enjoying our lives and computer games.
That's the stuff.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
471
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:00:40 -
[693] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Damn that must have been one tough solo pvp myrm, 34 of eves best to kill him. Now that's some pretty awesome content right there.
Your kill board had better be awesome, if you even have one.
Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6588
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:16:07 -
[694] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues. Just out of curiosity, who is it complaining about having noone to shoot?
For the most part the problem isn't that there's noone to shoot, it's that the mechanics to start conflict over space ownership are boring (mining structures), the ability for solo players to contest sov make it too risky to deploy over a moderate distance and that more people will run when engaged now as their ships aren't fitted for conflict. There's plenty of people to shoot, just nothing driving us to do so. Personally I'm quite happy plodding along with my traders while CCP break null, but it's not really very good for the long term health of the game.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:22:10 -
[695] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
They aren't the only reason for the drop in population, but they are certainly a contributing factor to the recent dip. Go ahead and pull out the stats and there's a clear drop at each stage of this sov release.
And if you've been around for a long time, you should know that a major selling point of EVE has always been the massive fleet battles. Those are almost dead now and will be further reduced if these mechanics continue to be rolled out.
While there was a significant increase of user during the dominion and DRF invasion, it was followed by a quick downfall.
The battle aint all. ISK drives it too big time. During Dominion it was really easy to make much more isk due to bugs and the trend at that time that everyone wanted to move to null. There was no system that did not have a carrrier. Everyone was ratting like crazy. High sec numbers went really down and high sec war deckers whined and CCP fixed the bugs and then nerfed it. Number began to take a tumble again. Now CCP made it really easy to make even more isk wit hthe buff to systems. There are so many anomolies I cant eevn count them!
The most significant change is without a doubt is that there is not enough action in eve. In the last few years the same sov did jack for numbers even with B-R5RB event. Its not sov. Its people opting out of pvp and unsubscribing alts. If I was in the CFC, I would probably unsubsribe too my alts. There is so much safety in numbers that makes no sence to have alts. Besides you are not getting the fights.
Lucas Kell wrote:
It will not happen. If CCP aren't putting in reasons for us to fight, we're not going to do it. That's like asking a shopkeeper to stop selling his best selling products just for a challenge. It makes no sense. If null stagnates further it's all on CCP. If they can't design a game that drives conflict then their game will die. It's really that simple.
NCDot and DRF did not have a reason to fight besides beef over past eve events. Not CCP, but eve players. B-R5RB was pritty much an accident from a bad decision from N3. They ignored the first rule in eve when capitals. Load grid first or suicide.
War between the russians that just ended, also a beef over events in the past. Goons causing the destruction of BOB, also a beef event. The destruction of Atlas also a beef. The destruction of PL in fountain also over beef. The destruction of Goons by IT Alliance also a beef. The invasion of Goons into Esoteria and subsecuent dispatched of Goons back home was also over a beef in a thread. The first war between Goons and BOB also over a beef.
CCP DOES NOT PUT THE REASON TO FIGHT. PLAYERS DRAMA DOES IT ALL THE TIME!!!!!!
I cant believe your character is so old and you havent noticed this already? |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:29:20 -
[696] - Quote
The issue isn't all of FozzieSov, a majority of us like the concept. It needs work, however.
Zipping around at 4 km/s, in an interceptor, and clicking a button should not in any way give you ownership in null sec sovereignty. Sovereignty should be fought over and influence a push of assets by group A versus current sov citizens group B. If an entity wants to take space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, not send a lone interceptor with the belief "If you don't get it now, just go back and try again in a little bit. They will eventually get tired of responding."
Another issue is there needs to be some form of shooting something, but I believe that will be addressed with the citadels patch.
I am willing to bet once people start entosis'ing things in ships cruiser size and up you will see some fights start developing.
Also please ignore the MoA trolling (and obvious alts), they use to be in CFC and are just mad at us for kicking them from the pack. Try and stay on topic. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
41
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:38:49 -
[697] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:The issue isn't all of FozzieSov, a majority of us like the concept. It needs work, however.
Zipping around at 4 km/s, in an interceptor, and clicking a button should not in any way give you ownership in null sec sovereignty. Sovereignty should be fought over and influence a push of assets by group A versus current sov citizens group B. If an entity wants to take space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, not send a lone interceptor with the belief "If you don't get it now, just go back and try again in a little bit. They will eventually get tired of responding."
.
you are quite right. it's not zipping around in interceptor that gives the ownership, it's failure of defenders to show up.
if an entity wants to hold space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, and show up for defense. it shouldn't be based on defender sitting docked up protected by gazillions of HP |
LujTic
Green Visstick High
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:43:33 -
[698] - Quote
Although I think these changes are positive, I think they are just a band-aid for a new design that failed. This isn't going to fix the problem. I think the new mechanics for Citadels are much better and I hope that this is just a stop-gap measure to keep more players from leaving the game until Citadels are released and those mechanics can be properly tested ingame. There is no good reason to have different mechanics for PoSses, Citadels and sov structures. We just need one mechanic that works. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:45:37 -
[699] - Quote
Icycle wrote:While there was a significant increase of user during the dominion and DRF invasion, it was followed by a quick downfall.
The battle aint all. ISK drives it too big time. During Dominion it was really easy to make much more isk due to bugs and the trend at that time that everyone wanted to move to null. There was no system that did not have a carrrier. Everyone was ratting like crazy. High sec numbers went really down and high sec war deckers whined and CCP fixed the bugs and then nerfed it. Number began to take a tumble again. Now CCP made it really easy to make even more isk wit hthe buff to systems. There are so many anomolies I cant eevn count them! ISK is always easy to make. Incursions, high sec trading and FW all exist.
Icycle wrote:The most significant change is without a doubt is that there is not enough action in eve. In the last few years the same sov did jack for numbers even with B-R5RB event. Its not sov. Its people opting out of pvp and unsubscribing alts. If I was in the CFC, I would probably unsubsribe too my alts. There is so much safety in numbers that makes no sence to have alts. Besides you are not getting the fights. Sov didn't do much, but news articles of epic battles with $300,000 in damages did and those battles occurred because of committed assets in null. Those types of battles will no longer occur under the current system since people no longer need to commit assets to take sov.
Icycle wrote:NCDot and DRF did not have a reason to fight besides beef over past eve events. Not CCP, but eve players. B-R5RB was pritty much an accident from a bad decision from N3. They ignored the first rule in eve when capitals. Load grid first or suicide.
War between the russians that just ended, also a beef over events in the past. Goons causing the destruction of BOB, also a beef event. The destruction of Atlas also a beef. The destruction of PL in fountain also over beef. The destruction of Goons by IT Alliance also a beef. The invasion of Goons into Esoteria and subsecuent dispatched of Goons back home was also over a beef in a thread. The first war between Goons and BOB also over a beef.
CCP DOES NOT PUT THE REASON TO FIGHT. PLAYERS DRAMA DOES IT ALL THE TIME!!!!!!
I cant believe your character is so old and you havent noticed this already?
Its players that generate content not CCP! Quit blaiming them for your faults! They may not have had a reason to start the fight, but the mechanics are why the fight escalated. Fights will invariably be because group A can't deal peacefully with group B and often because of resources (see the entire fountain war), but thanks to the new mechanics, when that happens no big battle occurs. We have people now citing 60b in losses as an epic scale battle. That's horrendous to be quite honest.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:46:10 -
[700] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:The issue isn't all of FozzieSov, a majority of us like the concept. It needs work, however.
Zipping around at 4 km/s, in an interceptor, and clicking a button should not in any way give you ownership in null sec sovereignty. Sovereignty should be fought over and influence a push of assets by group A versus current sov citizens group B. If an entity wants to take space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, not send a lone interceptor with the belief "If you don't get it now, just go back and try again in a little bit. They will eventually get tired of responding."
Another issue is there needs to be some form of shooting something, but I believe that will be addressed with the citadels patch.
I am willing to bet once people start entosis'ing things in ships cruiser size and up you will see some fights start developing.
Also please ignore the MoA trolling (and obvious alts), they use to be in CFC and are just mad at us for kicking them from the pack. Try and stay on topic.
lol, how nice..a personal attack.
What else you are going to call me next?
It makes me feel warm in the inside.
Do you know that we also do cruiser entosis? Or have you missed it?
|
|
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2113
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:46:23 -
[701] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:The issue isn't all of FozzieSov, a majority of us like the concept. It needs work, however.
Zipping around at 4 km/s, in an interceptor, and clicking a button should not in any way give you ownership in null sec sovereignty. Sovereignty should be fought over and influence a push of assets by group A versus current sov citizens group B. If an entity wants to take space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, not send a lone interceptor with the belief "If you don't get it now, just go back and try again in a little bit. They will eventually get tired of responding."
. you are quite right. it's not zipping around in interceptor that gives the ownership, it's failure of defenders to show up. if an entity wants to hold space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, and show up for defense. it shouldn't be based on defender sitting docked up protected by gazillions of HP
How long would you tolerate a kid playing ding dong ditch at your door?
You can't unplug the door bell (they will just knock instead) but if you decide to ignore them, they get to own a room in your house. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2114
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:49:11 -
[702] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Sov didn't do much, but news articles of epic battles with $300,000 in damages did and those battles occurred because of committed assets in null. Those types of battles will no longer occur under the current system since people no longer need to commit assets to take sov.
Does anyone actually have any number of how many of those "media event" created account stayed sub instead of quitting for various reason when they realized getting in those meaningful battle wasn't exactly guaranteed? |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:51:03 -
[703] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Warmeister wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:The issue isn't all of FozzieSov, a majority of us like the concept. It needs work, however.
Zipping around at 4 km/s, in an interceptor, and clicking a button should not in any way give you ownership in null sec sovereignty. Sovereignty should be fought over and influence a push of assets by group A versus current sov citizens group B. If an entity wants to take space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, not send a lone interceptor with the belief "If you don't get it now, just go back and try again in a little bit. They will eventually get tired of responding."
. you are quite right. it's not zipping around in interceptor that gives the ownership, it's failure of defenders to show up. if an entity wants to hold space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, and show up for defense. it shouldn't be based on defender sitting docked up protected by gazillions of HP How long would you tolerate a kid playing ding dong ditch at your door? You can't unplug the door bell (they will just knock instead) but if you decide to ignore them, they get to own a room in your house.
So he may not have his own doorbell you can ring, but is there something stopping you giving the kid a beat down?
You could make his life a misery.
And I'm not talking about catching the inty. Go RF all their POS, hellcamp the place the call home. Go dish out some retribution. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:52:29 -
[704] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Sov didn't do much, but news articles of epic battles with $300,000 in damages did and those battles occurred because of committed assets in null. Those types of battles will no longer occur under the current system since people no longer need to commit assets to take sov. Does anyone actually have any number of how many of those "media event" created account stayed sub instead of quitting for various reason when they realized getting in those meaningful battle wasn't exactly guaranteed? Only CCP would be able to tell. But whatever the case, I'd rather see EVE in international non-gaming news for epic game events than not be in there at all.
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
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:53:35 -
[705] - Quote
afkalt wrote:So he may not have his own doorbell you can ring, but is there something stopping you giving the kid a beat down?
You could make his life a misery.
And I'm not talking about catching the inty. Go RF all their POS, hellcamp the place the call home. Go dish out some retribution. So waste even more of your time doing boring things while they jump clone to highsec or play on alts and hide out until you go away?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
41
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:56:02 -
[706] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
How long would you tolerate a kid playing ding dong ditch at your door?
You can't unplug the door bell (they will just knock instead) but if you decide to ignore them, they get to own a room in your house.
very good analogy. you have a choice. you either come to kids house and make sure he never does it again, or hire someone to stand in front of the door. or stand behind the door so you can punch the kid in the face as soon as he does it.
or you can ignore it and let the kid occupy couple of your rooms. choice is entirely yours.
one thing you most certainly can't to is ask god to prevent kids from ringing doorbells. well you can, but the response will be silence and laughs from those around you |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:59:29 -
[707] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Sov didn't do much, but news articles of epic battles with $300,000 in damages did and those battles occurred because of committed assets in null. Those types of battles will no longer occur under the current system since people no longer need to commit assets to take sov.
Does anyone actually have any number of how many of those "media event" created account stayed sub instead of quitting for various reason when they realized getting in those meaningful battle wasn't exactly guaranteed?
To be fair, those battles could happen (virtually) tomorrow if the players wished it to be so.
Blaming the lack of a conflict driver on the new sov system is disingenuous.
The reason they do not, is players currently value ownership of space pixels over blow-out levels of fun.
There is nothing wrong with this of course, but keep in mind that's the current mindset yet at the same time people moan about a lack of big fights and a lack of fun; when in reality what they want to have all the fun and none of the risk of losing said space pixels.
We could have a big fight at the weekend if people were so inclined, as I goaded our Russian comrades in this very thread. The were bemoaning the lack of fights - so I says rock up to Deklein with a super fleet and report back on how the "lack of content and no big fights" went....oddly they refused, muttering something about fozziesov....eve is kill or other such "we don't have the stones for that" cover excuses. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
43
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 13:59:35 -
[708] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Warmeister wrote:you are quite right. it's not zipping around in interceptor that gives the ownership, it's failure of defenders to show up.
if an entity wants to hold space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, and show up for defense. it shouldn't be based on defender sitting docked up protected by gazillions of HP Then why not make it so entosis modules can only go on a a BC or above? If the defenders don't show up, then ship type is irrelevant. The only reason people want to use interceptors is so they can run away when defenders do show up. Tell me I'm wrong.
you are wrong.
why not complement it with a rule that defenders can only attack the ship that runs entosis with exact same ship class, and only one person can attack. if that person dies, entosis ship is granted full immunity until he finishes entosising structure |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
43
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:01:23 -
[709] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Sov didn't do much, but news articles of epic battles with $300,000 in damages did and those battles occurred because of committed assets in null. Those types of battles will no longer occur under the current system since people no longer need to commit assets to take sov.
the only reason those battles occurred is because people stuffed up.
most of the times what happens is that one of the sides looks at the opponent, decides it's not worth the risk and punts the timer. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:01:51 -
[710] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:So he may not have his own doorbell you can ring, but is there something stopping you giving the kid a beat down?
You could make his life a misery.
And I'm not talking about catching the inty. Go RF all their POS, hellcamp the place the call home. Go dish out some retribution. So waste even more of your time doing boring things while they jump clone to highsec or play on alts and hide out until you go away?
The ENTIRE alliance jump clones? Stops playing? Really? You think that's not a win for you?
If they go play on alts whilst all their towers burn....that's not "nothing" my friend.
So quit making excuses, go pick up the bat and go administer some good old fashioned revenge.
Honestly you just come over as an over entitled cry baby
"Go hurt them back"
"But I Don't wanna, that's :effort:" |
|
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:04:51 -
[711] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
How long would you tolerate a kid playing ding dong ditch at your door?
You can't unplug the door bell (they will just knock instead) but if you decide to ignore them, they get to own a room in your house.
very good analogy. you have a choice. you either come to kids house and make sure he never does it again, or hire someone to stand in front of the door. or stand behind the door so you can punch the kid in the face as soon as he does it. or you can ignore it and let the kid occupy couple of your rooms. choice is entirely yours. one thing you most certainly can't to is ask god to prevent kids from ringing doorbells. well you can, but the response will be silence and laughs from those around you
Is this a subliminal "Hire PL today!" pitch I see?
That was a pretty funny yet accurate analogy by Frosty though hah. For arguments sake, imagine this kid lives in government owned orphanage housing and only goes out with his Harry Potter invisibility cloak and Nimbus 2000. So when you go to respond he either A. disappears from sight or B. zips away at blazing speeds so nothing can really be done about it. You also can't really do anything about his current living situation because it's government property. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2115
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:05:32 -
[712] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Warmeister wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:The issue isn't all of FozzieSov, a majority of us like the concept. It needs work, however.
Zipping around at 4 km/s, in an interceptor, and clicking a button should not in any way give you ownership in null sec sovereignty. Sovereignty should be fought over and influence a push of assets by group A versus current sov citizens group B. If an entity wants to take space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, not send a lone interceptor with the belief "If you don't get it now, just go back and try again in a little bit. They will eventually get tired of responding."
. you are quite right. it's not zipping around in interceptor that gives the ownership, it's failure of defenders to show up. if an entity wants to hold space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, and show up for defense. it shouldn't be based on defender sitting docked up protected by gazillions of HP How long would you tolerate a kid playing ding dong ditch at your door? You can't unplug the door bell (they will just knock instead) but if you decide to ignore them, they get to own a room in your house. So he may not have his own doorbell you can ring, but is there something stopping you giving the kid a beat down? You could make his life a misery. And I'm not talking about catching the inty. Go RF all their POS, hellcamp the place the call home. Go dish out some retribution.
Too bad the kid might own nothing of "value" beside his alliance tag right? Or I guess I can hell camp a NPC station for months on end while he just jump clone to another and undock a new interceptor and come back to my door.
If MOA for example always committed their cerberus fleet every single time they entosis a system, I'm pretty sure everybody would be happy to have to defend the damn system because something would happen. I know they do it at least some time but that does not remove the stupidity that are all the ding dong ditch happening all the time by lone interceptor that also can't be ignored.
What is so damn bad about asking that the barrier of entry to owning SOV be something like a fielding a small cruiser fleet? I'm not asking for caps or supers or a 256 battleship force. I'm just asking for the guy who want to own territory to have to commit something more than a single throw away nimble ship. Am I really asking for too much with that? |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:06:35 -
[713] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
How long would you tolerate a kid playing ding dong ditch at your door?
You can't unplug the door bell (they will just knock instead) but if you decide to ignore them, they get to own a room in your house.
very good analogy. you have a choice. you either come to kids house and make sure he never does it again, or hire someone to stand in front of the door. or stand behind the door so you can punch the kid in the face as soon as he does it. or you can ignore it and let the kid occupy couple of your rooms. choice is entirely yours. one thing you most certainly can't to is ask god to prevent kids from ringing doorbells. well you can, but the response will be silence and laughs from those around you
I'd rather ask why does he feel entitled to the whole building, or significant parts of it, when it's technically not his (belongs to CCP). The landlord lets you take as much rooms as you can use, and if the room is unoccupied, it's theirs for the taking. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:08:56 -
[714] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Too bad the kid might own nothing of "value" beside his alliance tag right? Or I guess I can hell camp a NPC station for months on end while he just jump clone to another and undock a new interceptor and come back to my door.
If MOA for example always committed their cerberus fleet every single time they entosis a system, I'm pretty sure everybody would be happy to have to defend the damn system because something would happen. I know they do it at least some time but that does not remove the stupidity that are all the ding dong ditch happening all the time by lone interceptor that also can't be ignored.
What is so damn bad about asking that the barrier of entry to owning SOV be something like a fielding a small cruiser fleet? I'm not asking for caps or supers or a 256 battleship force. I'm just asking for the guy who want to own territory to have to commit something more than a single throw away nimble ship. Am I really asking for too much with that?
I guess undocking said tech 1 cruiser to contest the guy is too much to ask from the mighty 40k gewncry qqderation. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:11:19 -
[715] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Then why not make it so entosis modules can only go on a a BC or above? If the defenders don't show up, then ship type is irrelevant. The only reason people want to use interceptors is so they can run away when defenders do show up. Tell me I'm wrong. you are wrong.
why not complement it with a rule that defenders can only attack the ship that runs entosis with exact same ship class, and only one person can attack. if that person dies, entosis ship is granted full immunity until he finishes entosising structure[/quote]Troll status confirmed. The only reason to being an evasion fit interceptor is to evade. All of this horseshit about it being against defenders who don't show up is ridiculous.
The point is that undefended sov should be easy to take. When a defender shows up though then conflict should be driven. Interceptors mean that players can assault sov with no intention of fighting and no intention of taking sov. It's dumb.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:12:15 -
[716] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
What is so damn bad about asking that the barrier of entry to owning SOV be something like a fielding a small cruiser fleet? I'm not asking for caps or supers or a 256 battleship force. I'm just asking for the guy who want to own territory to have to commit something more than a single throw away nimble ship. Am I really asking for too much with that?
Because the crying wouldn't stop there.
You know it and I know it.
Hell this thread is full of almost nothing but suggestions that mean a lasering ship is a guaranteed killmail. "Immobilise it!" "No reps!" "battleships only" "no nullification" "command ships only"
I'm realistic, expecting existing sov holders to be remotely happy about the change in landscape is like expecting turkeys to vote for christmas.
The system is imperfect, certainly, but most of the ideas in this thread are just downright stupid in a bid to return to the old status quo as fast as humanly possible. That is the sooner they can get back to hiding behind bubbles and a couple of camps and enforce everything with the thread of supers the better.
I'll say it again, if you think you have problems, spare a thought for WH users and citadels. If you think you have problems today, those guys ain't seen nothing yet. And I'm one of said WHers. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
43
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:12:59 -
[717] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:
Is this a subliminal "Hire PL today!" pitch I see?
That was a pretty funny yet accurate analogy by Frosty though hah. For arguments sake, imagine this kid lives in government owned orphanage housing and only goes out with his Harry Potter invisibility cloak and Nimbus 2000. So when you go to respond he either A. disappears from sight or B. zips away at blazing speeds so nothing can really be done about it. You also can't really do anything about his current living situation because it's government property.
like i said - hire someone to stand in front of the door.
or create a roster for people in your household to stand in front of the door.
plenty of people are AFK cloaking in other people's systems to disrupt activities of carebears. you need to do the same in your own systems and trolling ceptors won't be a thing anymore.
or you could actually live in your systems, how's that for a novel idea? |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:15:45 -
[718] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:
Is this a subliminal "Hire PL today!" pitch I see?
That was a pretty funny yet accurate analogy by Frosty though hah. For arguments sake, imagine this kid lives in government owned orphanage housing and only goes out with his Harry Potter invisibility cloak and Nimbus 2000. So when you go to respond he either A. disappears from sight or B. zips away at blazing speeds so nothing can really be done about it. You also can't really do anything about his current living situation because it's government property.
like i said - hire someone to stand in front of the door. or create a roster for people in your household to stand in front of the door. plenty of people are AFK cloaking in other people's systems to disrupt activities of carebears. you need to do the same in your own systems and trolling ceptors won't be a thing anymore. or you could actually live in your systems, how's that for a novel idea?
Do you guys live in every system you have an r64 in? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2115
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:18:05 -
[719] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
How long would you tolerate a kid playing ding dong ditch at your door?
You can't unplug the door bell (they will just knock instead) but if you decide to ignore them, they get to own a room in your house.
very good analogy. you have a choice. you either come to kids house and make sure he never does it again, or hire someone to stand in front of the door. or stand behind the door so you can punch the kid in the face as soon as he does it.
1- The kids house can't really be camped because he lives in various refuge. Camping them all is meaningless since I can't effectively stop him just like camping interceptors is ineffective.
2- Hiring someone to stand in front of this door will make him ring / knock on the other door. Are you gonna pay guards for your house on every single doors? Remember, the guard can't beat up the kids since they can always buy new troll ship.
3- Punching him in the face is useless because the game created an environment where my punch force gets dampened into being irrelevant just like killing a troll ceptor hurt no one.
Do you see now what is stupid about this gameplay?
It's like banning trolls from a forum where creating new account require nothing beside a fake e-mail. Playing dodge-ball where the "time-out" for getting hit is 4 seconds and teams are about 50 each side. Playing hockey with steel plates in front of the nets.
Trolls are literally empowered in the name of "we don't want the link to alter possible doctrine" when you would never have to change your doctrine anyway because you don't need all your ships to be entosis fit. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
43
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:19:04 -
[720] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Troll status confirmed. The only reason to being an evasion fit interceptor is to evade. All of this horseshit about it being against defenders who don't show up is ridiculous.
The point is that undefended sov should be easy to take. When a defender shows up though then conflict should be driven. Interceptors mean that players can assault sov with no intention of fighting and no intention of taking sov. It's dumb.
i'm not trolling i just figured that i'm entitled to respond to stupid ideas with another stupid idea.
the thing you said about 'conflict should be driven' is whole load of crap. there are plenty of other ships that have been used prior to fozzisov that could evade capture. there are plenty examples where fleets decide not to engage and just run from the attacker.
why don't we just ask CCP to equalise the speed of all ships and disable warp drives of everyone in the system for 5 minutes once someone new enters. how's that for a conflict driver? |
|
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:19:06 -
[721] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
Sov didn't do much, but news articles of epic battles with $300,000 in damages did and those battles occurred because of committed assets in null. Those types of battles will no longer occur under the current system since people no longer need to commit assets to take sov.
So you have acknowledged that B-R5RB was an event that was by a mistake of an FC and also by the alliance not paying sov. Before that, all the battles were reasonable and the difference was not as high.
Large battles have been happened in eve for years. The difference is that before there was a lot less blues and a lot more drama. Not there is a lot more blue and a lot less drama.
Its very simple!
LESS Blues, more DRAMA, more FIGHTS!
MORE Blues, less DRAMA, less FIGHTS!
What drives eve is not CCP its PLAYER DRAMA. Thats the really explosive combustion!! PLAYER DRAMA.
The reality is that everyone is happy so stay at home and make isk and not engage in big fights. At MOA we are trying to change that We are trying to make you lose territory and brake up with gobly blob of blues thats hurting the game so much.
Icycle wrote:
They may not have had a reason to start the fight, but the mechanics are why the fight escalated. Fights will invariably be because group A can't deal peacefully with group B and often because of resources (see the entire fountain war), but thanks to the new mechanics, when that happens no big battle occurs. We have people now citing 60b in losses as an epic scale battle. That's horrendous to be quite honest.
In a convensional world how do you fight a number thats over 50 times larger than you? You have to change the way you think and you got to provide tools to do it that are not present in the game, its the only way. The other way is another DRF. But with so many blues I doubt it will happen. Its the blue donut that is the desease and all the shady agreements that I wont fight you if you dont fight me...Or we will only kill ships, no structure shooting etc. Its all the bs that this blue donut brought.
I guarantee you if the gloves are for for real and its all in, you will look at your neighbour and say hmm, nice moon goo, i will take it.
The only feasible other way I think to really destroy the blob will be moon goo respawning in different regions of eve. This will signal the end of blues but you will be living like a nomad in null chasing the goo. That maybe too drastic ...I cant seriously see anyone fighting for anything if they got no chance of wining it specially with so many blobs. They will all have the same idea instead that you mentioned above. I will sti at home and make isk. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:20:53 -
[722] - Quote
afkalt wrote:To be fair, those battles could happen (virtually) tomorrow if the players wished it to be so. They could, but they won't. Big battles cost isk. Why would players throw that down if they stand to gain little to nothing regardless of the outcome?
afkalt wrote:The reason they do not, is players currently value ownership of space pixels over blow-out levels of fun. No, it's simply easier to have fun in ways that don't involve throwing billions of isk away. People don't need to commit isk to attacking, so they don't. Effectively you guys are saying it's fine for some tiny alliance to put nothing on the line to contest sov with no chance of actually taking it, but big alliances should literally throw away trillions of isk to create content for no gain. No thanks, I'll continue to enjoy myself and keep all my stuff while null continues to stagnate.
Warmeister wrote:the only reason those battles occurred is because people stuffed up.
most of the times what happens is that one of the sides looks at the opponent, decides it's not worth the risk and punts the timer. Those battles occurred because a group wanted something and committed to it. Another group committed to defense and then the fight escalated until one side could afford no more escalation. What they've removed is the need to commit and thus the need to escalate the fight. These will now only happen if people actively seek a giant battle which will be rare.
afkalt wrote:The ENTIRE alliance jump clones? Stops playing? Really? You think that's not a win for you? Not the entire alliance, but enough players just evade to make the entire act pointless. Propaganda aside, we don;t play this game to watch other people not play, we play to be entertained. It's not entertaining to idly sit around while your opponents refuse to play.
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
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:25:28 -
[723] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:i'm not trolling i just figured that i'm entitled to respond to stupid ideas with another stupid idea. Then explain why you feel it's a stupid idea. You stated yourself that it's for defenders not showing up. If they don't show up, it doesn't matter if you are in a bloody Orca, you're safe. The only reason to use an interceptor is for if they DO show up, so you can run away.
Warmeister wrote:the thing you said about 'conflict should be driven' is whole load of crap. there are plenty of other ships that have been used prior to fozzisov that could evade capture. there are plenty examples where fleets decide not to engage and just run from the attacker. Name one that could single handed contest sov. Ia have no problem with interceptors existing, I have a problem with their ability to contest sov. Contesting sov should take commitment, it's an alliance level activity after all.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:26:36 -
[724] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Troll status confirmed. The only reason to being an evasion fit interceptor is to evade. All of this horseshit about it being against defenders who don't show up is ridiculous.
The point is that undefended sov should be easy to take. When a defender shows up though then conflict should be driven. Interceptors mean that players can assault sov with no intention of fighting and no intention of taking sov. It's dumb. i'm not trolling i just figured that i'm entitled to respond to stupid ideas with another stupid idea. the thing you said about 'conflict should be driven' is whole load of crap. there are plenty of other ships that have been used prior to fozzisov that could evade capture. there are plenty examples where fleets decide not to engage and just run from the attacker. why don't we just ask CCP to equalise the speed of all ships and disable warp drives of everyone in the system for 5 minutes once someone new enters. how's that for a conflict driver?
lol i can already see a few "scout pods one day old" account been created for this purposes |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1838
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:28:33 -
[725] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:To be fair, those battles could happen (virtually) tomorrow if the players wished it to be so. They could, but they won't. Big battles cost isk. Why would players throw that down if they stand to gain little to nothing regardless of the outcome? afkalt wrote:The reason they do not, is players currently value ownership of space pixels over blow-out levels of fun. No, it's simply easier to have fun in ways that don't involve throwing billions of isk away. People don't need to commit isk to attacking, so they don't. Effectively you guys are saying it's fine for some tiny alliance to put nothing on the line to contest sov with no chance of actually taking it, but big alliances should literally throw away trillions of isk to create content for no gain. No thanks, I'll continue to enjoy myself and keep all my stuff while null continues to stagnate.
No. I am not saying that at all.
YOU are the one blaming the lack of big fights with the new system.
YOU are the ones refusing to start them
YOU are the people putting isk ahead of fun whilst moaning about fun.
What I am saying is your complaints about big fights and a lack of fun have exactly nothing to do with the new system.
Currently (and correct me if I am wrong) there has been exactly one fight for a system which was actually of interest to both parties and >gasp< it was NOT contested with frigates and lasers!!!! Who could have predicted.
Quote:No thanks, I'll continue to enjoy myself and keep all my stuff
This, right here, THIS is why you have issues finding fun. Fights are awesome, as long as someone else does the dying, right? |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
699
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:28:46 -
[726] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Warmeister wrote:you are quite right. it's not zipping around in interceptor that gives the ownership, it's failure of defenders to show up.
if an entity wants to hold space, they need to dedicate themselves to it, and show up for defense. it shouldn't be based on defender sitting docked up protected by gazillions of HP Then why not make it so entosis modules can only go on a a BC or above? If the defenders don't show up, then ship type is irrelevant. The only reason people want to use interceptors is so they can run away when defenders do show up. Tell me I'm wrong. you are wrong. why not complement it with a rule that defenders can only attack the ship that runs entosis with exact same ship class, and only one person can attack. if that person dies, entosis ship is granted full immunity until he finishes entosising structure
War, I think it is time you went to bed.. Your reply just makes no sense and comes across as a very poor troll attempt. Get some sleep - Get some perspective.
Lucas has a good point. Undoubtedly the strongest "command link" in the game, SHOULD be designed to fit ships with the roles to fit command links.
If not straight out restricted to ships that can fit command links, at least give those ships a bonus to Entosis links. Could be easily done by increasing the amount of Stront needed by X2 or even X3 - Ceptor can still fit and use an Entosis link but will need at least 1 friend with him to feed him fuel.
Does anyone really want to be stuck playing "interceptors online" for the next few years.
Drakes online, Supers online, Ishtars online and now Interceptors online.
Why not give battle cruisers a role in sov?
The only reason to not do it would be because "trolling" is by design, the new meta Devs are encouraging.
Pity interceptors + sov = conflict avoidance - Negates a few of the stated goals for the new sov.
Without Entosis links Interceptors could in fact have an even more integral role in sov - Tackle ships, which oddly enough, is a role at which they excel.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
471
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:29:12 -
[727] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Damn that must have been one tough solo pvp myrm, 34 of eves best to kill him. Now that's some pretty awesome content right there.
You've been on eight killmails in over two years, and six of those were Pocos.
Considering you less than stellar pvp record, you might want to be a bit more selective in who you sneer at.
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.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
47
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:29:55 -
[728] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Name one that could single handed contest sov. Ia have no problem with interceptors existing, I have a problem with their ability to contest sov. Contesting sov should take commitment, it's an alliance level activity after all.
torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
and before you say 'but it was more than one person' think whether there would be any difference to your crying if your opponent brought 50 inties instead of 1
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:31:04 -
[729] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:To be fair, those battles could happen (virtually) tomorrow if the players wished it to be so. They could, but they won't. Big battles cost isk. Why would players throw that down if they stand to gain little to nothing regardless of the outcome? afkalt wrote:The reason they do not, is players currently value ownership of space pixels over blow-out levels of fun. No, it's simply easier to have fun in ways that don't involve throwing billions of isk away. People don't need to commit isk to attacking, so they don't. Effectively you guys are saying it's fine for some tiny alliance to put nothing on the line to contest sov with no chance of actually taking it, but big alliances should literally throw away trillions of isk to create content for no gain. No thanks, I'll continue to enjoy myself and keep all my stuff while null continues to stagnate. No. I am not saying that at all. YOU are the one blaming the lack of big fights with the new system. YOU are the ones refusing to start them YOU are the people putting isk ahead of fun whilst moaning about fun. What I am saying is your complaints about big fights and a lack of fun have exactly nothing to do with the new system. Currently (and correct me if I am wrong) there has been exactly one fight for a system which was actually of interest to both parties and >gasp< it was NOT contested with frigates and lasers!!!! Who could have predicted. Quote:No thanks, I'll continue to enjoy myself and keep all my stuff This, right here, THIS is why you have issues finding fun. Fights are awesome, as long as someone else does the dying, right?
One? More like one per day. Come south, we're already past the entosis 101 here. Gewns did not even start yet. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1838
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:32:19 -
[730] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Does anyone really want to be stuck playing "interceptors online" for the next few years.
Drakes online, Supers online, Ishtars online and now Interceptors online.
Because it WONT be.
For the Nth time....the (as far as I know) only seriously contested timer was last night and the field was...
Machariels
T3s
HACs
Not a single ******* trollceptor to be seen. Imagine that, when **** gets real people escalate quickly. |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:33:11 -
[731] - Quote
Icycle wrote:So you have acknowledged that B-R5RB was an event that was by a mistake of an FC and also by the alliance not paying sov. Before that, all the battles were reasonable and the difference was not as high.
Large battles have been happened in eve for years. The difference is that before there was a lot less blues and a lot more drama. Not there is a lot more blue and a lot less drama. No, larger battles occured because of the need to commit. That need hs been removed.
Icycle wrote:Its very simple!
LESS Blues, more DRAMA, more FIGHTS!
MORE Blues, less DRAMA, less FIGHTS! Stop being special. That's not how it works. At some point a group will always rise to the top and others will work together to bring them down. That's the great social aspect of the game. What you want is to make it so that one person is able to cause as much damage as a whole alliance because you're terrible at collaboration.
Icycle wrote:The reality is that everyone is happy so stay at home and make isk and not engage in big fights. At MOA we are trying to change that We are trying to make you lose territory and brake up with gobly blob of blues thats hurting the game so much. Well you're failing, especially since you're supporting changes that make it EASIER for us to stay at home and not engage in big fights.
Icycle wrote:In a convensional world how do you fight a number thats over 50 times larger than you? You have to change the way you think and you got to provide tools to do it that are not present in the game, its the only way. The other way is another DRF. But with so many blues I doubt it will happen. Ask BL, they did a pretty good job of causing significant damage. You harp on about your killboard, but BL did more damage to the Imperium in a single fight than you guys have done in the history of your existence. You guys think too small and that's why you can;t see how damaging these changes are to your cause. I guarantee once the dust settles you'll suddenly realise how easy it is for us to res on our laurels.
Icycle wrote:Its the blue donut that is the desease
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2115
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:35:17 -
[732] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Name one that could single handed contest sov. Ia have no problem with interceptors existing, I have a problem with their ability to contest sov. Contesting sov should take commitment, it's an alliance level activity after all. torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos. and before you say 'but it was more than one person' think whether there would be any difference to your crying if your opponent brought 50 inties instead of 1
TBH, both case are extremely stupid and a proof that game mechanics are bad... |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1125
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:35:30 -
[733] - Quote
it is amazing how many people without two brain cells to rub together look at a viciously competitive game where you win or die, see that people playing it to win don't do X, and then assert that people playing to win should just do X instead of that the mechanics are flawed
i suppose if you've never won, you don't really 'get' playing to win |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
699
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:38:45 -
[734] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Damn that must have been one tough solo pvp myrm, 34 of eves best to kill him. Now that's some pretty awesome content right there. You've been on eight killmails in over two years, and six of those were Pocos. Considering you less than stellar pvp record, you might want to be a bit more selective in who you sneer at.
Yeah and this is an alt.. So whats your point.
Doesn't change the fact you are an F1 blob bot who thinks 34 vs 1 is good content and something to brag about.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:38:48 -
[735] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
TBH, both case are extremely stupid and a proof that game mechanics are bad...
but you didn't see anyone crying to CCP to nerf bombers so that they couldn't shoot structures, and all alliances that wanted to have fun actually used doctrines with more expensive ships.
this isn't any different |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:39:43 -
[736] - Quote
afkalt wrote:No. I am not saying that at all.
YOU are the one blaming the lack of big fights with the new system.
YOU are the ones refusing to start them
YOU are the people putting isk ahead of fun whilst moaning about fun. No, we're not. We're saying there will be no big fights as there's no REASON to start them, and we are having fun by avoiding the mechanics. The mechanics suck beyond belief, so we simply won't use them where we can avoid it.
afkalt wrote:Quote:No thanks, I'll continue to enjoy myself and keep all my stuff This, right here, THIS is why you have issues finding fun. Fights are awesome, as long as someone else does the dying, right? ROFL. So here are 2 options:
1. Have fun, keep stuff.
2. Have fun, throw away stuff.
Which would you pick? I'd always pick 1, since stuff leads to more fun later. You're literally stating that we should throw stuff away to make big fights, even though the level of entertainment for us will be the same. We gain no additional entertainment and no progress in the game by having big battles. If CCP want to remove big battles, that's up to them, we are simply pointing out that in the long run it will end badly.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1125
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:40:09 -
[737] - Quote
question from an idiot: "if you want more challenging fights, why don't you pointlessly and needlessly cripple yourself instead of waiting for ccp to fix the game?"
obvious answer: there is a reason i pay money, and ccp earns money: it's their job to fix the game and it's my job to win it |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:41:57 -
[738] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:question from an idiot: "if you want more challenging fights, why don't you pointlessly and needlessly cripple yourself instead of waiting for ccp to fix the game?"
obvious answer: there is a reason i pay money, and ccp earns money: it's their job to fix the game and it's my job to win it
in other words you just want your 'i win' button, so you can keep pressing it at your leisure? |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:42:22 -
[739] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
and before you say 'but it was more than one person' think whether there would be any difference to your crying if your opponent brought 50 inties instead of 1 So a single torp bomber on it's own could contest sov could it?
And no, I'd be fine with 50 interceptors. In fact I'll say that now.
CCP, my suggestion is either:
a) require a BC or above for entosis links
or
b) require 50+ interceptors to run an entosis link.
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
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:44:18 -
[740] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
TBH, both case are extremely stupid and a proof that game mechanics are bad...
but you didn't see anyone crying to CCP to nerf bombers so that they couldn't shoot structures, and all alliances that wanted to have fun actually used doctrines with more expensive ships. this isn't any different Uh yes you did. You still do. People complain about stealth bombers all the time and did moreso during fountain.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
48
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:45:24 -
[741] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Uh yes you did. You still do. People complain about stealth bombers all the time and did moreso during fountain.
really? show me where i was crying to ccp to nerf bombers? |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1838
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:46:18 -
[742] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:We're saying there will be no big fights as there's no REASON to start them
Which is of exactly no relevance whatsoever to sov mechanics, whatever they may be.
Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:Quote:No thanks, I'll continue to enjoy myself and keep all my stuff This, right here, THIS is why you have issues finding fun. Fights are awesome, as long as someone else does the dying, right? ROFL. So here are 2 options: 1. Have fun, keep stuff. 2. Have fun, throw away stuff. Which would you pick? I'd always pick 1, since stuff leads to more fun later. You're literally stating that we should throw stuff away to make big fights, even though the level of entertainment for us will be the same. We gain no additional entertainment and no progress in the game by having big battles. If CCP want to remove big battles, that's up to them, we are simply pointing out that in the long run it will end badly.
Good lord your argument is confused indeed. You're bitching about a lack of big fights and in the same breath saying they are the same amount of fun as not having them. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:53:53 -
[743] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:really? show me where i was crying to ccp to nerf bombers? I didn't say you cried, I said you saw people crying.Lucas Kell wrote:Warmeister wrote:but you didn't see anyone crying to CCP Uh yes you did. Comprehension, it's a thing.
afkalt wrote:Which is of exactly no relevance whatsoever to sov mechanics, whatever they may be. Except of course where it has everything to do with sov mechanics, since they are the primary conflict driver (or should be) in a competitive ownership system.
afkalt wrote:Good lord your argument is confused indeed. You're bitching about a lack of big fights and in the same breath saying they are the same amount of fun as not having them. That's not confused. My level of fun will not change whether I have big fights or not, but the amount of people interested in playing EVE will. I think your confusion comes from the fact that you can't comprehend someone having an opinion about something that isn't selfishly driven by what's in it for them.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:00:54 -
[744] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
No, larger battles occured because of the need to commit.
You only comit if its worth to comit or if its fun. Otherwise you stay at home making isk, which is what you do. You said it above already. I dont care about isk. Nobody is going to comit to a big fight knowing you are outblobbing them and they stand a chance to lose it all unless you are looking for fun. Right now there is nobody near to CFC to do this. I doubt there is anyone in game even. CFC has becomes its true enemy.
Lucas Kell wrote:
Stop being special. That's not how it works. At some point a group will always rise to the top and others will work together to bring them down. That's the great social aspect of the game. What you want is to make it so that one person is able to cause as much damage as a whole alliance because you're terrible at collaboration.
I think you are the one that think you are special and your holly empire of renting or isk making should not be touched...
who are you to tell me what should work how? In fact who are you to tell eve what?
I do what I want to do. I am not going to play by your strenght but by mine!
Lucas Kell wrote:
Well you're failing, especially since you're supporting changes that make it EASIER for us to stay at home and not engage in big fights.
You form up every day the anti entosis fleets to chase us down. We have captured serveral system. You got to blob us every night cos we fail so much. We have failed
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ask BL, they did a pretty good job of causing significant damage. You harp on about your killboard, but BL did more damage to the Imperium in a single fight than you guys have done in the history of your existence. You guys think too small and that's why you can;t see how damaging these changes are to your cause. I guarantee once the dust settles you'll suddenly realise how easy it is for us to res on our laurels.
Yeah and no. BL has not been able to do much besides every time it does you pay them off to go away. I agree that MOA need to ramp up their numbers and think bigger. If you look at our forums, you will see I have not been shy about it in any way! I am one of the voices that says this all the time. You can ask Massa or Gen, I am sure they are tired of hearing it
But you got to also admit, that its is not sufficient. If it was that simple BL would already own half your space! So there is something more here that stops even entities like BL to take over your space.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1838
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:11:54 -
[745] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:Which is of exactly no relevance whatsoever to sov mechanics, whatever they may be. Except of course where it has everything to do with sov mechanics, since they are the primary conflict driver (or should be) in a competitive ownership system.
I didn't think I'd need to spell out that the sov CAPTURE mechanics do not matter a damn, yet here I am....
The fact no-one has a reason to go contest sov is NOT a fault with aegis, rather null itself. It is a completely different discussion.
It has already been shown that even with current sov, when two parties both want the same thing, a fight happen. And it is not nano-nonsense either.
Or maybe you think machs, T3s and HACs on field is non-committal nano-nonsense, /shrug. If that's the case, I can't help you. |
Qui Binder
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:14:48 -
[746] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:
So they became CSM members without being voted in by large numbers of players who agree with their viewpoints?
Is that what you're trying to say?
They had large numbers of players who voted for them, that is true. It's a huge leap from there to say that they agreed with their viewpoints.
CFC and other large nullsec alliances agreed to vote for each others candidates in order to 'fix' the election. CFC sent out a filled in ballot and asked every pilot to vote that ballot with every account exactly, that order, thus ensuring that the CSM will be overly represented by pilots from large nullsec blocks. CFC pilots were asked to vote for candidates that were in red (hostile) alliances, because they had agreements that those red alliances were going to ask their pilots to vote for the CFC candidates.
It's cute that you think the CSM was elected by people who took the time to review the candidates positions and make independent selections. Don't let go of that naive optimism. |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
471
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:22:35 -
[747] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I'm getting plenty of fights in my alliance thanks. And I'm not the one complaining about a lack of content or fights. I was referring to the posters who are complaining about having no-one to shoot while surrounded by blues.
Damn that must have been one tough solo pvp myrm, 34 of eves best to kill him. Now that's some pretty awesome content right there. You've been on eight killmails in over two years, and six of those were Pocos. Considering you less than stellar pvp record, you might want to be a bit more selective in who you sneer at. Yeah and this is an alt.. So whats your point. Doesn't change the fact you are an F1 blob bot who thinks 34 vs 1 is good content and something to brag about.
An alt, thats what all the worthless scrubs say. Post with your main or get knotted.
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.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2115
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:25:54 -
[748] - Quote
Qui Binder wrote:Kystraz wrote:
So they became CSM members without being voted in by large numbers of players who agree with their viewpoints?
Is that what you're trying to say?
They had large numbers of players who voted for them, that is true. It's a huge leap from there to say that they agreed with their viewpoints. CFC and other large nullsec alliances agreed to vote for each others candidates in order to 'fix' the election. CFC sent out a filled in ballot and asked every pilot to vote that ballot with every account exactly, that order, thus ensuring that the CSM will be overly represented by pilots from large nullsec blocks. CFC pilots were asked to vote for candidates that were in red (hostile) alliances, because they had agreements that those red alliances were going to ask their pilots to vote for the CFC candidates. It's cute that you think the CSM was elected by people who took the time to review the candidates positions and make independent selections. Don't let go of that naive optimism.
Just like political party in democratic country, the election in EVE went to the side who were able to get their supporter to vote while many candidate were un-able to get to vote for them to happen.
Also, while a ballot is suggested in most large alliance, nobody can really be held to follow it. It's not like I'm un-able to vote for whoever I want just because I have a [CONDI] tag beside my name.
The biggest reason why the high-sec candidates rarely make it is mostly because the vote they rely on is diluted on so many different candidate instead of being concentrated. Nobody is able to rally their vote under a single or few banners. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
699
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:26:16 -
[749] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:
Does anyone really want to be stuck playing "interceptors online" for the next few years.
Drakes online, Supers online, Ishtars online and now Interceptors online.
Because it WONT be. For the Nth time....the (as far as I know) only seriously contested timer was last night and the field was... Machariels T3s HACs Not a single ******* trollceptor to be seen. Imagine that, when **** gets real people escalate quickly.
So out of the hundreds and hundreds of created timers, ONE was seriously contested - and you see that as a good step forward?
NB; The ceptors were there, they did their thing after the fight ended.
Escalate quickly?
It was little more than staged, all parties knew who was coming and when. One 3rd party even turned around and went home after, I believe, misunderstanding what they were told by those they were to have been fighting.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:30:01 -
[750] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Or maybe you think machs, T3s and HACs on field is non-committal nano-nonsense, /shrug. If that's the case, I can't help you.
Jesus was this your first big fight in EVE Online: A Spaceship Game ? You keep harping on this one single conflict. Single. As in a value of one. |
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1839
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:32:17 -
[751] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Or maybe you think machs, T3s and HACs on field is non-committal nano-nonsense, /shrug. If that's the case, I can't help you.
Jesus was this your first big fight in EVE Online: A Spaceship Game ? You keep harping on this one single conflict. Single. As in a value of one.
Do you have another example of a seriously contested timer?
I don't.
Again, not a mechanic fault (how many were contested in the 6 weeks prior to it going live?) but a far different problem.
Do you have examples of serious sov being contested with just small ships? Thought not. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:33:04 -
[752] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
The biggest reason why the high-sec candidates rarely make it is mostly because the vote they rely on is diluted on so many different candidate instead of being concentrated. Nobody is able to rally their vote under a single or few banners.
That and a large majority of people in highsec are nullsec alts. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:33:47 -
[753] - Quote
Qui Binder wrote:Kystraz wrote:
So they became CSM members without being voted in by large numbers of players who agree with their viewpoints?
Is that what you're trying to say?
They had large numbers of players who voted for them, that is true. It's a huge leap from there to say that they agreed with their viewpoints. CFC and other large nullsec alliances agreed to vote for each others candidates in order to 'fix' the election. CFC sent out a filled in ballot and asked every pilot to vote that ballot with every account exactly, that order, thus ensuring that the CSM will be overly represented by pilots from large nullsec blocks. CFC pilots were asked to vote for candidates that were in red (hostile) alliances, because they had agreements that those red alliances were going to ask their pilots to vote for the CFC candidates. It's cute that you think the CSM was elected by people who took the time to review the candidates positions and make independent selections. Don't let go of that naive optimism.
Agree. For the most part CSM is a sham. Its a popularity contest gone wrong in terms of own alliance self interests. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:37:36 -
[754] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Nobody is going to comit to a big fight. Exactly. Nobody will.
Icycle wrote:who are you to tell me what should work how? In fact who are you to tell eve what?
I do what I want to do. I am not going to play by your strenght but by mine! It's basic human nature. You've even done it yourself which is why you are part of MOA. You could contest goons on your own, but you know it's better to group up with others to do it, so you do. That will always be the case. Multiple weaker groups will join to defeat a common enemy.
Icycle wrote:You form up every day the anti entosis fleets to chase us down. We have captured serveral system. You got to blob us every night cos we fail so much. We have failed The only systems you "captured" are ones mid way between being swapped between our alliances internally. You've failed because you've had almost no impact on our coalition, other than providing us with content from time to time.
Icycle wrote:Yeah and no. BL has not been able to do much besides every time it does you pay them off to go away. I agree that MOA need to ramp up their numbers and think bigger. If you look at our forums, you will see I have not been shy about it in any way! I am one of the voices that says this all the time. You can ask Massa or Gen, I am sure they are tired of hearing it And why do you think we've paid them off yet never offered to pay you guys? It's because BL actually caused us significant problems, you haven't.
Icycle wrote:But you got to also admit, that its is not sufficient. If it was that simple BL would already own half your space! So there is something more here that stops even entities like BL to take over your space. Yeah, the fact that we are remotely competent and we work as a team to achieve a common goal. Again, we're back to collaboration being a powerful thing in an MMO.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2115
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:37:49 -
[755] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
The biggest reason why the high-sec candidates rarely make it is mostly because the vote they rely on is diluted on so many different candidate instead of being concentrated. Nobody is able to rally their vote under a single or few banners.
That and a large majority of people in highsec are nullsec alts.
Well that too but even if you were to "RP" your high-sec alt as a high-sec player, you would have trouble voting for some people and not ending with the votes still being spread all over the place. Organisation win election. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:38:42 -
[756] - Quote
afkalt wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Or maybe you think machs, T3s and HACs on field is non-committal nano-nonsense, /shrug. If that's the case, I can't help you.
Jesus was this your first big fight in EVE Online: A Spaceship Game ? You keep harping on this one single conflict. Single. As in a value of one. Do you have another example of a seriously contested timer? I don't. Again, not a mechanic fault (how many were contested in the 6 weeks prior to it going live?) but a far different problem. Do you have examples of serious sov being contested with just small ships? Thought not.
What? So your original argument is that there are ~gud fights~ from new sov system by sharing one example of proof concerning some t3s and machs. Now you are saying you can't find another example, after I pointed out that is only one example, thus disproving your original comment.
No, I do not have examples because there are none, supporting my initial views on the subject matter that the new system is not promoting group conflict. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:43:47 -
[757] - Quote
afkalt wrote:I didn't think I'd need to spell out that the sov CAPTURE mechanics do not matter a damn, yet here I am....
The fact no-one has a reason to go contest sov is NOT a fault with aegis, rather null itself. It is a completely different discussion.
It has already been shown that even with current sov, when two parties both want the same thing, a fight happen. And it is not nano-nonsense either.
Or maybe you think machs, T3s and HACs on field is non-committal nano-nonsense, /shrug. If that's the case, I can't help you. So are you suggesting that the stats supplied by CCP through dotlan are wrong, and that conflict has not decreased this month?
Sov mechanics aren;t the only, but are a major factor in driving conflict. The fact that you can't comprehend this leads me to question how much experience you actually have with either the new or old sov system.
afkalt wrote:Do you have another example of a seriously contested timer?
I don't. Neither do we, hence the problem.
afkalt wrote:Do you have examples of serious sov being contested with just small ships? Thought not. No, because most people aren't seriously contesting sov. Again, that's the problem. Why would people seriously contest sov when they can just troll and cause a similar reaction? Again, it's comes down to an accepted lack of commitment in the new system.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1839
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:46:58 -
[758] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:afkalt wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Or maybe you think machs, T3s and HACs on field is non-committal nano-nonsense, /shrug. If that's the case, I can't help you.
Jesus was this your first big fight in EVE Online: A Spaceship Game ? You keep harping on this one single conflict. Single. As in a value of one. Do you have another example of a seriously contested timer? I don't. Again, not a mechanic fault (how many were contested in the 6 weeks prior to it going live?) but a far different problem. Do you have examples of serious sov being contested with just small ships? Thought not. What? So your original argument is that there are ~gud fights~ from new sov system by sharing one example of proof concerning some t3s and machs. Now you are saying you can't find another example, after I pointed out that is only one example, thus disproving your original comment. No, I do not have examples because there are none, supporting my initial views on the subject matter that the new system is not promoting group conflict.
Sigh.
No. The contention is that the statement that fozziesov is stopping fights is a fallacy.
I contend that there had (up until last night) been no serious contests.
So of the one serious contest I'm aware of, it has not involved nano-non committal stuff. Thus that argument is shaky at best. By all means, prove me wrong - Show me some serious sov/station contests duked out by the dual of the interceptors.
The new system would never have promoted conflict, group or otherwise but nor should it. It is by its very nature NOT a conflict driver. How are people not getting this? It is a mechanic, the drive to start a conflict needs to be something else.
Why do you think a capture MECHANIC change is going to create a CONFLICT DRIVER?
They are two fundamentally different things.
There is literally no mechanic in existence they could have put in place which would suddenly drive the empires to war, it is illogical to think otherwise.
So if we want decent feedback on the mechanics and it's challenges and growing pains, we should be keeping it to relevant areas and not complaining about things which it has exactly nothing to do with. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:51:52 -
[759] - Quote
Ok, so I think I kinda understand you?
You actually agree with us that the Entosis link on interceptors is dumb because no one seriously takes sov with an interceptor(s).
You further go on to agree with a more unrelated, but relevant, opinion of the masses that nullsec needs value added to provide reason for taking sov in the first place.
Got it. |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:55:30 -
[760] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Nobody has in a loooooong while. Who the hell will comit to the CFC if they dont have a chace for example? I dont see BL doing it . It must be for a reason.
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's basic human nature. You've even done it yourself which is why you are part of MOA. You could contest goons on your own, but you know it's better to group up with others to do it, so you do. That will always be the case. Multiple weaker groups will join to defeat a common enemy.
I seriosuly disagree with blobbing a human nature. For many years this was not it until these large blue blobs began to appear. I am not saying that communities are not build...all iam saying this is not a community. Thats just a fight for who got the largest blob to throw at someone. This is not the eve I used to play. You want to blob fine be my guest but dont whine when you dont get kills. The other day you guys were blobbing us and decide to refit and you lost your numbers became smaller. We engaged you probably 30 vs 30 more or less. Both parties had fun. Blob us again and we will deny you the fun the same way CFC did to its oponents for years!
Lucas Kell wrote:
The only systems you "captured" are ones mid way between being swapped between our alliances internally. You've failed because you've had almost no impact on our coalition, other than providing us with content from time to time.
To you is a failure. To us to do this vs 50000 people + titans and all the stuff that you guys throw at us its a victory. We are 1000.
Lucas Kell wrote:
And why do you think we've paid them off yet never offered to pay you guys? It's because BL actually caused us significant problems, you haven't.
Well thats obvious. You have discovered cold water!
|
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:09:23 -
[761] - Quote
afkalt wrote:No. The contention is that the statement that fozziesov is stopping fights is a fallacy. It's not that it stops them, it simply leaves no reason to start them. Conflicts will happen, sure, but not very many since there's no need to commit to it.
afkalt wrote:So of the one serious contest I'm aware of, it has not involved nano-non committal stuff. Thus that argument is shaky at best. By all means, prove me wrong - Show me some serious sov/station contests duked out by the dual of the interceptors. Right, so the one serious contest out of the several hundred if not thousand timers and nodes contested. The vast majority of all of those was from "non-commital stuff". Without a reason to commit, people will choose not to, it's the optimal choice.
afkalt wrote:Why do you think a capture MECHANIC change is going to create a CONFLICT DRIVER? Because that's one of it's stated aims:
"We hope to achieve this goal by focusing on an easily understood core game system that encourages player interaction and conflict."
afkalt wrote:And were they "seriously" contesting it in a months before the new system? Were they hell. So nothing has changed on that front. Of course not, the problem with the old system is that it also didn't drive conflict very well. It certainly did a better job than the new system over the years, but no, it was also a bad system. They need to have a sov system that people want to interact with, that is entertaining to be part of. You know, the #1 states goal of Aegis sov.
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
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:16:54 -
[762] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Nobody has in a loooooong while. Who the hell will comit to the CFC if they dont have a chace for example? I dont see BL doing it . It must be for a reason. It's because we're winning EVE. No matter what system CCP put in place that's not going to change. You're not goign to suddenly win now just because you can trigger some timers with interceptors, you realise that, right? You know that the sov you "took" won;t be yours once we decide to take it back, right?
Icycle wrote:I seriosuly disagree with blobbing a human nature. For many years this was not it until these large blue blobs began to appear. I am not saying that communities are not build...all iam saying this is not a community. Then you don't understand human nature. I've played since 2005 and I've not known a time when people didn't work together to beat bigger or stronger opponents. Even MOA now do that, you realise that, right? You recruit players and corps and you work with other groups to achieve results.
Icycle wrote:To you is a failure. To us to do this vs 50000 people + titans and all the stuff that you guys throw at us its a victory. We are 1000. Objectively it's a failure. you set out to damage the Imperium and we continue to grow stronger. That's a textbook failure. You can't even claim it's because of your size, since smaller groups than yours have achieved more against us.
Icycle wrote:Well thats obvious. You have discovered cold water! No, we're simply not threatened by you. You have the numbers to do damage but not the strategic knowhow or leadership.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
1093
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:28:09 -
[763] - Quote
Lets put it down very clearly so people get it, just after I joined the system was changed to Dominion from the number of POS's in system, so I saw the change occur. I am sure many of you saw a very good video put out on the war between Red Alliance and allies against Etherium Dawn and IRC, in that war a smaller less well equipped coalition was able to keep fighting for months and people had fun and epic fights. I know some of those people.
Let now look at the event when Razor accidently IRC'd, in fact it was more that the CFC by accident killed IRC, I was in IRC when that happened, the leadership of IRC was poor and there was one event with a CSAA that really set the scene for a certain level of disbelief. What caused IRC to fail cascade, it was simple the use of what was for IRC an overwhelming force of supers, the realisation was that IRC was facing all of the CFC on any critical timer, so what was the point of throwing ships away with no chance of victory, in some cases no chance of kills. People said, can't resist, no fun and walked away, it did not help that the IRC leadership was pretty poor.
So when people say this is not fun, well I can tell you I would have loved the current sov system to have been in place with the IRC I was then in, there was people in almost every system living in that space. IRC would not have died with a whimper, it would have been as epic as that fight against Red Alliance.
You Goonies as the Imperium along with your NIP with PL and the affects of the Dominion system have destroyed the game, true you had big fleet battles, but 10% tidi for 20 hours, wow but no thanks.
At this point people are having to operate in their systems, over time it will reduce the size of alliances and coalitions because in Eve the conflict needs to be a lot more local and the jump changes, jump fatigue and this new sov will change relationships.
Some cretins on this thread, and I use that deliberately have said that people who do not hold sov at this point have no voice, I will tell you to F off, I have held sov in the past and intend to do so again, what I am waiting for is the Imperium and PL to crumble and people to start ignoring the poorer systems, once that happens I intend to move in. I expect I have quite a long wait, but if CCP sticks to their guns and does not cave in to your tears this will eventually happen.
And what MOA is doing in Pure Blind is harassment of an enemy who has already put off their much talked about invasion of Provi, because of what exactly? The feeling that they cannot allow MOA to take systems. I call that a big win for Eve.
Stay strong CCP, I am having a ball at this moment.
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!!!!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1097
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:30:07 -
[764] - Quote
afkalt wrote:And I'm not talking about catching the inty. Go RF all their POS, hellcamp the place the call home. Go dish out some retribution.
POS's get RF'd (and killed) fairly regularly. As for hellcamping... how do you hellcamp interceptors again? |
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1732
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:31:28 -
[765] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:If CCP want to remove big battles, that's up to them, we are simply pointing out that in the long run it will end badly.
For whom? Time Dilation gave us the ability to have the really huge, headline-generating battles. That started January 18th, 2012. Can you show me where all the growth in the game is as a result? You have the substantial increase from Crucible, which was mostly a package of features that players had waited years for. You have spikes for the big battles, but they deflate quickly--most of the people who come don't even stay for the three months that the average theme park MMO hopes for. There's no indication that those were all new subscriptions anyway. How many were situationally resubbed supercap accounts? The big battles are terrible marketing, not because they're boring to read about, but because they vividly describe a part of the game that new players--indeed, most players--will never experience. They don't represent the game.
And that's the problem: the optimal alliance structure is for the vast bulk of the players to not play the game. They log in when told, get in a ship they're told to, go where they're told (often being driven there), shoot what they're told to, then click the pap link they're told to and leave. If they do PVE, it's AFK. They're perhaps the most minimally invested players in the entire game; all the work they would do is instead done by a handful of people for whom it's a second job, or even a first job. In other words, Aegis sov, which all told is meant to spread the workload out, is fundamentally incompatible with this alliance structure. The same handful of people can't run around doing everything that the people randomly present in a system are supposed to be able to take care of. The huge, centralized battles are still possible, but now there's an everyday hum of conflict as well.
Why not design the sov to match the existing alliance structure? Here's the rub: CCP needs players to be engaged in the game, not just the metagame, to ensure its long-term survival. If your alliance structure is such that you can muster hundreds or thousands of people to follow directions in game X, where X could be any game in existence, that's not good for EVE, which is only potentially one of those games. People look askance at the loners leveling their Ravens, but those guys decide when to log in, and for what reason; which ship to fly and how to fit it; where to go, even if that's just the system they happen to be in; what their goals are, and; when to log out. Some of them, when they've leveled their Raven to 80, or 90, or 100, decide to use their exhaustive knowledge of missions and PVE mechanics to become baiters or gankers, or they pitch it all and go do something totally different--or they leave, but that's another discussion. The point is that they're invested in the game itself, which is good, even if they're sticking to one relatively shallow and dusty corner of the game. They still have more experience, more autonomy, and more initiative to log in and do their own thing than many nullsec line members. The more players there are who make their own decisions and take their own intiatives, the richer and deeper and more unpredictable the sandbox is.
Providence, take a bow.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1097
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:35:20 -
[766] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
You Goonies as the Imperium along with your NIP with PL and the affects of the Dominion system have destroyed the game, true you had big fleet battles, but 10% tidi for 20 hours, wow but no thanks.
First point: 23.5 hrs, thanks.
Quote:
Some cretins on this thread, and I use that deliberately have said that people who do not hold sov at this point have no voice, I will tell you to F off, I have held sov in the past and intend to do so again, what I am waiting for is the Imperium and PL to crumble and people to start ignoring the poorer systems, once that happens I intend to move in.
Second point: OH MY GOD WHY IS THIS ONE SENTENCE?
Third point: It's not 'people who don't hold sov', but 'people who haven't and/or have no intention of holding sov'.
Fourth: Exactly what effect do you think any sov system will have on Pandemic Legion, when they typically never hold sov, they just come in and bust up yours?
Quote:
And what MOA is doing in Pure Blind is harassment of an enemy who has already put off their much talked about invasion of Provi, because of what exactly? The feeling that they cannot allow MOA to take systems. I call that a big win for Eve.
So you're saying not having conflict is good for EVE? Interesting!
Quote:Stay strong CCP, I am having a ball at this moment.
Too late.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:38:53 -
[767] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:If CCP want to remove big battles, that's up to them, we are simply pointing out that in the long run it will end badly. For whom? Time Dilation gave us the ability to have the really huge, headline-generating battles. That started January 18th, 2012. Can you show me where all the growth in the game is as a result? So wait, before I even consider reading your entire tl;dr rant, what you are saying is that having no headlines about EVE is better than or equal to having some headlines about epic space battles. I refuse to believe that appearing in international news for epic levels of gameplay will ever be anything except positive for the game no matter how shortlived those benefits may be.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Feonyx Ash
Sabotage Incorporated
Executive Outcomes
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:39:46 -
[768] - Quote
Thank you CCP Fozzie. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1127
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:43:01 -
[769] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:question from an idiot: "if you want more challenging fights, why don't you pointlessly and needlessly cripple yourself instead of waiting for ccp to fix the game?"
obvious answer: there is a reason i pay money, and ccp earns money: it's their job to fix the game and it's my job to win it in other words you just want your 'i win' button, so you can keep pressing it at your leisure?
no, ccp should go ahead and fix it
they should not, however, give me an i-win button and expect it not to be pressed, especially when other people have the same button (though most pubbies are not strong enough to push it ofc) |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1098
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:53:11 -
[770] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote: In other words, Aegis sov, which all told is meant to spread the workload out, is fundamentally incompatible with this alliance structure.
Aegis sov, unfortunately, just isn't engaging at all. I've had FW people tell me 'that really sucks for you guys. Trust us, orbiting a button in space is a crap mechanic'. They keep doing it because the direct LP awards mean there's a chance they'll get a fight. The size limits on the node means there's even a reasonable chance it's going to be an almost fair fight*. It's not guaranteed - it's not even likely - but there's still a reasonable chance.
But it's still boring as heck gameplay, and other than watching d-scan for someone coming into their plex, yeah, they're basically afk'ing.
And that's what's getting expanded by orders of magnitude here. A boring mechanic that only works in FW because those guys have a (wait for it.... ) conflict driver in place beneath the mechanic: LP. And more, taking 1 or even 11 FW plexes won't flip a system. It's something like 50 of them to make the system assaultable, then they have to go and shoot the ihub.
You know, the thing we don't do anymore?
That doesn't mean the conceptual elements are bad - the ADMs are awesome. The idea of spreading the fight out over the constellation is wonderful. The execution of it - mimicking Faction Warfare's bad element without the counterbalancing good element - isn't.
* - Mind you, outside of (and even in them, really) those FW complexes, a 'fair fight' in EVE is generally either something pre-arranged... or someone screwing up. Not just in null, either. How many highsec wardec corps go for 'a fair fight'? How many lowsec groups say 'wait, they've only got three guys, you twenty wait here'?
|
|
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
61
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:54:03 -
[771] - Quote
Biggle Wondersnap wrote:Is there a good reason why not to add a requirement for attacking to be at war with the alliance you are attacking?
concord is already involved with the new sov mechanics, so adding a requirement for people to declare war would make logical sense. and it would force trolls to put in a bit of extra effort before attacking.
thoughts?
That would limit the "sandbox" gameplay aspect of the game even further, and at this point a lot of those sandbox "anything can happen" elements have been greatly reduced.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
62
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:12:32 -
[772] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:You Goonies as the Imperium along with your NIP with PL and the affects of the Dominion system have destroyed the game, true you had big fleet battles, but 10% tidi for 20 hours, wow but no thanks.
PL has had no NIP with CFC since November of 2014.
Please get your facts straight.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:18:24 -
[773] - Quote
Feonyx Ash wrote:Thank you CCP Fozzie.
For dropping player counts to 2007 levels. A very successful series of changes indeed. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:18:25 -
[774] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:they should not, however, give me an i-win button and expect it not to be pressed, especially when other people have the same button (though most pubbies are not strong enough to push it ofc)
They need to blue up so with their combined power they can push it
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:22:59 -
[775] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: A lot of words
Wait wait wait.... IRC is complaining about the use of capitals and having peace agreements with other entities?
I'm pretty sure you guys got too greedy and wanted more space and got punched for it. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:29:07 -
[776] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:they should not, however, give me an i-win button and expect it not to be pressed, especially when other people have the same button (though most pubbies are not strong enough to push it ofc) They need to blue up so with their combined power they can push it
Impossible as then they would have friends just like goons.
We really can't have that now can we? |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:30:30 -
[777] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:what I am waiting for is the Imperium and PL to crumble and people to start ignoring the poorer systems, once that happens I intend to move in.
Go to the east where the command nodes have been sitting since the sov changes
Why do you want our space?
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:31:28 -
[778] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Dracvlad wrote:what I am waiting for is the Imperium and PL to crumble and people to start ignoring the poorer systems, once that happens I intend to move in. Go to the east where the command nodes have been sitting since the sov changes Why do you want our space?
Grrrr organisation!!
Or something... |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
1097
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:32:05 -
[779] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:And what MOA is doing in Pure Blind is harassment of an enemy who has already put off their much talked about invasion of Provi, because of what exactly? The feeling that they cannot allow MOA to take systems. I call that a big win for Eve. So you're saying not having conflict is good for EVE? Interesting!
Actually people are feeling out the new system, there are some major fights occurring, the Intiative vs Gentlemans Club is one such example. These bigger escalation will start happening more and more, because they can not be easily third partied and there are systems that will be more important for a full on fight
You cannot asses it based on your issues in Pure Blind is mainly because of your strength, it has to be harassment, you just have to deal with it and not assume taht all the content is like that.
The good news is that your ability to project your fun on others which is not fun to them is curtailed, before you could sit behind the huge EHP and super / titan superiority and go anywhere in Eve without a care to look for fights, it made Sov space boring for many people, oh look its the Imperium, stop people doing PvE with cloaky camps etc., after a while when numbers are down as people go back to hisec in comes the big guns, go for head shot, done dusted, agree to transfer sov, look how great we are, more recruits great game. That is not going to work for you any more is it?
You ask about PL, well the issue about them is the ability to escalate to full on end game escalation, that means any sov holder has to take them into consideration. The Darkness retreat is what I expect to see from many alliances, however as soon as they get complacent and go in half hearted someone will give them a a bloody nose at least for a short while. Personally for my part as a future sov holder I would not put all my eggs in one basket, let them take the sov and take it back when they go elsewhere. The key question in terms of PL is how many stupid alliances are out there that will give hell camp full on content to PL, not many I hope. If that is the case then I expect a certain downgrading of their ability as time goes on, classic Eve boredom wearing out of an enemy.
The question is how long will this take and how many players leave because of it, well my group came back because of these changes, but the change in the players will take time to manifest itself, but it will.
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
1097
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:35:09 -
[780] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Dracvlad wrote:what I am waiting for is the Imperium and PL to crumble and people to start ignoring the poorer systems, once that happens I intend to move in. Go to the east where the command nodes have been sitting since the sov changes Why do you want our space? Grrrr organisation!! Or something...
Oh dear a Grrrr comment, how unoriginal...
I am looking near Stain, no where near you lot, I don't want to give you lot any content at all, MOA is giving you what you deserve  .
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!!!!
|
|
|
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1734
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:35:22 -
[781] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dersen Lowery wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:If CCP want to remove big battles, that's up to them, we are simply pointing out that in the long run it will end badly. For whom? Time Dilation gave us the ability to have the really huge, headline-generating battles. That started January 18th, 2012. Can you show me where all the growth in the game is as a result? So wait, before I even consider reading your entire tl;dr rant, what you are saying is that having no headlines about EVE is better than or equal to having some headlines about epic space battles. I refuse to believe that appearing in international news for epic levels of gameplay will ever be anything except positive for the game no matter how shortlived those benefits may be.
I said that it's terrible marketing, because it indisputably is: anyone who runs from some media site to download the EVE client because they have visions of massive battles dancing in their heads is going to be disappointed. Disappointed players don't stay. They don't tell their friends about that great game that they got hooked on. Instead, when their friends come to them all excited about the latest lagfest in the latest string of random characters, they shake their heads and say that it's not like that. Bad word of mouth marketing is much, much worse than no marketing at all.
I'm not saying that it wouldn't be nice to see the battle you were part of in print. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that it comes with a steep price.
Arrendis wrote:Aegis sov, unfortunately, just isn't engaging at all. I've had FW people tell me 'that really sucks for you guys. Trust us, orbiting a button in space is a crap mechanic'. They keep doing it because the direct LP awards mean there's a chance they'll get a fight. The size limits on the node means there's even a reasonable chance it's going to be an almost fair fight*. It's not guaranteed - it's not even likely - but there's still a reasonable chance.
Yeah, I tried the button-orbiting thing myself (not on this character). Even when there was conflict, it wasn't particularly fun. I didn't last very long before I got bored and left. But I only care about having enough ISK to stay in ships, and I have plenty of ships. LP--even stacks of LP--simply wasn't enough of an incentive to sit there and watch a Breacher orbit. As a result I'm deeply skeptical of ISK particularly or wealth generally as a conflict driver. First of all, there's a surreal amount of wealth sloshing around the game; second, if wealth is a conflict driver then it's also a conflict resolver, which means that wealthy alliances can simply buy off anyone who presents a plausible threat, either with a nice region or moons or outright cash. Third, anything worth fighting over is worth negotiating over. You can have conflicts start and end in diplomatic channels, without a single ship undocking and with next to no risk of third party interference.
At the end of the day, people have to want to fight for fights to occur. If they don't, they won't.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:37:59 -
[782] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:And what MOA is doing in Pure Blind is harassment of an enemy who has already put off their much talked about invasion of Provi, because of what exactly? The feeling that they cannot allow MOA to take systems. I call that a big win for Eve. So you're saying not having conflict is good for EVE? Interesting! Actually people are feeling out the new system, there are some major fights occurring, the Intiative vs Gentlemans Club is one such example. These bigger escalation will start happening more and more, because they can not be easily third partied and there are systems that will be more important for a full on fight
Your only example of fight escalating was 3rd partied by Provi.
So much for fight being harder to 3rd party huh... |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:38:48 -
[783] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
~Previous Rebuttals~
The good news is that your ability to project your fun on others which is not fun to them is curtailed, before you could sit behind the huge EHP and super / titan superiority and go anywhere in Eve without a care to look for fights.
You are missing what we are saying here, we like the new fozzie sov system. It just needs tweaks and details ironed out i.e. an interceptor being able to solo a whole constellation, regardless if anyone is defending or not.
Regarding your super capitals comment, I am pretty sure it was us who lead the pack in reducing the effectiveness of "super blobs". We realized how invulnerable groups can be with massive super capital blobs and felt as if it could present unfair advantages. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
1098
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:39:16 -
[784] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Dracvlad wrote: A lot of words Wait wait wait.... IRC is complaining about the use of capitals and having peace agreements with other entities? I'm pretty sure you guys got too greedy and wanted more space and got punched for it.
I was not in IRC leadership, I was a director of a corp who was in some channels, in effect it was the mismanagement of the leadership that broke an agreement with Razor that FC's did not know they had, the agreement was not to hit Razor structures.
But I am talking about the IRC that existed before that point and how they would have done with the new sov system.
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!!!!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1103
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:41:22 -
[785] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:And what MOA is doing in Pure Blind is harassment of an enemy who has already put off their much talked about invasion of Provi, because of what exactly? The feeling that they cannot allow MOA to take systems. I call that a big win for Eve. So you're saying not having conflict is good for EVE? Interesting! Actually people are feeling out the new system, there are some major fights occurring, the Intiative vs Gentlemans Club is one such example. These bigger escalation will start happening more and more, because they can not be easily third partied and there are systems that will be more important for a full on fight
Except, as has been mentioned by those involved, that fight had nothing to do with Sov.
Just like my egg sandwich this morning isn't an indication that Aegis Sov is great because I had bacon. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1833
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:42:29 -
[786] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:
torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
It astounds me that people are still bitter about siegefleet.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:43:14 -
[787] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Dracvlad wrote:what I am waiting for is the Imperium and PL to crumble and people to start ignoring the poorer systems, once that happens I intend to move in. Go to the east where the command nodes have been sitting since the sov changes Why do you want our space? Grrrr organisation!! Or something... Oh dear a Grrrr comment, how unoriginal... I am looking near Stain, no where near you lot, I don't want to give you lot any content at all, MOA is giving you what you deserve .
Just beside stain there is catch which already has space available for you to take with timer being expired by over 20 days. Why aren't you taking it yet? You really need us, some 7 region away, to crumble before you get in?
PL's only current SOV help is in germinate so that's also kinda far from catch. They really need to "crumble" before you join in on the fun of the galactic ding dong ditch game? |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:43:24 -
[788] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:And what MOA is doing in Pure Blind is harassment of an enemy who has already put off their much talked about invasion of Provi, because of what exactly? The feeling that they cannot allow MOA to take systems. I call that a big win for Eve. So you're saying not having conflict is good for EVE? Interesting! Actually people are feeling out the new system, there are some major fights occurring, the Intiative vs Gentlemans Club is one such example. These bigger escalation will start happening more and more, because they can not be easily third partied and there are systems that will be more important for a full on fight You cannot asses it based on your issues in Pure Blind is mainly because of your strength, it has to be harassment, you just have to deal with it and not assume taht all the content is like that. The good news is that your ability to project your fun on others which is not fun to them is curtailed, before you could sit behind the huge EHP and super / titan superiority and go anywhere in Eve without a care to look for fights, it made Sov space boring for many people, oh look its the Imperium, stop people doing PvE with cloaky camps etc., after a while when numbers are down as people go back to hisec in comes the big guns, go for head shot, done dusted, agree to transfer sov, look how great we are, more recruits great game. That is not going to work for you any more is it? You ask about PL, well the issue about them is the ability to escalate to full on end game escalation, that means any sov holder has to take them into consideration. The Darkness retreat is what I expect to see from many alliances, however as soon as they get complacent and go in half hearted someone will give them a a bloody nose at least for a short while. Personally for my part as a future sov holder I would not put all my eggs in one basket, let them take the sov and take it back when they go elsewhere. The key question in terms of PL is how many stupid alliances are out there that will give hell camp full on content to PL, not many I hope. If that is the case then I expect a certain downgrading of their ability as time goes on, classic Eve boredom wearing out of an enemy. The question is how long will this take and how many players leave because of it, well my group came back because of these changes, but the change in the players will take time to manifest itself, but it will.
I feel like we could probably get along really well, dear sir.
Such wow, much like.
Once again, stay strong CCP, don't cater to gewn tears, if they can't counter a ceptor it's their own damn fault, no need to bend the rules with the most unrealistic obscure limitation ever. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2118
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:44:37 -
[789] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Arrendis wrote:Dracvlad wrote:And what MOA is doing in Pure Blind is harassment of an enemy who has already put off their much talked about invasion of Provi, because of what exactly? The feeling that they cannot allow MOA to take systems. I call that a big win for Eve. So you're saying not having conflict is good for EVE? Interesting! Actually people are feeling out the new system, there are some major fights occurring, the Intiative vs Gentlemans Club is one such example. These bigger escalation will start happening more and more, because they can not be easily third partied and there are systems that will be more important for a full on fight Except, as has been mentioned by those involved, that fight had nothing to do with Sov. Just like my egg sandwich this morning isn't an indication that Aegis Sov is great because I had bacon.
Bacon is always a good indicator. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1103
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:53:30 -
[790] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Bacon is always a good indicator.
Fair point. Lemme rephrase
Dracvlad wrote:
Actually people are feeling out the new system, there are some major fights occurring, the Intiative vs Gentlemans Club is one such example. These bigger escalation will start happening more and more, because they can not be easily third partied and there are systems that will be more important for a full on fight
Hey, look! Some Imperium Alliances and some N3 Alliances shot one another! Clearly, WALKING IN STATIONS is a huge success! Who cares if the fight wasn't about the best way to play barbies, right? |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:54:50 -
[791] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:I said that it's terrible marketing, because it indisputably is: anyone who runs from some media site to download the EVE client because they have visions of massive battles dancing in their heads is going to be disappointed. Disappointed players don't stay. They don't tell their friends about that great game that they got hooked on. Instead, when their friends come to them all excited about the latest lagfest in the latest string of random characters, they shake their heads and say that it's not like that. Bad word of mouth marketing is much, much worse than no marketing at all.
I'm not saying that it wouldn't be nice to see the battle you were part of in print. I'm not saying they aren't good stories.I'm saying that they come with a steep price. And I'm disagreeing. Anyone that joins then leaves would never have stayed anyway. If they stay for a month, yay, income. Some do stay because those fights are accessible to people and because they find other things they also like.
The word of mouth about EVE is already out there - steep leaning cuve, spreadsheet in space, toxic community. That's always going to be a problem. At least when they also see "massive quarter of a million dollar space battle" there's some level of positive to it.
I believe that these stories are a net positive result and that getting rid of them is a big shame. Getting rid of the actual battles is worse.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
122
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:57:17 -
[792] - Quote
wow at last CFC decided to look for action. They call it trying out sov in Providence.
https://soundcloud.com/mel-gibson-774238727/mittani-provi-war-primer
Minute 18:00 for the actual Providence strategy.
I would recomend it highly if into sov and new changes. |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
112
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 18:41:22 -
[793] - Quote
Don't listen to all the noise Team 5-0, stick to your vision and focus on making individual systems worth having and maintaining. Also, you may want to get ahead of the curve a bit and reduce the costs of ihubs and upgrades, those are a hangover of the old system and need to be more in line with the new concepts of smaller groups being able to setup shop, get blasted out and try try again. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
62
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 18:43:12 -
[794] - Quote
Why would you listen to it though? You've admitted you're not interested in sov.
Harry Saq wrote:Don't listen to all the noise Team 5-0, stick to your vision and focus on making individual systems worth having and maintaining. Also, you may want to get ahead of the curve a bit and reduce the costs of ihubs and upgrades, those are a hangover of the old system and need to be more in line with the new concepts of smaller groups being able to setup shop, get blasted out and try try again.
Yeah, they shouldn't listen to a sizable portion of the community that uses a mechanic regularly when balancing the game. While Team Five-0 are at it, they should also work on limiting the number of people in a single solar system from the current max to about 50, it'll make the fights more localized across all areas of the game.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
122
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 18:50:13 -
[795] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Why would you listen to it though? You've admitted you're not interested in sov.
Free intel. Also I am naturally curious. And see how can I use it to my advantage. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
62
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 18:51:43 -
[796] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Why would you listen to it though? You've admitted you're not interested in sov. Free intel. Also I am naturally curious. And see how can I use it to my advantage.
So far, despite the CFC giving out all these sort of speeches throughout its history, you and your alliance have failed to capitalize anything like this to your advantage. It's literally be 1 step forward, 2 steps back for you for years.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
122
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:03:14 -
[797] - Quote
Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Why would you listen to it though? You've admitted you're not interested in sov. Free intel. Also I am naturally curious. And see how can I use it to my advantage. So far, despite the CFC giving out all these sort of speeches throughout its history, you and your alliance have failed to capitalize anything like this to your advantage. It's literally be 1 step forward, 2 steps back for you for years.
unlike your alliance right? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1105
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:11:16 -
[798] - Quote
Icycle wrote:unlike your alliance right?
You know, not to defend PL or nothin', but when a single corp in an alliance can lose 3 trillion in a day and the corp and alliance recover w/in 9 months, you really can't say they're not doing something right.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2121
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:12:19 -
[799] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Icycle wrote:Tallardar wrote:Why would you listen to it though? You've admitted you're not interested in sov. Free intel. Also I am naturally curious. And see how can I use it to my advantage. So far, despite the CFC giving out all these sort of speeches throughout its history, you and your alliance have failed to capitalize anything like this to your advantage. It's literally be 1 step forward, 2 steps back for you for years. unlike your alliance right?
Yeah it's not like they had probably around 1/4 of SOV space under their own renting alliance under the previous system right...
Not sure it was 1/4 but BoT was not small. |
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
62
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:13:51 -
[800] - Quote
Icycle wrote:unlike your alliance right?
You mean Pandemic Horde, a new player focused alliance that's been around for a whopping 4 months?
I don't think your "burn" worked out the way you think it would.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
|
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:15:30 -
[801] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
Bacon is always a good indicator.
Fair point. Lemme rephrase Dracvlad wrote:
Actually people are feeling out the new system, there are some major fights occurring, the Intiative vs Gentlemans Club is one such example. These bigger escalation will start happening more and more, because they can not be easily third partied and there are systems that will be more important for a full on fight
Hey, look! Some Imperium Alliances and some N3 Alliances shot one another! Clearly, WALKING IN STATIONS is a huge success! Who cares if the fight wasn't about the best way to play barbies, right?
Didn't your boss say to not be whiny and be to be the adult in these discussions?
Anyways, unlike the constant crying in this forum, the Mittani laid out in the soundcloud that was "leaked" about their strategy as far as what changes they are looking to push. I'm generally in argument with what he said. The trollceptor should ultimately die. It just isn't a good thing to have participate in sov warfare, though as a tackle ship I'm glad it has a spot in EVE. Another point he wanted was node decay, which I think would be great. Takes away the troll factor of people hitting nodes and then forcing the sov holder to clean it up even if no one shows. I'm not sold on the battle cruiser and up change though, I think have a variety of ship classes and fighting styles based around entosis warfare is a good thing and shouldn't be limited.
As for the INIT/Razor vs GCLUB and Friends fight, it actually has been one of several fights that have been going on do around the Tenerfis/Catch/Immensea area the last coupe weeks. The original campaign was GCLUB vs Stainwagon, but as people have noticed the conflict point, more people have stopped by. I was in GCLUB for awhile before taking a break from null, so I've been watching to brawls. Here is some examples you wanted:
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4825,4830,4828,4826,4824,4829,4827,4815&b=6643920&e=120&t=WrmIauqLcOb&r=1
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=2155&b=6639632&e=90&t=ravq&r=1
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4810&b=6619430&e=90&t=uvvqqubeab&r=1
Along with dozens of smaller fights not worth linking (like this one https://zkillboard.com/br/45153/ ) . So some interesting campaigns are out there, I promise. |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:16:52 -
[802] - Quote
delete plz oops |
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
122
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:17:29 -
[803] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Icycle wrote:unlike your alliance right? You know, not to defend PL or nothin', but when a single corp in an alliance can lose 3 trillion in a day and the corp and alliance recover w/in 9 months, you really can't say they're not doing something right.
I am just simply saying the fact. I dont concider them PL. Yes they have some PL members and they maybe an extension of PL. But far from PL. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
87
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:23:32 -
[804] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Don't listen to all the noise Team 5-0, stick to your vision and focus on making individual systems worth having and maintaining. Also, you may want to get ahead of the curve a bit and reduce the costs of ihubs and upgrades, those are a hangover of the old system and need to be more in line with the new concepts of smaller groups being able to setup shop, get blasted out and try try again.
We are focused on Providence, but for you, we can make an exception. Those 6 systems you just recently acquired in Catch look nice. I'll be sure to notify your alliance, when they lose their sov, that we only eyed this area because of your posting. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
353
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 19:53:36 -
[805] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Don't listen to all the noise Team 5-0, stick to your vision and focus on making individual systems worth having and maintaining. Also, you may want to get ahead of the curve a bit and reduce the costs of ihubs and upgrades, those are a hangover of the old system and need to be more in line with the new concepts of smaller groups being able to setup shop, get blasted out and try try again. We are focused on Providence, but for you, we can make an exception. Those 6 systems you just recently acquired in Catch look nice. I'll be sure to notify your alliance, when they lose their sov, that we only eyed this area because of your posting.
INB4 SMA is sent in with pvp entosis firetails that just die without shooting back at anything |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2122
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 20:09:10 -
[806] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Arrendis wrote:Icycle wrote:unlike your alliance right? You know, not to defend PL or nothin', but when a single corp in an alliance can lose 3 trillion in a day and the corp and alliance recover w/in 9 months, you really can't say they're not doing something right. I am just simply saying the fact. I dont concider them PL. Yes they have some PL members and they maybe an extension of PL. But far from PL.
The guy can't possibly be in PL and also have an alt in PH for management stuff.
Impossible... |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6591
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 20:39:42 -
[807] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Don't listen to all the noise Team 5-0, stick to your vision and focus on making individual systems worth having and maintaining. Also, you may want to get ahead of the curve a bit and reduce the costs of ihubs and upgrades, those are a hangover of the old system and need to be more in line with the new concepts of smaller groups being able to setup shop, get blasted out and try try again. We are focused on Providence, but for you, we can make an exception. Those 6 systems you just recently acquired in Catch look nice. I'll be sure to notify your alliance, when they lose their sov, that we only eyed this area because of your posting. INB4 SMA is sent in with pvp entosis firetails that just die without shooting back at anything Ook ook!
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Icycle
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
122
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 21:10:19 -
[808] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Icycle wrote:Arrendis wrote:Icycle wrote:unlike your alliance right? You know, not to defend PL or nothin', but when a single corp in an alliance can lose 3 trillion in a day and the corp and alliance recover w/in 9 months, you really can't say they're not doing something right. I am just simply saying the fact. I dont concider them PL. Yes they have some PL members and they maybe an extension of PL. But far from PL. The guy can't possibly be in PL and also have an alt in PH for management stuff. Impossible...
I think you are missing the point. What I am trying to say that while there are some PL members, the majority are not. I think they got random alts from all over eve. I know even I wanted to place an alt in it but at the end did not bother. How hard can it be to pretend to be a noob? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2123
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 21:17:07 -
[809] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Icycle wrote:Arrendis wrote:Icycle wrote:unlike your alliance right? You know, not to defend PL or nothin', but when a single corp in an alliance can lose 3 trillion in a day and the corp and alliance recover w/in 9 months, you really can't say they're not doing something right. I am just simply saying the fact. I dont concider them PL. Yes they have some PL members and they maybe an extension of PL. But far from PL. The guy can't possibly be in PL and also have an alt in PH for management stuff. Impossible... I think you are missing the point. What I am trying to say that while there are some PL members, the majority are not. I think they got random alts from all over eve. I know even I wanted to place an alt in it but at the end did not bother. How hard can it be to pretend to be a noob?
You are the one trying to say "his alliance" din't do anything and I am presenting you the fact that his alliance DID in fact do stuff before in a much meaningful than MoA but you keep trying to dodge the point because he post on his PH character and not his PL one.
Is this thread supposed to devolve into "post on your main or STFU"?
You think this guy is a PH player with the possibility of having an alt in PL and not the other way around? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1106
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 21:38:49 -
[810] - Quote
Icycle wrote:Arrendis wrote:Icycle wrote:unlike your alliance right? You know, not to defend PL or nothin', but when a single corp in an alliance can lose 3 trillion in a day and the corp and alliance recover w/in 9 months, you really can't say they're not doing something right. I am just simply saying the fact. I dont concider them PL. Yes they have some PL members and they maybe an extension of PL. But far from PL.
Right, but PHorde is a newbie-training alliance. So... what? You're gonna scoff at newbies for not having billions of ISK? Wow, sick burn. What's next, mocking CONDI for not dominating Faction Warfare? |
|
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 23:06:17 -
[811] - Quote
Arrendis wrote: What's next, mocking CONDI for not dominating Faction Warfare?
At least we are blue to Fweddit and they do?
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
701
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 23:07:37 -
[812] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:We're saying there will be no big fights as there's no REASON to start them Which is of exactly no relevance whatsoever to sov mechanics, whatever they may be.
I think your wrong. Devs made it quite clear they intended sov to be a driver for conflicts and fighting.
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
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.
To date with new sov;
Hundreds of systems entosed, 1 (big) fight, which took place in one system.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Vic Jefferson
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
547
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 23:46:06 -
[813] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:
To date with new sov;
Hundreds of systems entosed, 1 (big) fight, which took place in one system.
A keen perception obfuscated by the heaps of grr in this thread.
It's a very good point. Any and all opinions on either side are worth nothing compared to hard numbers and real evidence. The success of the system should be measured by the proportions of reinforces that lead to a change in sov, particularly a new entity claiming it. Now you could make such a metric more involved, but it would be much harder to quantify and qualify what counts as a successful defence, especially when many successful defences are just displays of force, and don't actually escalate into fight after both sides are mutually scouted. Therefore, while crude, a good metric is simply the ratio of reinforces that result in a structure/system/etc being changed hands. If an overwhelming majority of reinforces do not result in a change of some kind, then the mechanic is a terrible failure, because one would absolutely not RF something unless one had both the intention and the resources to actually follow through on it, unless it is just simple trolling, which I'd guess the majority is currently. Sov mechanics are supposed to let powers attack each other, not enable a single interceptor to troll a region.
Of course then you could get fancy with those metrics, once you got going. I.E size of the attacker and defender, weighted chances of a successful attack...you could go nuts with it, and it would be absolutely a blast for people who like numbers. At the end of the day though, the take home message is that RFs that do not commonly result in a successful invasion:
A)Should not be costless, they currently are.
-Cost to use an entosis link should be ISK paid to CONCORD
-Cost to fail to actually invade should cost the alliance ISK, status, or incur penalties.
-Limit the amount of entosis an alliance can do based on size: an alliance of 2 corps with 10 people each has no business reinforcing more than a few things at time.
-Unsuccessful Entosis should cause the capsuleer to lose SP, the same way losing a T3 cruiser does.
B)Should not be numerically the overwhelming majority of RFs. RFs are designed to let sovereign entities invade each other, and if this is simply not happening with enough of them, then the mechanic is a failure and needs to be revisited.
-When most RFs are trolling, its a failure.
-When most RFs are actual people actually interested in taking actual space, the mechanic is a raving success!
Graphs won't do. We all remember, hey look, more capitals are exploding post Phoebe graphs - but they aren't very convincing at all when you consider how popular insurance frauding capitals in-lieu of moving them is. A tiny little filter on the data could remove all those, then you'd have a greater chance of convincing people of what you are trying to prove. Or the hilarious amounts of capitals dying in Aridia - yes the average goes up, but they aren't provoking or generating actual fights. It's like watching ship kills in Uedama - PvP yes, fights no.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:30:34 -
[814] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:
torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
It astounds me that people are still bitter about siegefleet.
it astounds me that you see bitterness there.
i'm just pointing out the obvious. it was the same concept for risk free sov capture as inties are now, and goons jumped on it
now that the tables have turned - goons are crying nerf to inties.
well done to CCP for ignoring people who asked to nerf bombers (not that i think there were any), keep up the good job ignoring the goon tears now |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:33:46 -
[815] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:
You are missing what we are saying here, we like the new fozzie sov system. It just needs tweaks and details ironed out i.e. an interceptor being able to solo a whole constellation, regardless if anyone is defending or not.
the only thing that needs ironing out is elimination of pure trolls.
if no one comes to spin the nodes when structures come out of RF they should despawn after couple of days and the structure should go back to defender.
now if someone is serious about taking sov, there is no reason inty shouldn't be able to do it when defender doesn't show up.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:35:25 -
[816] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:
torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
It astounds me that people are still bitter about siegefleet. it astounds me that you see bitterness there. i'm just pointing out the obvious. it was the same concept for risk free sov capture as inties are now, and goons jumped on it now that the tables have turned - goons are crying nerf to inties. well done to CCP for ignoring people who asked to nerf bombers (not that i think there were any), keep up the good job ignoring the goon tears now
The fact that you considered it "risk free" is where the bitterness originates. Or, to be more specific, that it was used in proxy for the dreadnoughts typically considered for the role, denying anyone in drop range a bunch of free dread kills.
Siegefleet was a marvelous way to reduce risk -- it was not, by any means, risk free. If siegefleet was risk free, then all tactics involving dropping bombers would also carry forth this connotation, and few people bemoan the bomber drop as a risk-free ganking experience.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:53:03 -
[817] - Quote
Querns wrote:
The fact that you considered it "risk free" is where the bitterness originates. Or, to be more specific, that it was used in proxy for the dreadnoughts typically considered for the role, denying anyone in drop range a bunch of free dread kills.
Siegefleet was a marvelous way to reduce risk -- it was not, by any means, risk free. If siegefleet was risk free, then all tactics involving dropping bombers would also carry forth this connotation, and few people bemoan the bomber drop as a risk-free ganking experience.
you are confusing two things here, pvp and contesting undefended systems.
there is a difference between dropping stack of bombers on someone who can shoot back, and dropping them on the structure with no hostile in local. of course it wasn't entirely risk free, i remember us decimating a few of those fleets, when your people got so bored that they probably went afk and stopped watching local.
same thing applies to inties in current sov mechanics. if someone tried to use them to capture sov against a proper fleet, they'd be dead. they only turn into risk free thing when the system they are used in aren't defended.
in your second sentence you outlines the exact reason why you want inties to not be able to entosis - you just want free kills for anyone in the drop range.
as i outlined before, if you are worried about people trolling your sov, changes need to be done to the mechanics so that the structures return to normal state if no one captured the beacons for a certain period of time.
|
Plaid Rabbit
Enlightened Industries
Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:55:47 -
[818] - Quote
It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:04:06 -
[819] - Quote
Plaid Rabbit wrote:It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly.
It's about the effort of the attacker. The goons put forth effort (20man/hours per structure or so) to take out a structure.
why should taking something that no one needs enough to bother defending it require much effort? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:11:32 -
[820] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:
you are confusing two things here, pvp and contesting undefended systems.
there is a difference between dropping stack of bombers on someone who can shoot back, and dropping them on the structure with no hostile in local. of course it wasn't entirely risk free, i remember us decimating a few of those fleets, when your people got so bored that they probably went afk and stopped watching local.
same thing applies to inties in current sov mechanics. if someone tried to use them to capture sov against a proper fleet, they'd be dead. they only turn into risk free thing when the system they are used in aren't defended.
in your second sentence you outlines the exact reason why you want inties to not be able to entosis - you just want free kills for anyone in the drop range.
as i outlined before, if you are worried about people trolling your sov, changes need to be done to the mechanics so that the structures return to normal state if no one captured the beacons for a certain period of time.
Generally, a few recons take care of the "shooting back" problem.
While I enjoy dropping on nerds as much as the next fat guy, unfortunately fatigue makes this an unwieldy proposition against troll threats. I would struggle to find it even in the same vein as dropping supercapitals on anything in the galaxy at moderate to severe distances. (Not calling out any player group here; we abused the **** out of it as much as anyone else.)
And you are mischaracterizing the goals of the Imperium at large if you think kills are our primary motivating factor. Our primary motivating factor is protecting the empire. To that extent, we would like it so that there is a reasonable chance for malefactors towards our holdings, which we've worked for five years to create, to be caught and punished. Kills intersect nicely here on the account of nearly everyone else in Eve valuing ship kills over sov; this creates the necessary negative reinforcement.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:14:27 -
[821] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Plaid Rabbit wrote:It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly.
It's about the effort of the attacker. The goons put forth effort (20man/hours per structure or so) to take out a structure. why should taking something that no one needs enough to bother defending it require much effort?
The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
Thank you, sov team, for adding the publicly visible ADMs and timers; they allow for succinct silencing of these sorts of accusations.
e: Also of note is the fact that we ceded a total of five regions leading up to both Phoebe and Aegis. The vaunted Empire Contraction has taken place! We can only tighten the belt so much (goons are fat.)
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:21:37 -
[822] - Quote
Querns wrote:
The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing |
Plaid Rabbit
Enlightened Industries
Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:28:17 -
[823] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Plaid Rabbit wrote:It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly.
It's about the effort of the attacker. The goons put forth effort (20man/hours per structure or so) to take out a structure. why should taking something that no one needs enough to bother defending it require much effort?
Agreed. We should have a man/hr number somewhere in the middle. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:31:49 -
[824] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing
We actually don't have much problem with them at all -- the only group that actually tries to RF our stuff uses 500mn omens instead.
We're allowed to be proactive with this sort of thing. This is usually the first step in helping the game, and failing the acceptance of our eternal beatitude, abusing the mechanic so hard that change is forced.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:35:13 -
[825] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing We actually don't have much problem with them at all -- the only group that actually tries to RF our stuff uses 500mn omens instead. We're allowed to be proactive with this sort of thing. This is usually the first step in helping the game, and failing the acceptance of our eternal beatitude, abusing the mechanic so hard that change is forced.
to me it sounds like working as intended - utilised space is hard to capture, unused space can be capured by any passer by with entosis link |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:39:14 -
[826] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing We actually don't have much problem with them at all -- the only group that actually tries to RF our stuff uses 500mn omens instead. We're allowed to be proactive with this sort of thing. This is usually the first step in helping the game, and failing the acceptance of our eternal beatitude, abusing the mechanic so hard that change is forced. to me it sounds like working as intended - utilised space is hard to capture, unused space can be capured by any passer by with entosis link
It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence.
Imperium regions are not typical of Eve at large. Our largest defensive structure is our reputation.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:03:44 -
[827] - Quote
Querns wrote:
It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence.
.
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that.
attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:13:34 -
[828] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence.
.
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted.
Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted."
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:23:19 -
[829] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence.
.
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted."
you have a perfect avenue for negative reinforcement. use all your titans and supers to hell camp every station they are based in so the only thing they can fly out is an inty. purchase all the inties in those stations and relist for 10 times the price. be inventive, use the vast resources you control. if they move, keep moving after them until they roll over |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:27:55 -
[830] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence.
.
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted." you have a perfect avenue for negative reinforcement. use all your titans and supers to hell camp every station they are based in so the only thing they can fly out is an inty. purchase all the inties in those stations and relist for 10 times the price. be inventive, use the vast resources you control. if they move, keep moving after them until they roll over
You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:28:08 -
[831] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence.
.
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted." you have a perfect avenue for negative reinforcement. use all your titans and supers to hell camp every station they are based in so the only thing they can fly out is an inty. purchase all the inties in those stations and relist for 10 times the price. be inventive, use the vast resources you control. if they move, keep moving after them until they roll over
good news for all those new small sov owners!
where did they go, i thought they all appeared when magic wands did
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:31:48 -
[832] - Quote
Querns wrote:
You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:34:10 -
[833] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread
We're goons -- we live to post. Posting is what we do.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:35:13 -
[834] - Quote
Hi, I like to post while watching lasers cycle (magic or mining).
This is really relevant to lasersov, as you can see.
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:44:28 -
[835] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Im'a toughy and my friends...er...me and my friends gun hurt you and tell mommy it was yer fawlt
...noted, I will be sure to have my lunch money on hand too...that wasted troll aside, this will prove the point of FozzieSov. You can enjoy your journey across the universe to poop and pee all over other's space, then leave and thump your chest and watch everybody move right back in. Unless you plan on actually moving into those systems, your pomp and circumstance will just be noise. We all know they aren't done iterating on sov and making null livable/defense worthy. Until that happens this is just an exercise in anti-boredom narrative building.
Like I have said in other posts Team 5-0, keep your eye on the ball and keep the concept of making space big, where local literally means the system and constellation you are in, and where it is worth fighting your actual neighbors not for content farming but actual compelling infrastructure and logistics need. The mega coalition concept and meta is obsolete, and only petulantly being held onto by intransigent arcane (and based on the "meta" narrative, hypocritical) thinking by a very unhappy vocal few. Of whom, some I do not even fault because old tales of over-romanticized 4k mega-brawls where ever so minor details like node dropping and soul crushing lag tidi misery marathons are glazed over or just plain left out.
I am no believer in CCPs ability to do things well, timely or remotely correctly, but they atleast nailed the concept and vision part, no matter how it plays out, a successful (or even moderately failed) execution of mechanics and improvements toward that vision would (and should) render organizations larger than alliances completely unnecessary. Some of these loud voices are the very ones stating that coalitions are simply a necessary evil to thwart bad design, yet now still cling and argue for hooks and compromises that draw us back into that stagnant design mentality.
Entosis modules should absolutely be able to be on anything; ceptors fitted with them can just as well capture an uncontested command node event for an attacker OR defender, and absolutely should be used in this way. Decay back to ownership is retrograde thinking, and goes counter to the point of alliances owning and renewing claim to their space as a basic responsibility. Forcing entosis modules on large slow ships is the argument of a disingenuous empire builder wanting to make it harder to hit empty space.
Finally, those crying for killmails on entoasted structures due to some presupposed purity of Eve are also being disingenuous. They want the killmails so they can flaunt what they destroyed for general griefing/aka "narrative" building and anti-boredom nose rubbing incentive. Killmails are a sov trolling incentive vs an actual necessary output for basic sov takeover. So all those scream crying about troll-ceptors and begging for killmails are arguing both sides of the "sov trolling" concept only to a comfortable n+1 end. This is made clear when you put those arguments (Entosis on BC and above + killmails for toasting) together, and reveal the real desire to maintain the n+1 design that they theoretically loath, and only reluctantly do to teach CCP a lesson. It's quite silly, obvious and transparent.
Maybe it isn't disingenuous, sinister or driven by motive....maybe they just don't know any better...whatever the reason, the outcome is the same, and we have been living that outcome for years...however, I believe the tough guy threat against me above, also helps make clear where the priority in mentality lies. That is, I want to gang up on people smaller and feel powerful while flaunting phat killmails vs actually acknowledging compelling game design that allows for more individualized skill and meaningful group (large and small) gameplay...but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis... |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:44:59 -
[836] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread We're goons -- we live to post. Posting is what we do.
We all know its much more than that.
Been there, seen it, heard it, passed on the tee-shirt and lifetime membership.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:59:33 -
[837] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis...
So you're a sovtroll?
I can see why you might want to maintain that.
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1107
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:05:29 -
[838] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:
You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread
Other than the members of NCdot, BL, people in PL who aren't you, and others who've actually dealt with sov.
None of your arguments address the fact that 'orbit button in space' is boring as heck, non-engaging gameplay that makes up the other half of the complaints. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1107
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:09:25 -
[839] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Harry Saq wrote:but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis... So you're a sovtroll? I can see why you might want to maintain that.
No, he's ex-LAWN, and he's apparently bitter that Blue-P didn't want to leave Fountain. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:14:32 -
[840] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:
...noted, I will be sure to have my lunch money on hand too...that wasted troll aside, this will prove the point of FozzieSov. You can enjoy your journey across the universe to poop and pee all over other's space, then leave and thump your chest and watch everybody move right back in. Unless you plan on actually moving into those systems, your pomp and circumstance will just be noise. We all know they aren't done iterating on sov and making null livable/defense worthy. Until that happens this is just an exercise in anti-boredom narrative building.
I guess ihubs don't have value or utility where you live.
Quote:
The mega coalition concept and meta is obsolete
This is false.
Quote:
I am no believer in CCPs ability to do things well, timely or remotely correctly, but they atleast nailed the concept and vision part, no matter how it plays out, a successful (or even moderately failed) execution of mechanics and improvements toward that vision would (and should) render organizations larger than alliances completely unnecessary.
Why are large organizations unnecessary? Hell, your corp used to be in the Imperium four months ago.
Quote:
Entosis modules should absolutely be able to be on anything; ceptors fitted with them can just as well capture an uncontested command node event for an attacker OR defender, and absolutely should be used in this way. Decay back to ownership is retrograde thinking, and goes counter to the point of alliances owning and renewing claim to their space as a basic responsibility. Forcing entosis modules on large slow ships is the argument of a disingenuous empire builder wanting to make it harder to hit empty space.
Finally, those crying for killmails on entoasted structures due to some presupposed purity of Eve are also being disingenuous. They want the killmails so they can flaunt what they destroyed for general griefing/aka "narrative" building and anti-boredom nose rubbing incentive. Killmails are a sov trolling incentive vs an actual necessary output for basic sov takeover. So all those scream crying about troll-ceptors and begging for killmails are arguing both sides of the "sov trolling" concept only to a comfortable n+1 end. This is made clear when you put those arguments (Entosis on BC and above + killmails for toasting) together, and reveal the real desire to maintain the n+1 design that they theoretically loath, and only reluctantly do to teach CCP a lesson. It's quite silly, obvious and transparent.
Maybe it isn't disingenuous, sinister or driven by motive....maybe they just don't know any better...whatever the reason, the outcome is the same, and we have been living that outcome for years...however, I believe the tough guy threat against me above, also helps make clear where the priority in mentality lies. That is, I want to gang up on people smaller and feel powerful while flaunting phat killmails vs actually acknowledging compelling game design that allows for more individualized skill and meaningful group (large and small) gameplay...but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis...
It's pretty clear that your opinions are driven by whatever the Imperium's aren't. I should probably be careful how I use the words "bleach" and "drink" henceforth.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:17:36 -
[841] - Quote
I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:18:55 -
[842] - Quote
Has anyone even tried to make a Deklein timer? Or have we SNIPED any attempts?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:40:14 -
[843] - Quote
Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium.
I believe the vast majority of the posts in this thread speak to the contrary on the annoy aspect, and since coalitions aren't actually supported through game mechanics, kill is probably the wrong word, since a coalition is just an agreement in standings and effort, nothing can kill that but those that participate in it. So the concept of a coalition can live as long as those carry it, making it unnecessary and pointless is the actual cure to space cancer ;)
If Eve servers could actually support huge battles between ridiculously large fleets than none of this would be necessary, so it is not I that loathes large gatherings of players for mutual destruction, but rather technology, so in light of that, I offer this excerpt from reddit:
"How everyone actually thought about one of those "I was there" Dominion battles
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=313717" |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
203
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:54:46 -
[844] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium. I believe the vast majority of the posts in this thread speak to the contrary on the annoy aspect
Please count the # of different goon posters in here that have explicitly said this annoys them (only count each poster once even if they post more than once) and compare that to the number in goons. You can't call that small a number moderately annoying the entire imperium. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1607
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 05:20:11 -
[845] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:
torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
It astounds me that people are still bitter about siegefleet.
I'm still bitter about siegefleet. As a member of many a siegefleet, it was ******* horrible.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6592
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 06:27:50 -
[846] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:now if someone is serious about taking sov, there is no reason inty shouldn't be able to do it when defender doesn't show up. Again, why an inty?
If noone shows up, ship type is irrelevant. The ONLY reason to suggest an inty should do it is so that if people DO show up they can run away.
I note you've avoided this multiple times now, as well as the whole sigefleet things once I made it clear that I'd be fine if entosising a node required 50 inties instead of 1. The reason for that is you don't have a leg to stand on because your arguments are flawed.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 06:30:41 -
[847] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:I note you've avoided this multiple times now, as well as the whole sigefleet things once I made it clear that I'd be fine if entosising a node required 50 inties instead of 1. The reason for that is you don't have a leg to stand on because your arguments are flawed.
It's because moa can't get it up at nights we're vulnerable**... 50 people?
**Maybe on weekends, but you know how crazy we are then
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 06:44:50 -
[848] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Warmeister wrote:now if someone is serious about taking sov, there is no reason inty shouldn't be able to do it when defender doesn't show up. Again, why an inty? If noone shows up, ship type is irrelevant. The ONLY reason to suggest an inty should do it is so that if people DO show up they can run away. I note you've avoided this multiple times now, as well as the whole sigefleet things once I made it clear that I'd be fine if entosising a node required 50 inties instead of 1. The reason for that is you don't have a leg to stand on because your arguments are flawed.
ok i'll rephrase
i think anyone should be able to capture undefended sov in any ship they like.
including the noobship if they can manage to fit entosis on it.
i didn't avoid anything multiple times. i explicitly said in one of my posts that i don't think that defenders should expect free killmail if they do decide to turn up.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6592
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 06:55:05 -
[849] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Warmeister wrote:now if someone is serious about taking sov, there is no reason inty shouldn't be able to do it when defender doesn't show up. Again, why an inty? If noone shows up, ship type is irrelevant. The ONLY reason to suggest an inty should do it is so that if people DO show up they can run away. I note you've avoided this multiple times now, as well as the whole sigefleet things once I made it clear that I'd be fine if entosising a node required 50 inties instead of 1. The reason for that is you don't have a leg to stand on because your arguments are flawed. ok i'll rephrase i think anyone should be able to capture undefended sov in any ship they like. including the noobship if they can manage to fit entosis on it. i didn't avoid anything multiple times. i explicitly said in one of my posts that i don't think that defenders should expect free killmail if they do decide to turn up. So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Since that's what's generally occuring. They use an inty so they can run away when defenders show up. How about CCP make it so the entosis link explodes if you move away from the target while it's active, so you cost yourself the entosis link and a trip back to station each time you run away. There you go, no free killmail.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:10:44 -
[850] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free?
Fozzie's new vision of sov? This is the new eve.
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
54
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:16:11 -
[851] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Since that's what's generally occuring. They use an inty so they can run away when defenders show up. How about CCP make it so the entosis link explodes if you move away from the target while it's active, so you cost yourself the entosis link and a trip back to station each time you run away. There you go, no free killmail.
they shouldn't
however i think you and I have different definitions of 'active sov'.
to me 'active sov' is the one where defenders don't have to make an effort to 'show up' during their vulnerability window.
they are either already there, or moving through the system on the regular basis as part of their normal activities.
now the length of the vulnerability window, the times it takes to RF something or to capture the nodes is something i think should be fine tuned based on player feedback. as well as what happens with the nodes no one bothered to cap/defend.
but i strongly object to crippling ships further than they already are by the current entosis 'perks', just for the sake of rewarding defenders with guaranteed kill mail for showing up.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1847
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:27:38 -
[852] - Quote
Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium.
Only a moron would think that occupancy based/use-it-or-lose-it ownership basis would negatively affect you guys.
You are literally the poster children for "doing it right in H2 2015Gäó".
What is needed is to reward you appropriately for this. A carrot if you will, as opposed to you just not getting the stick as if that is reward in of itself....which takes me to the next section:
My only wish would be that as a community we set aside our differences put even half the effort that we are putting into arguing over the capture mechanic into forming solid ideas to making Sov worth holding and attractive to line members.
If there was a way that people could (more) viably live in their systems, a whole lot of things would change overnight.
We're fiddling whilst Rome burns here. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1802
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:38:13 -
[853] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Why should keeping Sov be risk free? Without any possible form of harassment, sov owning becomes risk free especially for large and powerful entities, while smaller entities suffer from unreasonable threat potential. Besides, you still cling to the dense "Must get kills for my killboard to be successful!" mentality. Basing your ideas on fixing Fozzie Sov on this mentality is not going to help.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Second-Dawn
1099
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:43:56 -
[854] - Quote
Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium.
Well Deklin is geographically difficult to get at, surrouned by blue regions and has a very large and active PvE and mining population, due to that is anyone seriously surprised, I am not!
You have to look at the edges and Pure Blind is just that, and the TNT alliance seems to have given up and the Goon rental group is now in occupancy, sort of if you get what I mean. It does seem however that you are slowly gaining that control, but lets see how that pans out when you start your campaign in Provi, but even then I do not expect anyone to try for Deklin, its too remote and too difficult, thats for you people bleating on about no one being able to RF a system there.
But without any doubt the failure to gain full control in Pure Blind has affected your plans, we are talking about a much delayed deployment to Provi, and that does actually indicate that the system is working.
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!!!!
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
535
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:46:49 -
[855] - Quote
afkalt wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Arkady Romanov wrote:I am curious about something.
Why has CCP decided that the minimum barrier to entry as a Sov holding entity is a 50 mill, T2 frigate?
Dominion sov was flawed. The investment required to be a player in the Sov game at that time was a massive super fleet, and the logistic acumen of a real life medium sized business. This was absolutely unsustainable and needed to change. I don't think too many people would disagree.
It did have some advantages however. Wars required commitment, both in time and assets. The wars and politics were unlike anything any other game has offered. They were in many ways, EVE's unique selling point. They were the narrative for the history of the game. They gave the game a prestige. That's gone now. You can obtain Sov using an unarmed ship.
To me, contesting sov should be a game of thrones. Sov wars should require commitment to initiate. 50 mill of T2 frigate is not a commitment. My corp, which doesn't live in null, should not have been able to take sov just for yuks.
Dominion had limited life left in it because there were only a finite number of entities that could reasonably contest it. It had to change, but I think it was a mistake to abandon everything learned from it. There is no sense of occasion in fozzie sov. There is no sense of loss when a system changes hands or accomplishment when it is taken. Somewhere, between the obscene commitment of dominion and the laughable execution of fozziesov must be a happy medium.
Bring back the game of thrones. Bring "epic" back.
Well put. Does this not fit the bill? A somewhat serious fight over a station: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3hn4n5/fozzisov_fight_pretty_awesome_clash_going_on/
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4825,4830,4828,4826,4824,4829,4827,4815&b=6643920&e=120&t=WrmIauqLc&r=1
Machariel, T3, HAC fleets, not interceptors dancing around field here. "Epic"? No, I'd say not - but certainly an indicator that when people REALLY want something and the owners REALLY want to keep it it's not the small ships which are wheeled out. The system is in its infancy, this is the first actual fight I'm aware of and it's sure as hell not nano-games.
I also call bullshit and hyperobole on the whole idea of "solo ceptor taking sov". We are one of few offensive alliances fighting a sov war atm, and every meaningful system and station timer has been a full CTA for both parties, and good fights have been had. The systems between our and the enemy's home turf have turned into a warzone, changing hands multiple times. This is cool on the other hand because it generates constant fights (yes imagine, some people actually do sov for fights and not PVE) but also the single weakness (imho) of the new system- the 18-hour vulnerability window of freshly taken systems is too long because people do have real lives.
This thread is mostly entrenched, defensive people whining about PVP content not coming to them in a shape and form that is comfortable for them to deal with. My perspective is from a real war as offender, and the difference to Dominion system is absolutely neglible- you dunk or get dunked. Id really urge every whiner here to go and make content for yourself instead of whining about being the content for trolls. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6592
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:55:48 -
[856] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:they shouldn't
however i think you and I have different definitions of 'active sov'.
to me 'active sov' is the one where defenders don't have to make an effort to 'show up' during their vulnerability window.
they are either already there, or moving through the system on the regular basis as part of their normal activities. You realise that these nodes aren't in anoms, right? Nobody is spending their playtime sitting idly watching a node, so whatever the case, you have to "show up" to defend it. Interceptors are used because trolls are attacking active sov, waiting for someone to respond then running away as fast as they can. #It's got nothing to do with them wanting to attack undefended sov, that's why there are systems with no owner right now, because they don;t want to sov, they want the response. They want to waste people's time getting them to chase round their uncatchable ships.
Warmeister wrote:but i strongly object to crippling ships further than they already are by the current entosis 'perks', just for the sake of rewarding defenders with guaranteed kill mail for showing up. And I suggested a method of preventing trollceptors without a killmail. That said, why when you opt to contest sov should you need to put NOTHING on the line? You're single handedly attacking an entire solar system, asking you to put your ship down as collateral is not really that 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
6592
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:58:48 -
[857] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Why should keeping Sov be risk free? Without any possible form of harassment, sov owning becomes risk free especially for large and powerful entities, while smaller entities suffer from unreasonable threat potential. Besides, you still cling to the dense "Must get kills for my killboard to be successful!" mentality. Basing your ideas on fixing Fozzie Sov on this mentality is not going to help. How is it in any way risk free? Even by removing interceptors it's not risk free. Are you saying that the only ships that people can possibly take to attack our sov are interceptors?
on top of which, interceptors aren't even a risk, they are an annoyance. Interceptors are easy to remove because you just show up in a ship that can volley them off the field and they run away. Interceptors won't be the ones taking sov. Risk comes when a group seriously wants to take sov and smashes your nodes down.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 07:59:08 -
[858] - Quote
These ceptors are not uncatchable... There are several ships that can easily catch them, among others Dramiels, Garmurs and other ceptors. You just need to be there in time. If you have to go several jumps to get to the attacked system, you are not doing it right.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6592
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:04:27 -
[859] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote: These ceptors are not uncatchable... There are several ships that can easily catch them, among others Dramiels, Garmurs and other ceptors. You just need to be there in time. If you have to go several jumps to get to the attacked system, you are not doing it right. In the time it takes a response ship to arrive on grid the trollceptor will be most of the way off the grid and moving at ludicrous speed. Anyone caught in a trollceptor got caught because they are terrible at EVE.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
184
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:08:04 -
[860] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Does this not fit the bill? A somewhat serious fight over a station: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3hn4n5/fozzisov_fight_pretty_awesome_clash_going_on/
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4825,4830,4828,4826,4824,4829,4827,4815&b=6643920&e=120&t=WrmIauqLc&r=1
[this link is not working, use tinyurl next time please] Machariel, T3, HAC fleets, not interceptors dancing around field here.
This was not a fight over a station.
This was a fight to shoot each other and no-one could care less if the station was saved or captured. We are exchanging blows with G-Club for a while, and we use various means - roams, POS bashing, sov timers. We could easily just put SBUs and it would be the same fight.
There was another fight when we wanted to take a system in Catch. It started with ceptors, but escalated fairly quickly to T3 dessies and then to HACs - which is fine and proves that Fozziesov can work. We overwhelmed the enemy, which was fun too, but what happened next was a long devastating node grind with interceptors and griffins and all those nice stuff. |
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:15:49 -
[861] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote: These ceptors are not uncatchable... There are several ships that can easily catch them, among others Dramiels, Garmurs and other ceptors. You just need to be there in time. If you have to go several jumps to get to the attacked system, you are not doing it right. In the time it takes a response ship to arrive on grid the trollceptor will be most of the way off the grid and moving at ludicrous speed. Anyone caught in a trollceptor got caught because they are terrible at EVE.
They do not know if something is coming if there are people already in the systems. If neutrals to them need to come into the system and then do a long warp in the first place, it's no wonder that the ceptor pilot has a long advance warning time. As said, you are doing it wrong if this is a problem for you. As for the getting away part, while it can be bothersome, to me it is a won fight if their trolling was stopped before they can cause serious trouble.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1848
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:19:14 -
[862] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote: These ceptors are not uncatchable... There are several ships that can easily catch them, among others Dramiels, Garmurs and other ceptors. You just need to be there in time. If you have to go several jumps to get to the attacked system, you are not doing it right. In the time it takes a response ship to arrive on grid the trollceptor will be most of the way off the grid and moving at ludicrous speed. Anyone caught in a trollceptor got caught because they are terrible at EVE.
Confirming peoples skills at eve will make their ship fly faster than the 4km/s hard cap.
2/10 |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:22:05 -
[863] - Quote
We should go back to the early speculation about siphons and need to just sit and watch your structure float in space
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
Desman Alliance
184
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:24:44 -
[864] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Confirming peoples skills at eve will make their ship fly faster than the 4km/s hard cap.
And that is exactly the reason why hard caps are bad mkay. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:40:48 -
[865] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:You realise that these nodes aren't in anoms, right? Nobody is spending their playtime sitting idly watching a node, so whatever the case, you have to "show up" to defend it. Interceptors are used because trolls are attacking active sov, waiting for someone to respond then running away as fast as they can. #It's got nothing to do with them wanting to attack undefended sov, that's why there are systems with no owner right now, because they don;t want to sov, they want the response. They want to waste people's time getting them to chase round their uncatchable ships.
i fully realise what new sov is like.
for the record, i spent the whole duration of duality playtest on duality doing it, while your coalition leader led his players to play some zombie game, and the leadership actively discouraged players from participating. or at least that's what the few players from your coalition told us to explain their lack of numbers.
i find the existence of the systems without owners quite acceptable, as it means no one needs it. i also find the tactics of burning sov to the ground without capturing it a perfectly valid game play, as well as harassment of sov.
now i also noticed that you started to contradict yourself. on one hand you are saying that ceptors are attacking active sov, on another you are saying that they disappear as soon as defenders enter local. to me it means you aren't talking about active sov in the latter case.
Lucas Kell wrote:
And I suggested a method of preventing trollceptors without a killmail. That said, why when you opt to contest sov should you need to put NOTHING on the line? You're single handedly attacking an entire solar system, asking you to put your ship down as collateral is not really that much.
and i suggested a method of preventing trollceptors without killmail and without having to exclude them from sov warfare but you seem to be repeatedly ignoring that. putting your ship down as collateral isn't exactly nothing. you also put down your effort which can be wasted by any hostile simply appearing in local. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16523
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:44:12 -
[866] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Since that's what's generally occuring. They use an inty so they can run away when defenders show up. How about CCP make it so the entosis link explodes if you move away from the target while it's active, so you cost yourself the entosis link and a trip back to station each time you run away. There you go, no free killmail. they shouldn't however i think you and I have different definitions of 'active sov'. to me 'active sov' is the one where defenders don't have to make an effort to 'show up' during their vulnerability window. they are either already there, or moving through the system on the regular basis as part of their normal activities. now the length of the vulnerability window, the times it takes to RF something or to capture the nodes is something i think should be fine tuned based on player feedback. as well as what happens with the nodes no one bothered to cap/defend. but i strongly object to crippling ships further than they already are by the current entosis 'perks', just for the sake of rewarding defenders with guaranteed kill mail for showing up.
What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:49:29 -
[867] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?
i'm not going into this again, read me previous posts, you'll find an answer to your question there |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16523
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 08:59:47 -
[868] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:baltec1 wrote:
What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?
i'm not going into this again, read me previous posts, you'll find an answer to your question there
Unlikely.
The point of the sov shakeup was to make us all more active, kill the mega blobs and make the whole process more fun. Running around in ships built for avoiding fights while sporting the jesus laser is even less fun than grinding entire regions of abandoned structures.
Personally I would just disallow entosis links on anything smaller than a cruiser.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:05:45 -
[869] - Quote
And effectively remove any opposition to any sovholder with at least some level of power? Great idea.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16524
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:09:36 -
[870] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:And effectively remove any opposition to any sovholder with at least some level of power? Great idea.
Yep, nobody ever manages to get cruisers into dek to **** around with our stuff.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:13:49 -
[871] - Quote
Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
535
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:19:32 -
[872] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Since that's what's generally occuring. They use an inty so they can run away when defenders show up. How about CCP make it so the entosis link explodes if you move away from the target while it's active, so you cost yourself the entosis link and a trip back to station each time you run away. There you go, no free killmail. they shouldn't however i think you and I have different definitions of 'active sov'. to me 'active sov' is the one where defenders don't have to make an effort to 'show up' during their vulnerability window. they are either already there, or moving through the system on the regular basis as part of their normal activities. now the length of the vulnerability window, the times it takes to RF something or to capture the nodes is something i think should be fine tuned based on player feedback. as well as what happens with the nodes no one bothered to cap/defend. but i strongly object to crippling ships further than they already are by the current entosis 'perks', just for the sake of rewarding defenders with guaranteed kill mail for showing up. What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?
What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16524
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:22:21 -
[873] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere.
Given the number of ratters that die getting in and attacking things is no issue.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:27:31 -
[874] - Quote
Attacking a ratter and killing it is hardly comparable to sitting on a structure with no means of getting away if defenders appear.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16525
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:29:03 -
[875] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:
What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?
That's what is happening right now. We did say this would become cepters trolling sov and CCPs own data shows that people using cepters and other avoidance fitted ships are the norm.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage
RAZOR Alliance
602
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:29:50 -
[876] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere.
:|
If you're unable to mount an offence at any level above frigates maybe you shouldn't be trying to take sov.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16525
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:31:30 -
[877] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Attacking a ratter and killing it is hardly comparable to sitting on a structure with no means of getting away if defenders appear.
What makes you think attacking sov should not involve shooting the people defending their space or them being able to shoot you?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:37:18 -
[878] - Quote
I have not indicated such. While a ceptor can run away from unprepared or falsely prepared defenders, it has no means of warping away for a certain period of time and it can in fact be caught by other ceptors and some other ships. I have said that before. Attacking a ratter, on the other hand, gives the attacker total freedom of engagement and disengagement because they are not leashed to a structure.
Please do not try to turn around words into things I do not say. Much appreciated.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns
Triumvirate.
535
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:39:36 -
[879] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:
What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?
That's what is happening right now. We did say this would become cepters trolling sov and CCPs own data shows that people using cepters and other avoidance fitted ships are the norm.
Please have the decency to not call trolling "attacking" sov. You can not take a system with ceptor unless defenders allow it to happen. And now you see the point- its not the role of game mechanics to defend systems for you.
Not a single system worth **** has been taken so far without a fleet fight. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16526
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:45:39 -
[880] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:I have not indicated such. While a ceptor can run away from unprepared or falsely prepared defenders, it has no means of warping away for a certain period of time and it can in fact be caught by other ceptors and some other ships. I have said that before. Attacking a ratter, on the other hand, gives the attacker total freedom of engagement and disengagement because they are not leashed to a structure.
Please do not try to turn around words into things I do not say. Much appreciated.
Cepters fitted for speed will always outrun cepters fitted for combat. You are very much defending the use of uncatchable ships for attacking sov. Attackers having to fight to take sov is not a bad thing.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16526
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:49:38 -
[881] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:baltec1 wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:
What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?
That's what is happening right now. We did say this would become cepters trolling sov and CCPs own data shows that people using cepters and other avoidance fitted ships are the norm. Please have the decency to not call trolling "attacking" sov. You can not take a system with ceptor unless defenders allow it to happen. And now you see the point- its not the role of game mechanics to defend systems for you. Not a single system worth **** has been taken so far without a fleet fight.
The bulk of timers have been caused by avoidance fitted ships. That shows we have a problem.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage
RAZOR Alliance
602
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 09:50:09 -
[882] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:I have not indicated such. While a ceptor can run away from unprepared or falsely prepared defenders, it has no means of warping away for a certain period of time and it can in fact be caught by other ceptors and some other ships. I have said that before. Attacking a ratter, on the other hand, gives the attacker total freedom of engagement and disengagement because they are not leashed to a structure.
Please do not try to turn around words into things I do not say. Much appreciated.
I would still just use a naga and a combat prober to solve my problems there. Warp to 0, the further he runs the faster he dies.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Rhohan
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:09:10 -
[883] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:I have not indicated such. While a ceptor can run away from unprepared or falsely prepared defenders, it has no means of warping away for a certain period of time and it can in fact be caught by other ceptors and some other ships. I have said that before. Attacking a ratter, on the other hand, gives the attacker total freedom of engagement and disengagement because they are not leashed to a structure.
Please do not try to turn around words into things I do not say. Much appreciated. Cepters fitted for speed will always outrun cepters fitted for combat. You are very much defending the use of uncatchable ships for attacking sov. Attackers having to fight to take sov is not a bad thing.
Quote:Please show us on the Sov map where the entosis link touched you...
You are right, you should have to fight to take sov.
But one should also be able to easily disrupt sov.
Crying about a ceptor affecting sov is something I would expect from a no-body alliance, not Goonswarm.
Defending your space in the new Sov isn't hard if your system is actually occupied.
Though taking whole constellations for the hell of it and maintaining them absentee, of course is a lot harder.
As it should be to be honest. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6593
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:18:45 -
[884] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:They do not know if something is coming if there are people already in the systems. If neutrals to them need to come into the system and then do a long warp in the first place, it's no wonder that the ceptor pilot has a long advance warning time. As said, you are doing it wrong if this is a problem for you. As for the getting away part, while it can be bothersome, to me it is a won fight if their trolling was stopped before they can cause serious trouble. d-scan is a thing.
Most people hanging about in a system aren't hanging about in a PvP capable ship, since CCP are yet to make PvE and PvP content comparable. This means that upon a neut entering a system, a defender needs to go and change ship before warping to defend the points. They also have no idea which point (if any) the neutral is going to contest, thus the neut will generally get a headstart. Upon warping to the neut, the neut sees the approaching ship in d-scan and burns further away from the node (being at 25km already). If the neut knows even remotely what he's doing, the only ships capable of catching him will be so paper thin on tank they can be blapped on approach anyway. There's a video of a guy doing exactly this over and over.
Seriously, you have to be pretty bad to get caught.
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
6593
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:23:05 -
[885] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:now i also noticed that you started to contradict yourself. on one hand you are saying that ceptors are attacking active sov, on another you are saying that they disappear as soon as defenders enter local. to me it means you aren't talking about active sov in the latter case. Actually I said when they show up, as in on grid (or d-scan for those with any sense).
Warmeister wrote:and i suggested a method of preventing trollceptors without killmail and without having to exclude them from sov warfare but you seem to be repeatedly ignoring that. putting your ship down as collateral isn't exactly nothing. you also put down your effort which can be wasted by any hostile simply appearing in local. What method was that?
And no, putting your ship down as collateral isn't nothing. What they have no where nothing gets put down as collateral is in fact nothing. Sov should require some level of commitment to contest.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16526
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:23:49 -
[886] - Quote
Rhohan wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:I have not indicated such. While a ceptor can run away from unprepared or falsely prepared defenders, it has no means of warping away for a certain period of time and it can in fact be caught by other ceptors and some other ships. I have said that before. Attacking a ratter, on the other hand, gives the attacker total freedom of engagement and disengagement because they are not leashed to a structure.
Please do not try to turn around words into things I do not say. Much appreciated. Cepters fitted for speed will always outrun cepters fitted for combat. You are very much defending the use of uncatchable ships for attacking sov. Attackers having to fight to take sov is not a bad thing. Quote:Please show us on the Sov map where the entosis link touched you...
You are right, you should have to fight to take sov. But one should also be able to easily disrupt sov. Crying about a ceptor affecting sov is something I would expect from a no-body alliance, not Goonswarm. Defending your space in the new Sov isn't hard if your system is actually occupied. Though taking whole constellations for the hell of it and maintaining them absentee, of course is a lot harder. As it should be to be honest.
It's not that it's hard for us its that it's even more boring than grinding all of delves structures. Chasing around cepters all day gets boring very fast.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1850
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:25:36 -
[887] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:baltec1 wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:
What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?
That's what is happening right now. We did say this would become cepters trolling sov and CCPs own data shows that people using cepters and other avoidance fitted ships are the norm. Please have the decency to not call trolling "attacking" sov. You can not take a system with ceptor unless defenders allow it to happen. And now you see the point- its not the role of game mechanics to defend systems for you. Not a single system worth **** has been taken so far without a fleet fight. The bulk of timers have been caused by avoidance fitted ships. That shows we have a problem.
I suggest the problem is because no bugger turned up to contest the attack, yet somehow feel they still deserve the space. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6593
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:27:44 -
[888] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:And effectively remove any opposition to any sovholder with at least some level of power? Great idea. Lol? So you believe a cruiser is too much cost for taking part in an alliance level activity?
Rivr Luzade wrote:Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere. Firstly, there's loads of stuff in our space that isn't interceptors, get a clue.
Secondly, if we work to defend our borders 24/7, why shouldn't we be able to prevent people getting in without using wormholes or bridging to spies?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16527
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:34:58 -
[889] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:And effectively remove any opposition to any sovholder with at least some level of power? Great idea. Lol? So you believe a cruiser is too much cost for taking part in an alliance level activity? Rivr Luzade wrote:Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere. Firstly, there's loads of stuff in our space that isn't interceptors, get a clue. Secondly, if we work to defend our borders 24/7, why shouldn't we be able to prevent people getting in without using wormholes or bridging to spies?
Lets be honest, the only competent gate camps in our space are run by hostiles.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1850
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:35:12 -
[890] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Secondly, if we work to defend our borders 24/7, why shouldn't we be able to prevent people getting in without using wormholes or bridging to spies?
If you actually do that, not even trollceptors can get in.
Until they change the mass, which is annoying. |
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P
C C P Alliance
634
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 10:54:24 -
[891] - Quote
Kalenn Istarion wrote:A specific question which is not clear from the post: Does the reduced timer impact the initial ref timer as well, or only Command Nodes / services which are coming out of reinforcement?
If the shorter times apply to the initial ref period then this is an awful change. If they apply only after a structure has been reffed then it's a net positive.
The capture time of the command nodes is the only thing that is being shortened. The times to reinforce a Sovereignty structure remain the same.
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6593
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 11:01:24 -
[892] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Secondly, if we work to defend our borders 24/7, why shouldn't we be able to prevent people getting in without using wormholes or bridging to spies? If you actually do that, not even trollceptors can get in. Until they change the mass, which is annoying. There's only a couple of ships fits capable of stopping an interceptor passing through and you generally still have to have lightning reflexes, live in the UK and hope they aren't running WCS to bust the camp.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1850
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 11:03:30 -
[893] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Secondly, if we work to defend our borders 24/7, why shouldn't we be able to prevent people getting in without using wormholes or bridging to spies? If you actually do that, not even trollceptors can get in. Until they change the mass, which is annoying. There's only a couple of ships fits capable of stopping an interceptor passing through and you generally still have to have lightning reflexes, live in the UK and hope they aren't running WCS to bust the camp.
What self respecting fast locker only uses one point..... |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1803
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 11:11:52 -
[894] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:And effectively remove any opposition to any sovholder with at least some level of power? Great idea. Lol? So you believe a cruiser is too much cost for taking part in an alliance level activity? Rivr Luzade wrote:Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere. Firstly, there's loads of stuff in our space that isn't interceptors, get a clue. Secondly, if we work to defend our borders 24/7, why shouldn't we be able to prevent people getting in without using wormholes or bridging to spies?
I do not believe that a cruiser is too much to ask for a sov attack, but it is infeasible to use as a harassment tool. As stated by several parties before me, real sov assaults are usually undertaken by real fleets and not by a ceptor. Harassment, on the other hand, is a task that suits ceptors very well. Please do not confuse them.
Holding sov is more than holding and securing borders. All your space is always at stake and should be defended. IF you limit your defensive actions to borders (which you do not do, obviously), ceptors to get through your perimeters are a more than viable tool to make you remember that fact. If you had perfect border controls, a ceptor would not get through the gate camps. (Well, for now at least. With the removal of the mass penalty, this might change again.)
With regards to your other post: This is a thing now, after the changes, any ceptor and other ships I named can easily catch up with a running ceptor. There are also fittings proper ceptor fittings that are fast and not blap-able. You also still cling to the kill-it-mentality. You should really get someone to cut your claws so that you can let go of that. A fight and winning one is more than killing a ship. the sooner you realize that, the better for your perception and solution finding capabilities. Look at Caleb, he's got it right.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
471
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 11:35:05 -
[895] - Quote
Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium.
And yet here you all are moaning
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.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6594
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 12:29:32 -
[896] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:I do not believe that a cruiser is too much to ask for a sov attack, but it is infeasible to use as a harassment tool. As stated by several parties before me, real sov assaults are usually undertaken by real fleets and not by a ceptor. Harassment, on the other hand, is a task that suits ceptors very well. Please do not confuse them. Except it's only harassment because they do have the ability to contest sov solo. An interceptor has bubble immunity an high speed because it's designed to intercept, it's a tackle ship. You want it to be used for attacking sov for "harassment" because it's easy and safe, that's all this is.
Rivr Luzade wrote:With regards to your other post: This is a thing now, after the changes, any ceptor and other ships I named can easily catch up with a running ceptor. There are also fittings proper ceptor fittings that are fast and not blap-able. You also still cling to the kill-it-mentality. You should really get someone to cut your claws so that you can let go of that. A fight and winning one is more than killing a ship. the sooner you realize that, the better for your perception and solution finding capabilities. Look at Caleb, he's got it right. It's not just "kill-it", it's to do with people being able to contest sov, solo, with no risk. It's a dumb mechanics to leave open since all it;s going to do is mean that people who would normally be around generating conflict will instead just run around evading. Why are you so against conflict existing in nullsec?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Moneymake
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 12:29:36 -
[897] - Quote
Just wait and see what will happen to null sec when coalitions that have set more than 50% of null to blue, the likes of Imperium and friends. Come and get on to your sov with no investment what so ever. Not even bother to deploy capitals let alone super's.
This move by Fozzy sov & CCP, to make it easy for small alliances to harass sov actually empowers the big guys now more than ever. Let's see when Providence burns (Provi block has set 99% of null to red) and that content is gone in just one week or maybe less, to recover from it will take them two or three months. At times that the game is in need of content.
Interested to see how this sov will work for the small guy. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6594
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 12:32:55 -
[898] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium. And yet here you all are moaning Providing feedback and pointing out flaws which make designed game mechanics uninteresting isn't "moaning".
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
356
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 12:34:25 -
[899] - Quote
There this thing called 'probes' and with it I have no difficulties killing trollfrigs and ceptors even moving 8+ km/sec. It's not exactly hard to do. Points are not even necessary thanks to the fact that they cannot even warp off. It's almost funny.
Nothing wrong with trollceptors. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1850
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 12:38:37 -
[900] - Quote
Moneymake wrote:Let's see when Providence burns
I'll believe that when I see it, it was threatened before this even went live and.... *crickets*
And if it does, it'll sure as hell not be interceptors. |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6594
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 12:39:24 -
[901] - Quote
Moneymake wrote: Just wait and see what will happen to null sec when coalitions that have set more than 50% of null to blue, the likes of Imperium and friends. Come and get on to your sov with no investment what so ever. Not even bother to deploy capitals let alone super's.
This move by Fozzy sov & CCP, to make it easy for small alliances to harass sov actually empowers the big guys now more than ever. Let's see when Providence burns (Provi block has set 99% of null to red) and that content is gone in just one week or maybe less, to recover from it will take them two or three months. At times that the game is in need of content.
Interested to see how this sov will work for the small guy. Shhh, don't tell them that. It's still a secret.
Obviously, we are the big bad Imperium and we are only posting because we are rapidly losing our space, and not because of things like "entertainment" and "game balance". These changes totally make it easier for small alliances and don't all help us with mass destruction of people's space.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
143
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:00:36 -
[902] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:There this thing called 'probes' and with it I have no difficulties killing trollfrigs and ceptors even moving 8+ km/sec. It's not exactly hard to do. Points are not even necessary thanks to the fact that they cannot even warp off. It's almost funny.
Nothing wrong with trollceptors.
Ahahahahhahaaha....
Have you really ever tried probing, bro? |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16529
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:05:47 -
[903] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Moneymake wrote:Let's see when Providence burns I'll believe that when I see it, it was threatened before this even went live and.... *crickets* And if it does, it'll sure as hell not be interceptors.
Well, not after the patch lands at least.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
88
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:11:30 -
[904] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium. And yet here you all are moaning
No, it is only 4 or so of us. It's not like we are burning Jita or something along those lines in protest.
We are simply highlighting a flaw in the Entosis Linking system (interceptors) that can be exploited. Other than MOA picking at systems in pure blind, no one has really utilized this, yet. I want people to think ahead into the future. One 300 man gang, all interceptors, deployed to every system in a single region. It is impossible to react to all of those in an effective manner. If you manage to scare some off, they can come right back and do it again because they escaped. Now imagine this consistently happening over a week's period, sounds like fun stuff right? No.
Stop grr gooning and think logically about the situation. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1850
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:17:06 -
[905] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium. And yet here you all are moaning No, it is only 4 or so of us. It's not like we are burning Jita or something along those lines in protest. We are simply highlighting a flaw in the Entosis Linking system (interceptors) that can be exploited. Other than MOA picking at systems in pure blind, no one has really utilized this, yet. I want people to think ahead into the future. One 300 man gang, all interceptors, deployed to every system in a single region. It is impossible to react to all of those in an effective manner. If you manage to scare some off, they can come right back and do it again because they escaped. Now imagine this consistently happening over a week's period, sounds like fun stuff right? No. Stop grr gooning and think logically about the situation.
Indeed, I don't think we're quite there yet, but the situation is far from dire and going in the right direction. I think a very slightly lower speed cap and a return of (or better still, increase to) the mass penalty will be about perfect. I'd also not be opposed to a doubling of fuel costs.
All we need is a happy medium where it's not too awkward to catch people, but not too easy to mount an essentially passive defence either. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1805
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:23:45 -
[906] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Why are you so against conflict existing in nullsec? Same question back: Why are you evading conflict in Null sec by hiding under the most powerful entity in the game, stifling conflict in an entire sector of Null sec? Your complaints about risk-aversion are entirely hypocritical as long as you are a member of the CFC. However, if you were not a member of CFC, you would not be able to exist. I would now say that you should stop your own risk-averse behavior before you demand it from others, but as this is a sandbox you are free to do what you want to do. However, claiming other people are risk-averse and dodge conflict from a person in CFC is absolutely hilarious to read. I am not against conflict in Null sec, I live in an area with near constant action and sov threats. I have more than enough conflict in my local area. You on the other hand have pacified an entire sector in Null sec, complain about meaning less "trolls" of ceptors to your space and need to go to Providence under the guise of RP or other far away areas of space to find activity.
Please tell me again how disallowing ceptors is not creating conflict in Null sec, how cruisers would be so much better (considering your "impenetrable border controls", I am very interested in hearing that) and how you contribute anything to the "conflict in Null sec" in your area?
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2127
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:23:57 -
[907] - Quote
So last night I went on a fleet and didn't really see any troll ceptor. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to think of that 8,5k nomen tho... |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
143
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:24:20 -
[908] - Quote
The purpose of this change, as with Phobe and others, was to press sort of a reset button with Eve.
CCP intends to bring chaos to new Eden. The extremely low barrier to entry to sov and disproportionately more manpower required to nullify sovwanding is clearly an indication of CCP's intention to bring asymmetric pain down on sov holders.
The trick with these things is no one knows what kind of order will emerge after all the old structures of organization have been burnt down. It's made doubly complicated by the fact that people are getting tired with sovtrolling already.
Also, remember that to burn things down, you have to have someone to build things up. If the CFC can actually manage to wipe Provi indexes and ihubs in 3 days and destroy 100 days and 500B in effort, imagine what message that will send to anyone else wanting to build their little empire.
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1805
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:28:20 -
[909] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:So last night I went on a fleet and didn't really see any troll ceptor. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to think of that 8,5k nomen tho...
It's fine. It's a cruiser. A cruiser going 4k m-¦ (soon after the hard cap change) is totally better than a ceptor because it can apprehended by a little gate camp. (please observe the semi-sarcastic tone.)
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1110
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:28:58 -
[910] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:I'm still bitter about siegefleet. As a member of many a siegefleet, it was ******* horrible.
How can you be bitter about siegefleet? Siege & Sing w/Suas was where we first got to hear Boat's Oddity... live and unplugged, even! |
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1851
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:35:18 -
[911] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:If the CFC can actually manage to wipe Provi indexes and ihubs in 3 days and destroy 100 days and 500B in effort, imagine what message that will send to anyone else wanting to build their little empire.
Again, I think you're massively underestimating how stacked the deck is to the defender with their kinds of indexes.
If you manage it, it'll require a fleet in such numbers that the same result would have happened in the old system only more emphatically.
In short, if you're doing this, you're bringing all the guns and the whole 9 yards. Which....doesn't really prove much tbh. Except maybe that defended sov won't fall to trolls. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16532
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:42:06 -
[912] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:So last night I went on a fleet and didn't really see any troll ceptor. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to think of that 8,5k nomen tho...
Head to where MOA are sniffing around but don't expect a fight, their cepter fleet ran from my roaming dreadnought.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
144
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:44:30 -
[913] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Again, I think you're massively underestimating how stacked the deck is to the defender with their kinds of indexes.
If you manage it, it'll require a fleet in such numbers that the same result would have happened in the old system only more emphatically.
I'm assuming you mean, the deck is stacked in favor of the defender. How so? Please explain.
Regarding the second point, it depends on if they truly do it with cruiser hulls or below, or have to end up getting the heavy weights like dreads and BSes. And also the speed. I guess we'll know within 2 weeks, either way.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1110
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:44:47 -
[914] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lets be honest, the only competent gate camps in our space are run by hostiles.
Or Boat's inty-killing Levi.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1851
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:52:16 -
[915] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:afkalt wrote:Again, I think you're massively underestimating how stacked the deck is to the defender with their kinds of indexes.
If you manage it, it'll require a fleet in such numbers that the same result would have happened in the old system only more emphatically. I'm assuming you mean, the deck is stacked in favor of the defender. How so? Please explain. Regarding the second point, it depends on if they truly do it with cruiser hulls or below, or have to end up getting the heavy weights like dreads and BSes. And also the speed. I guess we'll know within 2 weeks, either way.
Let's assume the patch has hit (either way, the multiples are the same).
Let's assume you get to the node event, it is a race to capture them. Provi will take a node in 4 minutes, attackers will take 24 minutes. You're in a race with people tagging objectives SIX times faster than you.
Unless you significantly outnumber people and/or actively fight and control each and every grid, they're going to cap so much faster you'll be ice skating uphill trying to keep up.
That's assuming you even get to the command node event - which I'm not sure will be that easy as trolls can (and will be) chased off quickly and they can leave you there for 20 minutes pissing away time and stront, rock up and punt you off the structure and reset it in 4 minutes.
My money is on the heavy ships after a few days of inconsequential prodding. Hell I'd not be surprised to find the invasion cancelled for $REASON after a period.
I could well be wrong and am genuinely intrigued - it'll be an excellent "test" of the system with real things at stake and a good sov owner on the defensive (by good, I mean high indexes). Can't wait, will be fascinating. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16532
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:53:20 -
[916] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lets be honest, the only competent gate camps in our space are run by hostiles. Or Boat's inty-killing Levi.
When I told him about my theory on a roaming titan I didn't expect him to try it.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1110
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 13:55:59 -
[917] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:No, it is only 4 or so of us. It's not like we are burning Jita or something along those lines in protest.
Shockingly, it's more or less the exact same people who were saying 'yeah, trollceptors will be a thing' before the Entosis came out, and got told 'no no, of course they won't! look at everything we've done to prevent them'.
To which, of course, we responded with 'they'll ping the node, forcing form-ups, then run off to the next one', which, again, we were assured couldn't possibly be a thing.
So, you know, lemme know when our critics start having any track record of being right about anything.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6599
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:00:17 -
[918] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Why are you so against conflict existing in nullsec? Same question back: Why are you evading conflict in Null sec by hiding under the most powerful entity in the game, stifling conflict in an entire sector of Null sec? I'm not hiding, I'm simply a member of a decently sized group that works together, that's all. It's not my fault that you have some form of discrimination about people who work together to win EVE.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Your complaints about risk-aversion are entirely hypocritical as long as you are a member of the CFC. It's not about risk aversion, it's lack of commitment. I commit a hell of a lot more to nullsec than an interceptor. Also, you are confusing risk aversion (avoiding risk even at cost of efficiency) and risk mitigation (minimizing risk while maintaining efficiency). Interceptors clearly aren't the best choice to attack sov, but the people using them won't put anything more on the line because they are cowards.
Rivr Luzade wrote:However, if you were not a member of CFC, you would not be able to exist. Really? I've been playing EVE for over 10 years and I've been an Imperium member for 2 and a half, so clearly you're wrong.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Please tell me again how disallowing ceptors is not creating conflict in Null sec, how cruisers would be so much better (considering your "impenetrable border controls", I am very interested in hearing that) and how you contribute anything to the "conflict in Null sec" in your area? We don't have impenetrable border controls, sine we aren't under threat of being conquered regardless of who brings what into our space. Whatever way it goes, we're safe from people attacking us. The point with interceptors is that nobody can really stop them getting through, so they are the most optimal choice for most people looking to attack an enemy without committing too much.
Having cruisers (or battlecruisers more realistically) would mean that to contest sov you'd have to consider the choice. Will they defend? If they do defend do we have a force to fight them? If all else fails do we have a backup and/or evac plan? With interceptors that's all out the window. You can go fire at nearly any timer and the worse that happens is you lose an interceptor if you fall asleep. In the meantime there's hundreds of timers being created for people to have to deal with, meaning that they can't also go out seeking conflict as they have "work" to do, in a game. If commitment were required, harassment would still be possible but would require you to risk a bit to do it, but importantly most of the sov contests would be real attempts at fighting over sov.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1805
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:02:49 -
[919] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:When I told him about my theory on a roaming titan I didn't expect him to try it. How can you not expect him to actually try this? From what I have heard about him, he is kind of the nuts guy that does everything a little bit different. It's also not like anything could really happen to him. He has not left your space, you can react quickly in the unlikely event of PL, BL or any other power to get wind about it, and it is just for the lols, right?
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1805
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:14:28 -
[920] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Having cruisers (or battlecruisers more realistically) would mean that to contest sov you'd have to consider the choice. Will they defend? If they do defend do we have a force to fight them? If all else fails do we have a backup and/or evac plan? With interceptors that's all out the window. You can go fire at nearly any timer and the worse that happens is you lose an interceptor if you fall asleep. In the meantime there's hundreds of timers being created for people to have to deal with, meaning that they can't also go out seeking conflict as they have "work" to do, in a game. If commitment were required, harassment would still be possible but would require you to risk a bit to do it, but importantly most of the sov contests would be real attempts at fighting over sov.
*sigh* You as in your alliance, or any other alliance besides CONDI in CFC. You as in your person, your character has no significance to me in this context. Thank, though, for confirming that point.
There would not be such questions, because the answer to them at least in an attack plan against your sov is clear: Yes, attacks are futile. No, we do not have the backup of thousands of people. No backup plan necessary as no first action plan is necessary. I do not understand how something will create more fights if there is no initial trigger to begin with.
Ceptors cannot create any timer if driven off right away. Unless they are brought in such ridiculous numbers as previously hinted. Then, as stated, it does not matter if it's cruisrs, ceptors or BS. The sheer numbers overwhelm the defender. Period. Harassment does not require commitment, that is why it is harassment and not a serious attempt to take over the sov. As stated before by many people, ceptors do not take over sov, it is fleets that takes over sov and they already commit. Only if defenders allow ceptors to run nodes, they are able to do that. And believe me, I have been in many situations where I had to waste loads of time trying to link a node with my ceptor only to get a visit from a Cerb or Orthrus right after I started my warm-up. Another wasted 5 minutes, and I slowly but steadily ran out out Stront and the way back to my Stront Depot was blocked by an insta locking gate camp,which would have fried my ceptor. I thus absolutely not see any problem with ceptors, unless brought in huge numbers and then the above applies and nullifies anything else in the first place.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
|
|
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
We are not bad. Just unlucky
The Bastion
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:14:59 -
[921] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
It's not that it's hard for us its that it's even more boring than grinding all of delves structures. Chasing around cepters all day gets boring very fast.
I agree. We should not be chasing ceptors and they will get bored real quick.
1. Drop all sovereignty you don't live in, and by living I mean being in the system.
2. Scare anyone who appears in your system. Logging an alt will suffice in most cases. Ignore all other ceptors.
3. Use force projection to avoid anybody to live in any system that you consider your area of influence, independently of infrastructure deployed.
Your system count will fall, but your effective area of influence in Verite maps will continue to be as large as you want.
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:15:15 -
[922] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Let's assume you get to the node event, it is a race to capture them. Provi will take a node in 4 minutes, attackers will take 24 minutes. You're in a race with people tagging objectives SIX times faster than you.
Speaking hypothetically regarding a node event and an attacking force consisting of 300 troll ceptors (as I stated a few comments back):
That gang just Entosis'd every system in a region, and let's say they had a ~50% success rate. Now the nodes pop up - the defenders can only focus on so many nodes at one time. The attackers send one troll ceptor to each node for each system. Can you see where I am going with this? I do not feel like having to type out every cause/effect that would result. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1851
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:23:49 -
[923] - Quote
But then it is a case of sheer numbers winning the day, which doesn't really do much with regard to the mechanic itself or the hulls involved.
It'll be interesting either way.
e: I wager should you have bothered, you could have steamrollered provi in dominion sov a hell of a lot faster than you'll ever manage in Aegis. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1805
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:28:27 -
[924] - Quote
Back then they despised Role-Playing. Thus, there was no reason to attempt it.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:30:08 -
[925] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
e: I wager should you have bothered, you could have steamrollered provi in dominion sov a hell of a lot faster than you'll ever manage in Aegis.
No. Taking sov in dominion requires immense mobilization, large numbers and dps, grinding that lasts for days etc. With this new system it is completely feasible to fit out a gang of interceptors, fly from one side of the galazy to the other in an hours time (or less), RF everything, and be home in time for dinner. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1113
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:31:16 -
[926] - Quote
afkalt wrote:e: I wager should you have bothered, you could have steamrollered provi in dominion sov a hell of a lot faster than you'll ever manage in Aegis.
Not possible. Simply not enough hours in the day to grind that many structures under Dominion in under 2 weeks. Remember, when PL/NCdot went on their massive 24-hr reconquista in the middle the of the Fountain war, that was due to sov drops. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1851
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 14:39:35 -
[927] - Quote
Well, I'm not adverse to admitting I was wrong.
You have to admit, no matter what happens it's going to be very interesting. |
Kouklichka
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 15:06:10 -
[928] - Quote
afkalt wrote:But then it is a case of sheer numbers winning the day, which doesn't really do much with regard to the mechanic itself or the hulls involved.
It'll be interesting either way.
e: I wager should you have bothered, you could have steamrollered provi in dominion sov a hell of a lot faster than you'll ever manage in Aegis.
How can you say that? in Dominion you had to bring capitals to grind the structures now all you need is interceptors and blockade the system from anything that will try to tackle them. The level of commitment in harassing the sov is way lower now, damaging the system index and hub upgrades that cost in the 45 bil isk and countless hours of manpower invested. Guess what they want kill-mails for doing the hub damage, soon there will be alliances doing just that. It won't be a game for Sov but just let's go make there life miserable and get those kill-mails. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6599
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 15:09:36 -
[929] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:*sigh* You as in your alliance, or any other alliance besides CONDI in CFC. You as in your person, your character has no significance to me in this context. Thank, though, for confirming that point. Of course we would, stop being ridiculous. It's these types of comments that make you "grr goons" types such a laughing stock.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Ceptors cannot create any timer if driven off right away. Unless they are brought in such ridiculous numbers as previously hinted. Then, as stated, it does not matter if it's cruisrs, ceptors or BS. Of course it matters, because the game is supposed to be entertaining for both sides. That's the #1 goal of sov. It's not currently because most of the players engaging in the mechanics are harassers because it's the absolute best choice. It's easy, low risk and difficult to prevent. That's why you like it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
2127
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 15:10:27 -
[930] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:afkalt wrote:e: I wager should you have bothered, you could have steamrollered provi in dominion sov a hell of a lot faster than you'll ever manage in Aegis. Not possible. Simply not enough hours in the day to grind that many structures under Dominion in under 2 weeks. Remember, when PL/NCdot went on their massive 24-hr reconquista in the middle the of the Fountain war, that was due to sov drops. edit to add: Also remember, under Dominion, to pop the TCU would require killing the ihub and flipping the station. So a minimum of 4-5 days.
And god know there is a shitload of stations in Provi. |
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1805
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 15:18:21 -
[931] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:*sigh* You as in your alliance, or any other alliance besides CONDI in CFC. You as in your person, your character has no significance to me in this context. Thank, though, for confirming that point. Of course we would, stop being ridiculous. It's these types of comments that make you "grr goons" types such a laughing stock. Rivr Luzade wrote:Ceptors cannot create any timer if driven off right away. Unless they are brought in such ridiculous numbers as previously hinted. Then, as stated, it does not matter if it's cruisrs, ceptors or BS. Of course it matters, because the game is supposed to be entertaining for both sides. That's the #1 goal of sov. It's not currently because most of the players engaging in the mechanics are harassers because it's the absolute best choice. It's easy, low risk and difficult to prevent. That's why you like it.
I'd love to see that happening. FA proved beyond doubt that I am right in my assertion, and SMA is not better than FA.
Please do not forget that I am also part of a sov holding alliance. So far, I have been able to deal with the ceptors that came to our space. Most of them, however, were accompanied by a proper fleet.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6599
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 16:11:06 -
[932] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:I'd love to see that happening. FA proved beyond doubt that I am right in my assertion, and SMA is not better than FA. The problem there is that FA collapsed within the Imperium. They didn't leave, find out they couldn't run an alliance then implode. Would it be tougher to survive outside the Imperium? Sure, that's why we're part of the group, because it's mutual beneficial. Does it mean we couldn't hold our own? Certainly not.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Please do not forget that I am also part of a sov holding alliance. So far, I have been able to deal with the ceptors that came to our space. Most of them, however, were accompanied by a proper fleet. Which is great, and how it should be. Now imagine you're only dealing with individual ceptors, chasing them off multiple times a day. Not so fun. Harassment should be possible but not preferebale to invasion.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16532
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 16:15:12 -
[933] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
I'd love to see that happening. FA proved beyond doubt that I am right in my assertion, and SMA is not better than FA.
Please do not forget that I am also part of a sov holding alliance. So far, I have been able to deal with the ceptors that came to our space. Most of them, however, were accompanied by a proper fleet.
Nobody has used them on a war footing yet.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 17:12:51 -
[934] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Please do not forget that I am also part of a sov holding alliance. So far, I have been able to deal with the ceptors that came to our space. Most of them, however, were accompanied by a proper fleet.
I guess we should fit a bunch of ishtars with Entosis links then yeah? |
Nou Mene
Out of Focus
Odin's Call
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 17:27:56 -
[935] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:
ill say it again make fozziesov a mesh between structure and elink grind.
make it so you use the elink to reinforce the 1st time then you have to use elinks for the 1st capture event.
this then would cause the second reinforce which would then disable the shields and allow the structure to be shoot at.
so now you can put your capitals to work and attack the structure...
but even though the structure is vulnerable you can also choose to capture the annoms spread throughout the consultation.
So no you have a b-r type situation where you have your capital fight over the structure and then a bunch of sub cap fights over the capture annoms.
This!, why it has to be only one way to fight... i never really understood why the ehp grind had to disappear. Keep both systems. Iterate on making them compatible.. |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 18:03:10 -
[936] - Quote
Servers can't handle the load of big fights, coalitions and large mega battles are being designed away from, the sooner you realize that the happier you will be. It's futile to argue for mechanics that result in massive escalations. Step 1 was limiting travel and increasing the size of space (i.e. stick), Step 2 was designing a sov mechanic that both reigned in the ability to create massive buffers on empty space and does not necessarily escalate to a massive 4k brawl of server death, hence the node spawning and spreading the battlefield (i.e. another stick), Step 3 will be to incentivize living in systems and constellation while both being able to fortify and prosper as independent and strong smaller groups (i.e. carrot), Step 4+ ...hopefully more carrots.
Everybody is focusing on the damned sticks, maybe you should look ahead and start deciding what kind of carrots you would like, because that's what's coming, and where we should be focusing the attention of the devs.
Technology is what it is right now, as you start hearing your inner "good'ol day" voice starting to pipe up, you need to read through the old tidi threads as primers, and realize CCP simply never could figure out a solution to the technology problem, and instead walked a different way. That is why we are here...everything else is a distraction, and only serves to ****** development of the carrots we actually could use. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1839
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 18:14:26 -
[937] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Querns wrote:I will however admit publicly to a great deal of amusement in the fact that Aegis failed to "kill" or even "moderately annoy" the Imperium. And yet here you all are moaning
I can think current interceptor gameplay is out of band and still not be greatly affected by them, as an organization.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 18:14:51 -
[938] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote: rabble rabble
You are missing the point of what people are highlighting as the issue. The issue is not FozzieSov itsself, with some tweaks and fine tuning the system can work great. What the problem is, and stated countless times previously, the ability to harass/troll sovereignty with no risk/punishment mechanism. |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 18:27:37 -
[939] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Harry Saq wrote: accurate assessment You are missing the point of what people are highlighting as the issue. The issue is not FozzieSov itsself, with some tweaks and fine tuning the system can work great. What the problem is, and stated countless times previously, the ability to harass/troll sovereignty with no risk/punishment mechanism.
The point is, it's all about server lag, spreading people out, and still managing to make it worthwhile and fun. The harassment argument is based on a false premise of large holdings, which begs still more sticks, maybe still smaller and smaller, but sticks they will be. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 18:35:24 -
[940] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Harry Saq wrote: rabble rabble You are missing the point of what people are highlighting as the issue. The issue is not FozzieSov itsself, with some tweaks and fine tuning the system can work great. What the problem is, and stated countless times previously, the ability to harass/troll sovereignty with no risk/punishment mechanism. The point is, it's all about server lag, spreading people out, and still managing to make it worthwhile and fun. The harassment argument is based on a false premise of large holdings, which begs still more sticks, maybe still smaller and smaller, but sticks they will be.
What false premise? What 'sticks' and what are sticks? Where in this thread are we talking about "We want more lag fests!" ? |
|
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 19:47:24 -
[941] - Quote
sticks are obviously magiclaser trollships
Smaller and smaller... but we're already down to interceptors...
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Koebmand
Silverflames
45
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 00:49:09 -
[942] - Quote
Enthosis Link making it impossible to logi the ship seems counter productive, why remove the benefit for the attacker that bringing more ships gives? Chasing an interceptor around for 4 hours isn't as fun as blowing up a small fleet.
If the problem is server load and not about fun, making everyone quit the game sure will fix it.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 01:41:47 -
[943] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Let's assume you get to the node event, it is a race to capture them. Provi will take a node in 4 minutes, attackers will take 24 minutes. You're in a race with people tagging objectives SIX times faster than you.
Speaking hypothetically regarding a node event and an attacking force consisting of 300 troll ceptors (as I stated a few comments back): That gang just Entosis'd every system in a region, and let's say they had a ~50% success rate. Now the nodes pop up - the defenders can only focus on so many nodes at one time. The attackers send one troll ceptor to each node for each system. Can you see where I am going with this? I do not feel like having to type out every cause/effect that would result.
Because it is too hard to respond with a single Kitsune per system. Now it doesn't matter if they have 300 trollceptors. You just have to break more locks per entosis cycle than they have trollceptors. One Kitsune can easily serve ECM dish to 10+ trollceptors without trying.
Takes gewns to keep crying about it though, because getting one Kitsune per system is apparently too much to ask from a 40k accounts coalition.
CCP stay strong and roll back the 4k limit. Trollceptors are only a problem for people who bit more than they can chew, don't enable them. Any system occupied with a non-bot capable of undocking... hell, even Procurer can deal with Trollceptor, so basically anything goes - is immune to trollceptor. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
144
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 02:35:24 -
[944] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Because it is too hard to respond with a single Kitsune per system.
Superb solution to some problem, I'm sure, but not the one discussed in this thread.
Feel free to take it to a thread it belongs to though.
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 04:20:11 -
[945] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Let's assume you get to the node event, it is a race to capture them. Provi will take a node in 4 minutes, attackers will take 24 minutes. You're in a race with people tagging objectives SIX times faster than you.
Speaking hypothetically regarding a node event and an attacking force consisting of 300 troll ceptors (as I stated a few comments back): That gang just Entosis'd every system in a region, and let's say they had a ~50% success rate. Now the nodes pop up - the defenders can only focus on so many nodes at one time. The attackers send one troll ceptor to each node for each system. Can you see where I am going with this? I do not feel like having to type out every cause/effect that would result. Because it is too hard to respond with a single Kitsune per system. Now it doesn't matter if they have 300 trollceptors. You just have to break more locks per entosis cycle than they have trollceptors. One Kitsune can easily serve ECM dish to 10+ trollceptors without trying. Takes gewns to keep crying about it though, because getting one Kitsune per system is apparently too much to ask from a 40k accounts coalition. CCP stay strong and roll back the 4k limit. Trollceptors are only a problem for people who bit more than they can chew, don't enable them. Any system occupied with a non-bot capable of undocking... hell, even Procurer can deal with Trollceptor, so basically anything goes - is immune to trollceptor.
Ok so you somehow manage to get an 'x' amount of players to fit out and fly Kitsunes, great first leap. So you manage to get said Kitsunes to attacked system, great second step. Now you jam out one interceptor... what happens next? You break the lock and move to the next one? Once you move to the next one the previous interceptor has started his Entosis back up. How long is this going to last, ping ponging back and forth between attackers? Answer: Not long before a couple decide to gang up and remove you from the equation. Also, there are some mid slots on those interceptors that probably wouldn't be bad for fitting ECCM.
Back to the drawing board, sir. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 05:22:48 -
[946] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:afkalt wrote:
Let's assume you get to the node event, it is a race to capture them. Provi will take a node in 4 minutes, attackers will take 24 minutes. You're in a race with people tagging objectives SIX times faster than you.
Speaking hypothetically regarding a node event and an attacking force consisting of 300 troll ceptors (as I stated a few comments back): That gang just Entosis'd every system in a region, and let's say they had a ~50% success rate. Now the nodes pop up - the defenders can only focus on so many nodes at one time. The attackers send one troll ceptor to each node for each system. Can you see where I am going with this? I do not feel like having to type out every cause/effect that would result. Because it is too hard to respond with a single Kitsune per system. Now it doesn't matter if they have 300 trollceptors. You just have to break more locks per entosis cycle than they have trollceptors. One Kitsune can easily serve ECM dish to 10+ trollceptors without trying. Takes gewns to keep crying about it though, because getting one Kitsune per system is apparently too much to ask from a 40k accounts coalition. CCP stay strong and roll back the 4k limit. Trollceptors are only a problem for people who bit more than they can chew, don't enable them. Any system occupied with a non-bot capable of undocking... hell, even Procurer can deal with Trollceptor, so basically anything goes - is immune to trollceptor. Ok so you somehow manage to get an 'x' amount of players to fit out and fly Kitsunes, great first leap. So you manage to get said Kitsunes to attacked system, great second step. Now you jam out one interceptor... what happens next? You break the lock and move to the next one? Once you move to the next one the previous interceptor has started his Entosis back up. How long is this going to last, ping ponging back and forth between attackers? Answer: Not long before a couple decide to gang up and remove you from the equation. Also, there are some mid slots on those interceptors that probably wouldn't be bad for fitting ECCM. Back to the drawing board, sir.
Not before I fill your knowledge gaps.
First of all, no restart until cycle completes. After that, warmup cycle. Care to calculate the time it takes for them to go back to making entosis progress, or should help out as well?
If those systems are occupied (at least people living in the same constellation), 'x' amount of players are already there. Give them Kitsunes ffs, they aren't marauders.
How long this is going to last? Until your vulnerability window ends, until trollceptors get tired of you coming and breaking their lock every 5 minutes (effectively stopping any entosis progress) per ceptor, but normally it'll be over once you bring your own entosis and deal with that node. But even without that, as long as they cannot make entosis progress, you are immune.
And the biggest surprise of the whole scheme - if they come to gank you, TACKLE THEM and blow them with a battle badger. Them coming for you is exactly what you want. You don't need a rainbow fit for that Kitsune since you sit in the damn system and know what you're dealing with, and surely there's a refit available somewhere in the constellation (if not, drop the damn sov, you don't deserve to own a constellation you can't even refit in).
ECCM might pose a problem, but not a fatal one - 80 points is their best defense and you would usually mount 2x12 racial jammers, giving you 50% chance to jam a full mid rack of ECCM (-1 slot for mwd counted in) in 3 cycles. But in case they have a full rack (with mwd naturally) they have no means to tackle you, and if there's a specialized tackler, you run a better chance jamming and tackling him while you wait for that battle badger to drop by. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 07:09:47 -
[947] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote: I am super smart at spaceships
Because everyone has caldari frigate lvl 5 + electronic attack frigate + ewar skills right?
No. |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 07:15:49 -
[948] - Quote
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 |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1808
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 07:50:50 -
[949] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: I am super smart at spaceships Because everyone has caldari frigate lvl 5 + electronic attack frigate + ewar skills right? No.
A Griffin is more than sufficient and ECM Skills are quickly trained. Besides, these days the focus of many newbie friendly groups lies within making them fly Ewar ships. such as Griffins. Just looking at BRAVE, their numbers must go in the thousands overall by now.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16534
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 07:53:20 -
[950] - Quote
Kystraz wrote: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
Turns out Orca Platypus thinks playing whackamole with ECM frigates is going to be fun.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1808
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:00:37 -
[951] - Quote
As if fighting hundreds of people under Tidi in one system was much more fun. How were the general reaction during and after every big fight? #soulcrushingtidi, wasn't it?
Besides, if you really despise ceptors so much, bring proper fleets in the first place and resist the temptation of easy gameplay just because it is possible. Your lot constantly preaches to haulers and miners in High sec that they should put more effort into their tasks, yet you refuse to put more effort into your tasks just because easier ways are available. Set an example. Show how much more fun it can be with fleets. This won't remove troll ceptors for people who have nothing better to do, but encourages others on the lookout for interesting fights to actually provide the basis for them. But it is the effort that you cannot stand, isn't it?
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16534
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:01:14 -
[952] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: I am super smart at spaceships Because everyone has caldari frigate lvl 5 + electronic attack frigate + ewar skills right? No. A Griffin is more than sufficient and ECM Skills are quickly trained. Besides, these days the focus of many newbie friendly groups lies within making them fly Ewar ships. such as Griffins. Just looking at BRAVE, their numbers must go in the thousands overall by now.
As support ships, tossing them out as solo warriors against things like crusaders is only going to result in a lot of dead griffons.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16534
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:06:23 -
[953] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:As if fighting hundreds of people under Tidi in one system was much more fun. How were the general reaction during and after every big fight? #soulcrushingtidi, wasn't it?
Even a 20 hour slugfest under the worst tidi is better than dealing with uncatchable interceptor swarms with only ECM. Grinding away entire regions of structures for a month is better than chasing stuff you cant catch.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Besides, if you really despise ceptors so much, bring proper fleets in the first place and resist the temptation of easy gameplay just because it is possible. Your lot constantly preaches to haulers and miners in High sec that they should put more effort into their tasks, yet you refuse to put more effort into your tasks just because easier ways are available. Set an example. Show how much more fun it can be with fleets. This won't remove troll ceptors for people who have nothing better to do, but encourages others on the lookout for interesting fights to actually provide the basis for them. But it is the effort that you cannot stand, isn't it?
Why would anyone choose not to use the best tactic/ship?
That argument was used to defend every game imbalance including tracking titans. It was a ******** argument then and its ******** now.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1808
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:15:15 -
[954] - Quote
People who complain about it all the time. It is not like there are not other ways available, but they are not as convenient. And convenience is all that matters these day. Sickens me.
However, as said, in EVE, it's either the way of the least resistance (until its abuse forces the removal of it) or the extreme exhaustion of any mechanic (until it's nerfed so much that it's not viable anymore and nearly completely removed). This won't change even if Ceptors were removed from the equation. Next will be cruisers that blap ceptors and other tackle of the field and zoom around at 4k, uncatchable and unbeatable. What then? Gate camps? They just burn back to the gate and do it elsewhere.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16535
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:18:25 -
[955] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:People who complain about it all the time. It is not like there are not other ways available, but they are not as convenient. And convenience is all that matters these day. The limited mindset of people like you sickens me.
However, as said, in EVE, it's either the way of the least resistance (until its abuse forces the removal of it) or the extreme exhaustion of any mechanic (until it's nerfed so much that it's not viable anymore and nearly completely removed). This won't change even if Ceptors were removed from the equation. Next will be cruisers that blap ceptors and other tackle of the field and zoom around at 4k, uncatchable and unbeatable. What then? Gate camps? They just burn back to the gate and do it elsewhere.
Have you ever put together one of these super fast cruisers?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:23:28 -
[956] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:As if fighting hundreds of people under Tidi in one system was much more fun. How were the general reaction during and after every big fight? #soulcrushingtidi, wasn't it?
Why are the only two options solo interceptors v. griffins and 2000 people in massive tidi? |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1808
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:25:10 -
[957] - Quote
No, because I have not yet been contested in a way that would require it. It was either no contest at all (so ceptors to quickly get the job done were sufficient) or so much opposition that no linking was possible in the first place (as described before).
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16535
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:29:50 -
[958] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:No, because I have not yet been contested in a way that would require it. It was either no contest at all (so ceptors to quickly get the job done were sufficient) or so much opposition that no linking was possible in the first place (as described before). Besides, I do not complain about the ceptors. I do not see me in need of setting an example. Kystraz wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:As if fighting hundreds of people under Tidi in one system was much more fun. How were the general reaction during and after every big fight? #soulcrushingtidi, wasn't it? Why are the only two options solo interceptors v. griffins and 2000 people in massive tidi? They are not. As described by many people on previous pages. You should read them before you comment.
So you have no idea of the downsides of slapping a 500mn mwd on a cruiser is then.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 08:56:45 -
[959] - Quote
I guess fighting over a star system against 500mn cruisers and interceptors is supposed to be enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved. |
Kieron VonDeux
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 09:09:24 -
[960] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:As if fighting hundreds of people under Tidi in one system was much more fun. How were the general reaction during and after every big fight? #soulcrushingtidi, wasn't it? Why are the only two options solo interceptors v. griffins and 2000 people in massive tidi?
Just remember the point is to try and change a game mechanic, not to actually formulate tactics to counter their new threats.
The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals.
The new Sov favors those who actually occupy their systems and it allows these small groups to run circles around them. It appears they would rather try to force a game mechanic change than adapting the way they fight and live in their claimed systems.
|
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16535
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 09:20:46 -
[961] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:Kystraz wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:As if fighting hundreds of people under Tidi in one system was much more fun. How were the general reaction during and after every big fight? #soulcrushingtidi, wasn't it? Why are the only two options solo interceptors v. griffins and 2000 people in massive tidi? Just remember the point is to try and change a game mechanic, not to actually formulate tactics to counter their new threats. The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals. The new Sov favors those who actually occupy their systems and it allows these small groups to run circles around them. It appears they would rather try to force a game mechanic change than adapting the way they fight and live in their claimed systems.
Oh boy where to start with this one.
We are the ones who have been pushing for this kind of sov, we coined the phase "death to supers", our space is the most occupied and utilised in sov null along side provi, we have adapted to the new system far better than anyone else.
We want small gang stuff, its fun pvp and doesn't require large amounts of background logistics so anyone can do it. Chasing around uncatchable interceptors trolling sov is neither small gang pvp friendly or fun.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6600
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 09:25:11 -
[962] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals. We're not suggesting supercaps need to be used, but allowing sov to be contested by a solo frigate is too far the other way.
Kieron VonDeux wrote:The new Sov favors those who actually occupy their systems and it allows these small groups to run circles around them. It appears they would rather try to force a game mechanic change than adapting the way they fight and live in their claimed systems. No it doesn't, it favours those who can get the most small ships out on the field, which is still us. Nobody is running circles around us, we're not losing our space, we're simply pointing out how dull a mechanic is when it primarily involves chasing disposable evasion fit ships. You guys are so "grr goons" that you would swear blind that the moon is made of brie if goons claimed it wasn't, so you're unable to see past your prejudice to see the faults in the system.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1808
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 09:33:08 -
[963] - Quote
That is maybe, in my case at least, that I do not see these faults and instead more or less proper fighting behavior. It is your group that requires others to resort to these tactics and it is your group that threatens the game with abusive use of these tactics to show their exploitative nature. Again: exhaustion of mechanics to the extreme. Typical for EVE.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16538
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 09:58:01 -
[964] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:That is maybe, in my case at least, that I do not see these faults and instead more or less proper fighting behavior. It is your group that requires others to resort to these tactics and it is your group that threatens the game with abusive use of these tactics to show their exploitative nature. Again: exhaustion of mechanics to the extreme. Typical for EVE.
Any yet here you are fighting to keep said imbalances.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1809
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 10:07:00 -
[965] - Quote
If people employed reason instead of insanity, I would not have to do this.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16538
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 10:26:22 -
[966] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:If people employed reason instead of insanity, I would not have to do this.
Where is the insanity in saying chasing around ships you cant catch isn't fun?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1809
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 11:01:20 -
[967] - Quote
That people still do it who do not like it. That people want to do it just to show how bad it can be.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
A Band Apart.
165
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 11:45:29 -
[968] - Quote
This stupid speed limit just made the Orthus the go to ship to deal with anything trying to take you SOV. It Can do 5km with no links (Overheated MWD). Is unmatchable with links. And can apply damage to all the things with rapid lites. But the ship that is doing the Entosing has no reps from logi and is now so dam slow that it can be hit by a Dread.
And an even bigger issue. A frig sized ship with a speed limit of 4KM is not going to be able to be combat effective against anything that comes to contest the node. It will not be able to overload it's MWD to land a scram on anything. This gimping of any combat is dam stupid. If a SOV holding group can not deal with 1 frig Entosing their SOV, They should not HOLD SOV.
And 500MN MWD cruisers are so easy to deal with, It's just too funny. 1 Scam from a interceptor and a quick warp from the rest of you SOV holding group will kill it all to easy.
The speed limit is just plan wrong.
How am I to bait out PvP if my bait ship is speed gimped and can't tackle anything? |
Kieron VonDeux
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 11:53:09 -
[969] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:...You guys are so "grr goons" that you would swear blind that the moon is made of brie if goons claimed it wasn't, so you're unable to see past your prejudice to see the faults in the system...
I doubt that, but since it is mainly goons who are complaining about this mechanic, their complaint is suspect.
It may be simply that the goons are better at getting their players to the forums to complain, but that would also be an issue.
Simply put, two Alliances make up 1/3 of all posts in this feedback thread. That will always be suspect as being self-serving despite any logical arguments you try to make.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6814
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:00:00 -
[970] - Quote
Doesn't matter, gotta post.
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
16943
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:09:34 -
[971] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Kieron VonDeux wrote:The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals. We're not suggesting supercaps need to be used, but allowing sov to be contested by a solo frigate is too far the other way..
Sov can only be contested by a solo frigate if you put literally zero effort into the contest.
Once again: if it's too much trouble for you to undock a single ship to defend a system, why is that too low a bar to set to contest it?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1615
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:28:53 -
[972] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Kieron VonDeux wrote:The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals. We're not suggesting supercaps need to be used, but allowing sov to be contested by a solo frigate is too far the other way.. Sov can only be contested by a solo frigate if you put literally zero effort into the contest.Once again: if it's too much trouble for you to undock a single ship to defend a system, why is that too low a bar to set to contest it?
I feel like this discussion will go on at least as long as the never-ending debate concerning the "AFK-cloaker." It's the same stupid argument. The AFK-cloaker is not a threat until he is not AFK. This is apparently psychologically damaging to many folks. The solution is to be prepared to fight him (and his hot dropper friends) whenever he chooses. Some would say it makes for bad game play. Others disagree.
Similarly, the sov troll is not a threat to your sovereignty, unless you do not respond to his trolling. If you do respond to his trolling, he runs away, having successfully made you respond to his trolling. Some would say this makes for bad game play. Others disagree.
In either case, the argument results from a perceived imbalance in the amount of effort required to affect someone else's game. This is a fundamental game design issue, which can really only be solved by CCP. Preventing weaponized boredom should be one of CCP's guiding principles as they implement new improvements to Eve.
I really envy Rivr Luzade, who apparently has only had people bring real fleet compositions to ping his sovereignty. Those people clearly need to stop "being bad at Eve." It would really suck for him if someone decided to start ringing his doorbell a few hundred times a day.
For me, sov trolling interceptors are at least as bad as siegefleet, which I already established somewhere between mosquitoes and Thai lady-boys in my scale of "things which suck and I want nothing to do with."
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:40:11 -
[973] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote: I am super smart at spaceships Because everyone has caldari frigate lvl 5 + electronic attack frigate + ewar skills right? No.
This is the gewnest answer ever.
Caldari Frigate 5 takes a week. Long range targeting, as the only skill needed for Electronic Attack Frigate to V, is another week.
And as you were told before, you can use Griffin after the first week easy, and it's even cheaper.
The only difficult necessary skill is 5x Signal Dispersion, which takes 6 days to IV and 24 to V.
I won't even mention it was told on the first page of first entosis discussion that lock breaking is going to be efficient counter and everyone wishing to participate in new sov warfare defense should train it. But somebody was just too gewn to think forward, and prefers to cry and cry and cry instead.
See you in 3 weeks in Kitsune (or still crying) I guess. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:46:52 -
[974] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Kieron VonDeux wrote:The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals. We're not suggesting supercaps need to be used, but allowing sov to be contested by a solo frigate is too far the other way.. Sov can only be contested by a solo frigate if you put literally zero effort into the contest.Once again: if it's too much trouble for you to undock a single ship to defend a system, why is that too low a bar to set to contest it? I feel like this discussion will go on at least as long as the never-ending debate concerning the "AFK-cloaker." It's the same stupid argument. The AFK-cloaker is not a threat until he is not AFK. This is apparently psychologically damaging to many folks. The solution is to be prepared to fight him (and his hot dropper friends) whenever he chooses. Some would say it makes for bad game play. Others disagree. Similarly, the sov troll is not a threat to your sovereignty, unless you do not respond to his trolling. If you do respond to his trolling, he runs away, having successfully made you respond to his trolling. Some would say this makes for bad game play. Others disagree. In either case, the argument results from a perceived imbalance in the amount of effort required to affect someone else's game. This is a fundamental game design issue, which can really only be solved by CCP. Preventing weaponized boredom should be one of CCP's guiding principles as they implement new improvements to Eve.I really envy Rivr Luzade, who apparently has only had people bring real fleet compositions to ping his sovereignty. Those people clearly need to stop "being bad at Eve." It would really suck for him if someone decided to start ringing his doorbell a few hundred times a day. For me, sov trolling interceptors are at least as bad as siegefleet, which I already established somewhere between mosquitoes and Thai lady-boys in my scale of "things which suck and I want nothing to do with."
The analogy is dumb, because trollceptor is literally zero threat to anything with more than 2 guns/drones. (ED: FFS, he's even self-tackled on a node and you are informed about it...)
The AFK cloaker (who is never actually afk) is a certain death threat to a fleet of any size and composition.
But it takes a gewn holing himself and crying in undroppable Deklein to not see a difference.
There is no weaponized boredom here. You shouldn't have sov you can't undock to defend. Fozziesov promised a general principle that uncontested sov should be easily captureable by a single frigate, so go and contest it, and if it's too hard to contest all those systems you can't use, then drop them. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:55:08 -
[975] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Kieron VonDeux wrote:The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals. We're not suggesting supercaps need to be used, but allowing sov to be contested by a solo frigate is too far the other way.. Sov can only be contested by a solo frigate if you put literally zero effort into the contest.Once again: if it's too much trouble for you to undock a single ship to defend a system, why is that too low a bar to set to contest it?
I still think Malcanis is insane, but QFT. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
16943
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:56:16 -
[976] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Malcanis wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Kieron VonDeux wrote:The new mechanic is focused more toward small gang Sov warfare, where they prefer Sov combat based more upon the blob of Capitals and Supercapitals. We're not suggesting supercaps need to be used, but allowing sov to be contested by a solo frigate is too far the other way.. Sov can only be contested by a solo frigate if you put literally zero effort into the contest.Once again: if it's too much trouble for you to undock a single ship to defend a system, why is that too low a bar to set to contest it? I feel like this discussion will go on at least as long as the never-ending debate concerning the "AFK-cloaker." It's the same stupid argument. The AFK-cloaker is not a threat until he is not AFK. This is apparently psychologically damaging to many folks. The solution is to be prepared to fight him (and his hot dropper friends) whenever he chooses. Some would say it makes for bad game play. Others disagree. Similarly, the sov troll is not a threat to your sovereignty, unless you do not respond to his trolling. If you do respond to his trolling, he runs away, having successfully made you respond to his trolling. Some would say this makes for bad game play. Others disagree. In either case, the argument results from a perceived imbalance in the amount of effort required to affect someone else's game. This is a fundamental game design issue, which can really only be solved by CCP. Preventing weaponized boredom should be one of CCP's guiding principles as they implement new improvements to Eve.I really envy Rivr Luzade, who apparently has only had people bring real fleet compositions to ping his sovereignty. Those people clearly need to stop "being bad at Eve." It would really suck for him if someone decided to start ringing his doorbell a few hundred times a day. For me, sov trolling interceptors are at least as bad as siegefleet, which I already established somewhere between mosquitoes and Thai lady-boys in my scale of "things which suck and I want nothing to do with."
Well if spending 55 minutes orbiting to finally achieve the incredible result of making the defenders undock a low SP alt in Griffin is enough to have you whooping at the screen "WOLOLOL I TROLL U!!!" then I could just about see your point.
Is it enough for you?
"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.
16943
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 12:58:54 -
[977] - Quote
I mean if the prospect of your Griffin or whatever getting dropped is enough to deter you, just say, I'll run off a couple of dozen and have the Black Frogged to you.
Or I could just send you the ISK?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Safrador Gulken
Harbingers of Chaos Inc
Gentlemen's.Club
8
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 13:11:08 -
[978] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:...You guys are so "grr goons" that you would swear blind that the moon is made of brie if goons claimed it wasn't, so you're unable to see past your prejudice to see the faults in the system... I doubt that, but since it is mainly goons who are complaining about this mechanic, their complaint is suspect. It may be simply that the goons are better at getting their players to the forums to complain, but that would also be an issue.
I would also point out that the meta for Goons is using boredom against their enemies. There was a widely distributed soundcloud of a guy in Goons trying to advocate for participating in fights and several Goon higher-ups praising the merits of blue-balling, denying fights, staying docked, and generally not engaging in actual warfare.
We're finding ways to enjoy the Sov system even in its current state, finding some pretty good fights along the way. No one says they love the current system and trollceptors are definitely a key problem, but a speed limit may be just fine.
One thing that is true: EVE players are smart (way smarter than the worst posts in this thread would indicate) and will always figure out how to best deal with any game mechanic. Most of us are looking for cool fights and fun. If you come from an alliance that is all about controlling a vast empire and making ISK hand over fist, then it is likely you won't like the "small gang" and "localization" effort that is going on.
By the way, we still get big cap fights and some amazing escalations even in the current sub-optimal sov system. I think Galatea will only improve things. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
702
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 13:28:41 -
[979] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:
The speed limit is just plan wrong.
How am I to bait out PvP if my bait ship is speed gimped and can't tackle anything?
Don't go looking for "pvp" in a solo troll Ceptor that has little to no chance of killing anything. But (even limited to 4k m/s) would still be pretty god at running away from any pvp.
Don't fit an Entosis link to your bait ceptor.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6600
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 14:12:03 -
[980] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:I doubt that, but since it is mainly goons who are complaining about this mechanic, their complaint is suspect. But it's not mainly goons. There's an entire thread set up with a petition from groups who aren't goons with similar complaints. Most people involved in actually holding sov have these complaints, while generally the ones suggesting the mechanics are good are NPC corp players and groups with no intention of actually holding sov.
Kieron VonDeux wrote:Simply put, two Alliances make up 1/3 of all posts in this feedback thread. That will always be suspect as being self-serving despite any logical arguments you try to make. Uhh, not really. The feedback on mechanics will be primarily given by the players it most affects.
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
6600
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 14:14:03 -
[981] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Sov can only be contested by a solo frigate if you put literally zero effort into the contest.
Once again: if it's too much trouble for you to undock a single ship to defend a system, why is that too low a bar to set to contest it?
It's not that it's too difficult, it's simply boring. There's no fun in endlessly chasing frigates around simply because you have to to hold space.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 15:24:48 -
[982] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Kieron VonDeux wrote:I doubt that, but since it is mainly goons who are complaining about this mechanic, their complaint is suspect. But it's not mainly goons. There's an entire thread set up with a petition from groups who aren't goons with similar complaints. Most people involved in actually holding sov have these complaints, while generally the ones suggesting the mechanics are good are NPC corp players and groups with no intention of actually holding sov. Kieron VonDeux wrote:Simply put, two Alliances make up 1/3 of all posts in this feedback thread. That will always be suspect as being self-serving despite any logical arguments you try to make. Uhh, not really. The feedback on mechanics will be primarily given by the players it most affects.
Counting the gewn tears in this thread... nah mostly gewns.
I'm actually involved in holding sov over ONE constellation (I don't count fleeting up with allies cuz it's their entosis and their sov, not mine). That is exactly how much my corp intends to occupy and guess what, it's perfectly safe from trollceptors because:
a) We have ratings all over it.
b) We don't mind undocking in whatever ship we're in the mood to pilot today to chase them away.
c) We got trollceptored once, dealt with it with ease undocking 10 entosis ships and wrapping it up in 15 minutes, but not before...
d) ...one of our guys have been remarkably successful in blapping entosis ceptors by camping a node in cloaky lockspeed fit Arazu, but that requires patience, so his success is yet to be reproduced by the less patient ones.
tl;dr It affects everyone equally but the most tears come from one numerous yet remarkably incapable coalition.
Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:Sov can only be contested by a solo frigate if you put literally zero effort into the contest.
Once again: if it's too much trouble for you to undock a single ship to defend a system, why is that too low a bar to set to contest it?
It's not that it's too difficult, it's simply boring. There's no fun in endlessly chasing frigates around simply because you have to to hold space.
If you try to hold more than you can hold, you are bound to have some trouble.
If you have a house too big for you, cleaning it is going to be a hassle, and maintenance bills are going to be higher.
You are not paying those bills to have fun. You are paying them for the benefits of the house - the way to have fun is completely in your hands and is no way related to the house bills. If having that house prevents your fun, get rid of it, it's not rocket science.
tl;dr Being a Boring Rodrigues is your fault, not the system's. The system is fine. |
Borachon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
57
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 15:44:14 -
[983] - Quote
The galatea entosis speed limit and statis webifiers don't interact like you think they should. A ship that would go 10km/s does indeed go 4km/s when fit with an entosis link. When hit with a T2 stasis webifier, however, the ship still goes 4km/s!. Details on how I tested this posted here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5985182#post5985182 |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 16:43:58 -
[984] - Quote
Anybody else can't help but get the feeling that if Aegis Sov had been proposed by a random forum-dweller instead of CCP it would have been shot down faster than a Titan hitting jump instead of bridge?
Seriously it reeks of all the bad game design that F&I is known for. I mean look at the patches so far.
Step 1: introduce new gimmicky mechanic completely obsoleting several ship classes.
Step 2: slap on arbitrary limitations and workarounds (4k/s speed limit? Where did that number come from?)
Step 3: slap on even more arbitrary limitations when that doesn't solve the problem (?)
People on F&I always say, if you need to add on a bunch of arbitrary limitations to make an idea work it's probably not a very good idea to begin with.
As some goon said earlier, the entire problem with dominion sov was capitals, supers, and titans. Not only are they very powerful but the game has a kind of positive feedback built into their construction. You use your supers to capture more systems to be able to build more supers to be able to capture more systems. Once anyone gets a lead on supers they snowball ahead. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6601
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 18:10:06 -
[985] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Counting the gewn tears in this thread... nah mostly gewns.
Orca Platypus wrote:I'm actually involved in holding sov over ONE constellation Bull. You're posting on an NPC character, therefore you are an NPC player. You want to be taken seriously in sov discussions? Great! Post with your main.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 20:45:47 -
[986] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Counting the gewn tears in this thread... nah mostly gewns. Orca Platypus wrote:I'm actually involved in holding sov over ONE constellation Bull. You're posting on an NPC character, therefore you are an NPC player. You want to be taken seriously in sov discussions? Great! Post with your main.
Thus actually being knowledgeable in entosis mechanics and warfare was gewned over by the way I choose to post.
Demagogy, Lucas, demagogy. Please do better 1/10. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 21:55:17 -
[987] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Counting the gewn tears in this thread... nah mostly gewns. Orca Platypus wrote:I'm actually involved in holding sov over ONE constellation Bull. You're posting on an NPC character, therefore you are an NPC player. You want to be taken seriously in sov discussions? Great! Post with your main. Thus actually being knowledgeable in entosis mechanics and warfare was gewned over by the way I choose to post. Demagogy, Lucas, demagogy. Please do better 1/10.
He's an alt of the Blades of Grass alliance who just snipped 6 open systems in Catch.
All I have to say to the people disagreeing with the idea trollceptors are bad is don't get upset when your entire region disappears over a week period to fleets of these ships. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 22:32:47 -
[988] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Counting the gewn tears in this thread... nah mostly gewns. Orca Platypus wrote:I'm actually involved in holding sov over ONE constellation Bull. You're posting on an NPC character, therefore you are an NPC player. You want to be taken seriously in sov discussions? Great! Post with your main. Thus actually being knowledgeable in entosis mechanics and warfare was gewned over by the way I choose to post. Demagogy, Lucas, demagogy. Please do better 1/10. He's an alt of the Blades of Grass alliance who just snipped 6 open systems in Catch. All I have to say to the people disagreeing with the idea trollceptors are bad is don't get upset when your entire region disappears over a week period to fleets of these ships.
Remarkable is the gewns ignorance when it's showing itself speaking as if entosis warfare is the thing of tomorrow and not today. |
Borachon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
59
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 00:43:53 -
[989] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:
People on F&I always say, if you need to add on a bunch of arbitrary limitations to make an idea work it's probably not a very good idea to begin with.
Especially when those arbitrary limitations interact poorly with the rest of the game's core mechanics, like say stasis webifiers. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6603
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 01:17:26 -
[990] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Counting the gewn tears in this thread... nah mostly gewns. Orca Platypus wrote:I'm actually involved in holding sov over ONE constellation Bull. You're posting on an NPC character, therefore you are an NPC player. You want to be taken seriously in sov discussions? Great! Post with your main. Thus actually being knowledgeable in entosis mechanics and warfare was gewned over by the way I choose to post. Demagogy, Lucas, demagogy. Please do better 1/10. But you clearly aren't knowledgeable. All you've done in this post is go "Zomg the gewn tears" and repeatedly spew the same bull. You want to prove you're part of sov ownership and thus your point of view holds any relevance at all? Go right ahead. All posting as an NPC alt does is tell us you're not confident enough in what you say to put your main's name to it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1839
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 02:44:07 -
[991] - Quote
The "just undock a griffin for the interceptor" talking point is getting frayed and tired. Please let it rest.
The issue has always been catching and killing the interceptor before it can do anything. Its immunity to warp interdiction and its sub-two-second align time (now possible with the link online post-Galatea!) means that a form of defense that should be valid in defense of your space is not -- the humble gatecamp.
Without this, sov defense, by necessity, is a goose chase against the swiftest ships in the game, at both sub- and faster-than-light speeds.
Remove interdiction nullification from all ships. Failing that, please reinstate the mass penalty and make it apply if the link is offline or online.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 02:54:10 -
[992] - Quote
Querns wrote:The "just undock a griffin for the interceptor" talking point is getting frayed and tired. Please let it rest.
The issue has always been catching and killing the interceptor before it can do anything. Its immunity to warp interdiction and its sub-two-second align time (now possible with the link online post-Galatea!) means that a form of defense that should be valid in defense of your space is not -- the humble gatecamp.
Without this, sov defense, by necessity, is a goose chase against the swiftest ships in the game, at both sub- and faster-than-light speeds.
Remove interdiction nullification from all ships. Failing that, please reinstate the mass penalty and make it apply if the link is offline or online.
The issue never existed since if you undock anything at all (griffin is just one of the superior options), the ceptor can't do anything.
The gate camp is perfectly valid form of defense, which is supposed to have at least one weakness, because game design and stuff, you know, tradeoffs, meaningful decisions...
And yet you keep crying because your oh-so-nyanderful one-size-fits-all solution cannot fit 350lbs carebears you are.
Is there any shame about its own inability to undock a single frigate in gewnswarm out there?
ED: I just realized you're basically crying "remove gates". Now I wonder if that's the new genre in gewn tears or has it been there for a while without me noticing? |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 03:23:28 -
[993] - Quote
Killing or jamming an unending stream of troll interceptors is easy, but:
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 |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1839
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 04:13:26 -
[994] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
The gate camp is perfectly valid form of defense, which is supposed to have at least one weakness, because game design and stuff, you know, tradeoffs, meaningful decisions...
It has weaknesses in the form of bridging and wormholes. A competent covops pilot can worm his way past a gatecamp, and light a covert cyno to bring in his buddies.
However, the covops pilot actually has to have some skill to get out of a gatecamp. Thus, the piloting skill of the defenders and attackers are pitted against each other.
Again, please stop hammering that talking point again and again and again. It's thoroughly debunked and not doing you any favors.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
116
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 04:43:17 -
[995] - Quote
bigbillatard1 wrote:He's an alt of the Blades of Grass alliance who just snipped 6 open systems in Catch.
If you're implying he is an alt of mine, then you are mistaken, I do not use or need alts for posting. As far as the systems in Catch, we had 4 of them prior to Aegus Sov, and the area around us is clear due to the shocking reality that we fought our neighbors and cleared it under Aegus sov. I am guessing you consider terrible being those that actually login, undock and capture/defend a reasonable number of systems proportional to their alliance size in accordance with mechanics in a game that is undergoing sweeping change. I feel very good about what my alliance has done, we have had plenty of action and renewed purpose (pretty sure the word for it is fun).
I would argue terrible is crying about sov ceptor trolls from behind a thick wall of allies while being so bored I would rather fly halfway across the map to use said ceptors to spend days of my life toasting systems I have no intention of using or being in. Those alliances anxiously awaiting orders and commands from leadership that has monotized that level of terrible into RL income while playing zombies online and plexing accounts that never actually login is just bonus. Double bonus terrible is clicking pap links for CTA ratting and mining ops in systems I couldn't care less about being in or defending. Triple bonus is complaining about those systems not being worth having...and blaming game designers for me having to be there for "reasons". |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 04:45:38 -
[996] - Quote
Bunch of bullshit as usual.
Querns wrote:It has weaknesses in the form of bridging and wormholes. A competent covops pilot can worm his way past a gatecamp, and light a covert cyno to bring in his buddies.
However, the covops pilot actually has to have some skill to get out of a gatecamp. Thus, the piloting skill of the defenders and attackers are pitted against each other.
With a titan gatecamp, there is no worming. There is no skill other than putting this space sausage on the gate. And you perfectly know there are other ways for a perfect gatecamp. So no, those are the "remove gates" tears, and nothing more.
Querns wrote:Again, please stop hammering that talking point again and again and again. It's thoroughly debunked and not doing you any favors.
It has been bunked as very efficient solution. Just because you are too bad, lazy and self-entitled to do it doesn't mean it's any less credible. |
Chrome Veinss
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 04:57:33 -
[997] - Quote
I dont mind the trollceptors, especially the ones that we get in deklein turning off a station service here and there and even ocassionally taking sov. Its true, if we had active people in every system and corp hangars with griffins everywhere it would be trivial to undock and jam them. Not fun but a lot of eve things aren't fun. Maybe we will have to adapt and do that. I wouldnt mind. Maybe we can do with a bit less space and more renters to ensure there are always people available to jam and entosis things. That is all fairly trivial.
I think the bigger issue is that we have gone from a system where hundreds to thousands of people in ships ranging from frigates to dreadnaughts had to commit to complex campaigns lasting weeks or months in order to conquer a region to a system where a single person in one of the cheapest ships in the game with little to no support can do the same in a couple days, provided they have more time available and a higher resistance to boredom than their "enemy". But of course this "single person" is irrelevant. What matters is what happens when its two thousand of them, highly coordinated, operating under a single command structure. And we're going to have to do that because no one else will and we need to study how the system works in the hands of an actual coalition. I get the feeling that its everyone else that will be crying about how unfair it is once we're done with the test though! |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1839
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 05:03:44 -
[998] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Bunch of bullshit as usual. Querns wrote:It has weaknesses in the form of bridging and wormholes. A competent covops pilot can worm his way past a gatecamp, and light a covert cyno to bring in his buddies.
However, the covops pilot actually has to have some skill to get out of a gatecamp. Thus, the piloting skill of the defenders and attackers are pitted against each other. With a titan gatecamp, there is no worming. There is no skill other than putting this space sausage on the gate. And you perfectly know there are other ways for a perfect gatecamp. So no, those are the "remove gates" tears, and nothing more.
These are patently false. Titan gatecamps can be escaped, and there is no such thing as a perfect gatecamp.
Quote:Querns wrote:Again, please stop hammering that talking point again and again and again. It's thoroughly debunked and not doing you any favors. It has been bunked as very efficient solution. Just because you are too bad, lazy and self-entitled to do it doesn't mean it's any less credible.
So now it's our fault for not using interceptors? Huh?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kieron VonDeux
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 05:06:58 -
[999] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Counting the gewn tears in this thread... nah mostly gewns. Orca Platypus wrote:I'm actually involved in holding sov over ONE constellation Bull. You're posting on an NPC character, therefore you are an NPC player. You want to be taken seriously in sov discussions? Great! Post with your main. Thus actually being knowledgeable in entosis mechanics and warfare was gewned over by the way I choose to post. Demagogy, Lucas, demagogy. Please do better 1/10. But you clearly aren't knowledgeable. All you've done in this post is go "Zomg the gewn tears" and repeatedly spew the same bull. You want to prove you're part of sov ownership and thus your point of view holds any relevance at all? Go right ahead. All posting as an NPC alt does is tell us you're not confident enough in what you say to put your main's name to it.
All you do is look for ways to trash someone who doesn't agree with you when they post with their main.
It simply gives you ammo in trying to derail their argument without actually attacking the argument.
That is harder to do when someone chooses to not post with their main. You have to go with blind personal attacks which are not as effective.
You want the argument and poster to be your basis for counter-argument.
Not just the argument and the merits of it alone.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16543
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 05:23:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:
All you do is look for ways to trash someone who doesn't agree with you when they post with their main.
It simply gives you ammo in trying to derail their argument without actually attacking the argument.
That is harder to do when someone chooses to not post with their main. You have to go with blind personal attacks which are not as effective.
You want the argument and poster to be your basis for counter-argument.
Not just the argument and the merits of it alone.
No, posting with an alt just means there is no evidence they are telling the truth. Its a tactic used in countless arguments by people who clearly have no experience in the subject or are telling outright lies. We have already debunked his arguments several times now.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 05:25:37 -
[1001] - Quote
Chrome Veinss wrote:I dont mind the trollceptors, especially the ones that we get in deklein turning off a station service here and there and even ocassionally taking sov. Its true, if we had active people in every system and corp hangars with griffins everywhere it would be trivial to undock and jam them. Not fun but a lot of eve things aren't fun. Maybe we will have to adapt and do that. I wouldnt mind. Maybe we can do with a bit less space and more renters to ensure there are always people available to jam and entosis things. That is all fairly trivial.
That and 40+ pages of tears.
Chrome Veinss wrote:I think the bigger issue is that we have gone from a system where hundreds to thousands of people in ships ranging from frigates to dreadnaughts had to commit to complex campaigns lasting weeks or months in order to conquer a region to a system where a single person in one of the cheapest ships in the game with little to no support can do the same in a couple days, provided they have more time available and a higher resistance to boredom than their "enemy". But of course this "single person" is irrelevant. What matters is what happens when its two thousand of them, highly coordinated, operating under a single command structure. And we're going to have to do that because no one else will and we need to study how the system works in the hands of an actual coalition. I get the feeling that its everyone else that will be crying about how unfair it is once we're done with the test though!
First, we have gone from a system where low truesec meant something to a system where -0.1 is good enough, which removed at least one major conflict driver for south, which is not a blue donut like northwest.
Second, it's only possible as a single person against completely uncontested space. Which is working as intended.
Third, as always, I dare you to try. You gewns bark a lot, like always, but had notable difficulty biting anything but your own butt lately. My prediction is that if you're going with trollceptors, you will fail pathetically like every trollceptor who came to me did. It works only against uncontested sov, so you will have to contest it, and that can go either way depending on the defender, but no chance with a trollceptor.
baltec1 wrote:No, posting with an alt just means there is no evidence they are telling the truth. Its a tactic used in countless arguments by people who clearly have no experience in the subject or are telling outright lies. We have already debunked his arguments several times now.
"but we may not have a griffin qqqqqqqqq" does not count as debunking sorry. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16543
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 05:31:39 -
[1002] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
"but we may not have a griffin qqqqqqqqq" does not count as debunking sorry.
Griffons are a good support ship, they are not a good solo ship and they do not get rid of trollceptors or are fun to fly. All they will manage is to jam the enemy then die when a few ceptors gather to get rid of it before returning to their entosising.
Your tactic sucks balls and won't work, best it will manage is to entertain the trollceptors.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage
RAZOR Alliance
611
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 05:46:11 -
[1003] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Kieron VonDeux wrote:
All you do is look for ways to trash someone who doesn't agree with you when they post with their main.
It simply gives you ammo in trying to derail their argument without actually attacking the argument.
That is harder to do when someone chooses to not post with their main. You have to go with blind personal attacks which are not as effective.
You want the argument and poster to be your basis for counter-argument.
Not just the argument and the merits of it alone.
No, posting with an alt just means there is no evidence they are telling the truth. Its a tactic used in countless arguments by people who clearly have no experience in the subject or are telling outright lies. We have already debunked his arguments several times now.
Personally I support that old suggestion that NPC toons are banned from posting anywhere but GD and newbie sub forums. It would help to clean up a lot of badposting.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 05:50:47 -
[1004] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:
"but we may not have a griffin qqqqqqqqq" does not count as debunking sorry.
Griffons are a good support ship, they are not a good solo ship and they do not get rid of trollceptors or are fun to fly. All they will manage is to jam the enemy then die when a few ceptors gather to get rid of it before returning to their entosising. Your tactic sucks balls and won't work, best it will manage is to entertain the trollceptors.
They weren't meant to "get rid" of trollceptors, just to make them completely meaningless with the rarest actual application.
Getting rid of entosis ceptor is like getting rid of any other ceptor and isn't a subject worth touching normally, unless we're talking with someone too gewn to be at least average at the game of actually piloting his spaceship.
Just as you were being butthurt at the prospect of losing a griffin, I gave you an idea of fielding a Kitsune with a tackle so when ceptors come for you, you can actually get rid of them. Your response was equally nonsensual and stood somewhere inbetween "buh it's not fun to fly qqqqqq" and "ahhhhh 3 weeks training for Kitsune is impossible qqqqq".
You haven't even gotten to the tactic yet and just gewned ahead with nonsense. As usual.
Once again, tears are not debunking.
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Personally I support that old suggestion that NPC toons are banned from posting anywhere but GD and newbie sub forums. It would help to clean up a lot of badposting.
WTB Posting Alliance. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16543
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 06:00:50 -
[1005] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
They weren't meant to "get rid" of trollceptors, just to make them completely meaningless with the rarest actual application.
Only that doesn't happen does it? You still need to defend your space against them and if you arn't killing them then they are still there trolling away. This isn't fun or generating fights and the vast bulk of ships are rendered useless.
Orca Platypus wrote:
Getting rid of entosis ceptor is like getting rid of any other ceptor and isn't a subject worth touching normally, unless we're talking with someone too gewn to be at least average at the game of actually piloting his spaceship.
Trollcepters are build to evade fights while every other intercepters is built for tackling. This is not like getting rid of any other cepter. I also wouldn't start trying to go down the piloting skill argument path with me.
Orca Platypus wrote:
Just as you were being butthurt at the prospect of losing a ceptor I gave you an idea of fielding a Kitsune with a tackle so when ceptors come for you, you can actually get rid of them. Your response was equally nonsensual and stood somewhere inbetween "buh it's not fun to fly qqqqqq" and "ahhhhh 3 weeks training for Kitsune is impossible qqqqq".
So how long are people going to play the sov game that is not fun to play?
[/quote]
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 06:07:04 -
[1006] - Quote
Orca's posting is analogous to the trollceptor, consistent in coming in to annoy and accomplish nothing, then quickly escaping when attention is given (in his case to an NPC corp). |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 06:15:56 -
[1007] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:You still need to defend your space
Well sorry if that is apparently too much to ask.
baltec1 wrote:Trollcepters are build to evade fights while every other intercepters is built for tackling. This is not like getting rid of any other cepter. I also wouldn't start trying to go down the piloting skill argument path with me.
blablabla great me.
And no, there are plenty of ceptors built to avoid fights which aren't entosis ones.
baltec1 wrote:So how long are people going to play the sov game that is not fun to play?
Why are you playing it if it's not fun?
It's more fun for me than dominion could ever be.
And yes we held space in dominion, lost space in dominion, gained space in dominion. Fozziesov is a lot better and definitely more fun than dread babysitting. It being not fun for you is your own fault of being a dominionfag.
Adapt, downsize, occupy your systems, you'll forget trollceptor existed instead of crying non-stop about it. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16543
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 06:38:08 -
[1008] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
Well sorry if that is apparently too much to ask.
Defending isn't a problem, the issue is that trollcepters are even more boring than the old sov mechanics.
baltec1 wrote:
blablabla great me.
And no, there are plenty of ceptors built to avoid fights which aren't entosis ones.
Such as?
Orca Platypus wrote:
Why are you playing it if it's not fun?
It's more fun for me than dominion could ever be.
And yes we held space in dominion, lost space in dominion, gained space in dominion. Fozziesov is a lot better and definitely more fun than dread babysitting. It being not fun for you is your own fault of being a dominionfag.
Adapt, downsize, occupy your systems, you'll forget trollceptor existed instead of crying non-stop about it.
Post with your main or all you say is rubbish. I call bullshit on you having ever held anything in any sov mechanic given your utter lack of knowledge in your posting
[/quote]
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
John Wolfcastle
Galactic Cargo Inc.
Crying Clowns Foundation
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 07:45:10 -
[1009] - Quote
Le me is too dumb to read first page.... |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6603
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 08:21:36 -
[1010] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:All you do is look for ways to trash someone who doesn't agree with you when they post with their main.
It simply gives you ammo in trying to derail their argument without actually attacking the argument.
That is harder to do when someone chooses to not post with their main. You have to go with blind personal attacks which are not as effective.
You want the argument and poster to be your basis for counter-argument.
Not just the argument and the merits of it alone. There's nothing to argue, read the guy's posts. From moment one he's just been "Grr goons". Even outside of these threads. Based on his posts here he's not used the system.
If he actively refuse to post with his main, then obviously he either isn't confident enough in what he says or he's actively lying, otherwise he'd put his name to it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6817
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 09:44:34 -
[1011] - Quote
But do they at least have experience in trolling sov, all it takes is set up an alliance and grab a laser and a ceptor, then you too can attack
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Hobo Traveller
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 10:54:22 -
[1012] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:
Well sorry if that is apparently too much to ask.
Defending isn't a problem, the issue is that trollcepters are even more boring than the old sov mechanics. baltec1 wrote:
blablabla great me.
And no, there are plenty of ceptors built to avoid fights which aren't entosis ones.
Such as?
And in this thread we learn that baltec1 has never heard of travel ceptors. Maybe somebody will be kind enough to educate you. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1624
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 12:13:53 -
[1013] - Quote
Hobo Traveller wrote:
The worst part of FozzieSov is that it's made me agree with Snot Shot post.
The horror. The horror.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16544
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 13:36:31 -
[1014] - Quote
Hobo Traveller wrote:
And in this thread we learn that baltec1 has never heard of travel ceptors. Maybe somebody will be kind enough to educate you.
Attacking sov with effectively travel fit ceptors is depressingly accurate.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Hobo Traveller
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 14:29:24 -
[1015] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Hobo Traveller wrote:
And in this thread we learn that baltec1 has never heard of travel ceptors. Maybe somebody will be kind enough to educate you.
Attacking sov with effectively travel fit ceptors is depressingly accurate.
Ah so you knew about them but just chose to ignore them because they weakened your argument.. |
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
204
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:11:32 -
[1016] - Quote
Okay, what is the obsession with Rube Goldberg machines around here? Every time CCP or the playerbase suggests a rebalance to address broken mechanics, everyone seems to want to make it as complicated as possible.
You want to eliminate trollceptors in this instance? Change the entosis link this way. Maintain the mass penalty. Add a new thing - activating the entosis link now incurs a 5% speed boost. And just 5%. With the already-existing game mechanic that you cannot activate more than one speed module, now they can't try to burn off the grid before you arrive. Done. Simple. That ship is as much as committed to the capture.
(I do want to stop and give kudos to all the feedback that was given before the release, so most problems with this system never had to see the light of day)
By the way, nullification is a truly terrible mechanic, but it is necessary with anchorable bubbles. Effortless shutting down of gates with that is bad gameplay. Commit dictors to it and you have my blessing. But if you don't have a ship on grid (or even just long enough to launch a sphere) then you don't deserve to have that gate effectively shut down. And another thing, the idea of ceptors being nullified so they can tackle large prey for roaming fleets doesn't work because those fleets (unless T3) aren't getting through those bubble gates any time this century, so by the nature of bubbles you mandate that hundreds of ceptors swarm for the kill.
You want less ceptors? You want nullification dropped? Petition for it along with an end to anchorable bubbles. Then real fleets, much more catchable fleets, will roam null. Until then, nullified ceptors is the monster you guys created.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
loquacious7
String Theory For. U
The Obsidian Front
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:30:04 -
[1017] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:Magorath wrote:so.. less time to react as a defender and troll ships still perfectly acceptable.
Now this is content creation.
Never thought I'd say it but pos bashing was actually more fun then watching a timer as it's not a serious take over. I'd have a use for a carrier + dread as well.
^^ This. These changes barely address the major issues pointed out both on the forums, by the CSM, and on the EVE Reddit (namely fewer command nodes, reduction of speed while entosising to more like 10%, and removal of the ability to fit entosis links on ships below cruiser size). The correct way to address community unrest about the prior changes is not to stand behind them while ignoring how bad they are. EDIT: By the way, a guy on page 2 linked a poll. You should check the results.
What part of "trollceptor" do they not understand. Frigs/destroyers should not be able to capture sov. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16545
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:04:01 -
[1018] - Quote
Hobo Traveller wrote:baltec1 wrote:Hobo Traveller wrote:
And in this thread we learn that baltec1 has never heard of travel ceptors. Maybe somebody will be kind enough to educate you.
Attacking sov with effectively travel fit ceptors is depressingly accurate. Ah so you knew about them but just chose to ignore them because they weakened your argument..
In what way?
The whole point of the sov changes was to get us fighting more, using ships to attack sov while avoiding fights is the exact opposite of the goal CCP have.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:06:09 -
[1019] - Quote
loquacious7 wrote:What part of "trollceptor" do they not understand. Frigs/destroyers should not be able to capture sov.
What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand?
Like all those crying "miners have made themselves a victim boarding a mining ship", gewns and other MAH SHINY RENT peeps "made themselves a victim" by holding more sov than they can use.
I stated a few times that freighters and mining ships were too vulnerable due to bad design, not because they were flown in some bad way. Now that you get a game design that is bad for you, you cry like you never imagined this before.
Well, the advice is simple. If mining is "too dangerous", well, don't mine. If holding sov in empty systems is "too tedious", don't hold it. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:11:04 -
[1020] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:In what way?
In the ignorant gewnish jupiter-sized ego way.
baltec1 wrote:The whole point of the sov changes was to get us fighting more, using ships to attack sov while avoiding fights is the exact opposite of the goal CCP have.
You've been told a number of times that used systems are invulnerable to trollceptors, and thus once somebody wants to take an actually used system, he'll have to come with a fleet and fight you without avoiding.
You've been told a number of times that using a single frigate to capture uncontested sov is within the goals of fozziesov and working as intended.
If you haven't been fighting more, that is your own fault for being behind on tactics and adaption. |
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16546
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:53:37 -
[1021] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:baltec1 wrote:In what way? In the ignorant gewnish jupiter-sized ego way. baltec1 wrote:The whole point of the sov changes was to get us fighting more, using ships to attack sov while avoiding fights is the exact opposite of the goal CCP have. You've been told a number of times that used systems are invulnerable to trollceptors, and thus once somebody wants to take an actually used system, he'll have to come with a fleet and fight you without avoiding. You've been told a number of times that using a single frigate to capture uncontested sov is within the goals of fozziesov and working as intended. If you haven't been fighting more, that is your own fault for being behind on tactics and adaption.
Everything that has come for our space has been fitted for avoiding fights, everything we use is made to avoid fights, everyone is using this tactic as CCP has grudgingly accepted when they looked at the data and saw it was mostly interceptors doing the entosising.
We don't need to fight for sov anymore, just use ceptors endlessly for a month and just have the defenders give up in frustration as they can't do anything to stop us.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6606
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 17:42:53 -
[1022] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:[What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand? Out of curiosity where was this stated as a goal? Seems like a pretty silly goal for what is an alliance level mechanic.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 18:52:43 -
[1023] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:[What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand? Out of curiosity where was this stated as a goal? Seems like a pretty silly goal for what is an alliance level mechanic.
Seems pretty reasonable actually. Taking Sov has a near zero mechanical barrier, so the burden of Sov defence is borne entirely by the defenders. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 20:50:58 -
[1024] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Everything that has come for our space has been fitted for avoiding fights
Downsize to what you use and become immune to it.
baltec1 wrote:everything we use is made to avoid fights
Well, you're gewns, you suck at small gang pvp. So naturally you'll want to avoid that. Question is, are you succeeding? Nooooope.
baltec1 wrote:everyone is using this tactic as CCP has grudgingly accepted when they looked at the data and saw it was mostly interceptors doing the entosising.
Citation needed (c).
I think it was gents who first discovered that in actual sov fight, trollceptors are only good to be sent behind enemy lines, because DNS wiped their own entosis ceptors. After that I haven't seen anything less than entosis caracal from them.
In an actual sov fight, all nodes tend to be occupied, and if your entosis ship is a ceptor you're asking for it to be blapped or chased away, thus dropping the entosis and getting disadvantage in tug of war as long as enemy is making more entosis progress than you are.
tl;dr (can't skip it with gewns) uncontested nodes are indeed a good place for a ceptor, with full accordance to the uncontested sov capture goal of fozziesov. Contested nodes, however, give the side using entosis ceptor disadvantage, because even if they keep the ceptor, they lose the momentum, and thus heavier entosis ships are widely used by people who are not crying like gewns.
baltec1 wrote:We don't need to fight for sov anymore, just use ceptors endlessly for a month and just have the defenders give up in frustration as they can't do anything to stop us.
And you have tested that... when again?
I'll laugh once you try and fail, so go ahead. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 20:59:32 -
[1025] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:[What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand? Out of curiosity where was this stated as a goal? Seems like a pretty silly goal for what is an alliance level mechanic.
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/politics-by-other-means/
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.
...Our realistic goal for the new Sovereignty system is that a very small group of players in virtually any ship types should be able to completely conquer an undefended system...
...On the other hand, evicting an alliance that actively uses and defends their space should be a very difficult task indeed...
Working. As. Intended. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6611
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 21:08:41 -
[1026] - Quote
Aerasia wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:[What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand? Out of curiosity where was this stated as a goal? Seems like a pretty silly goal for what is an alliance level mechanic. Seems pretty reasonable actually. Taking Sov has a near zero mechanical barrier, so the burden of Sov defence is borne entirely by the defenders. Yeah, so on one side of the fight, the defender has an entire solar system on the line. On the other side, the attackers have a frigate. Doesn't sounds very balanced.
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
6611
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 21:10:04 -
[1027] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:[What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand? Out of curiosity where was this stated as a goal? Seems like a pretty silly goal for what is an alliance level mechanic. http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/politics-by-other-means/
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space. ...Our realistic goal for the new Sovereignty system is that a very small group of players in virtually any ship types should be able to completely conquer an undefended system... ...On the other hand, evicting an alliance that actively uses and defends their space should be a very difficult task indeed... Working. As. Intended. So you take "very small group of players" to mean "individuals"? It's an alliance level mechanic... Why do you people seem so intent on driving EVE to be a game played primarily by solo players?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 21:27:30 -
[1028] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Yeah, so on one side of the fight, the defender has an entire solar system on the line. On the other side, the attackers have a frigate. Doesn't sounds very balanced. So... you're concerned that frigates have zero chance to take a defended system?
It's just a confusing statement. If a solo frigate has any chance of taking a system it's because there is no 'defender' for the solar system to be 'on the line' for. Otherwise, the system is no more 'on the line' than if the frigate decided to solo a carrier.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 21:35:32 -
[1029] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Yeah, so on one side of the fight, the defender has an entire solar system on the line. On the other side, the attackers have a frigate. Doesn't sounds very balanced.
Keep up with the game mate, solar system you don't use is 6 times less yours than the one somebody lives in.
Lucas Kell wrote:So you take "very small group of players" to mean "individuals"? It's an alliance level mechanic... Why do you people seem so intent on driving EVE to be a game played primarily by solo players?
Aside from the fact that nobody set your "alliance level" tear-filled prayer in stone, the very specific word "uncontested" means it's up for grabs, and if somebody who grabbed it happens to be an individual or a small group, that does not mean the game became any more individual than it was - it just means one very numerous coalition is surprisingly incapable in terms of adapting to the rules announced well in advance. Considering reading comprehensions problems and grotesque rigid thought patterns its line and higher members demonstrate, I think I can name the culprit of that incapability. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6611
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:07:52 -
[1030] - Quote
Aerasia wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Yeah, so on one side of the fight, the defender has an entire solar system on the line. On the other side, the attackers have a frigate. Doesn't sounds very balanced. So... you're concerned that frigates have zero chance to take a defended system? It's just a confusing statement. If a solo frigate has any chance of taking a system it's because there is no 'defender' for the solar system to be 'on the line' for. Otherwise, the system is no more 'on the line' than if the frigate decided to solo a carrier. It's just dumb that it's a threat to sov that needs a response. It allows a frigate to force a defensive response even though, like you say, in a utilised system they have NO chance of taking it, and it means that attackers can put nearly nothing on the line while defenders have their whole system on the line. All of the control is in the attackers hands. While it required far too much commitment from attackers in the old system it now requires far too little.
Orca Platypus wrote:Keep up with the game mate, solar system you don't use is 6 times less yours than the one somebody lives in. Irrelevant, since I'm talking about the game mechanics being dull for defenders in systems they do utilise. Good job on you continued lack of comprehension on this. I couldn't really give a crap if a pod could take a system that nobody lives in, but a system that is actively used should take a committed force to assault, not just to take, but to contest at all. Not even a large force, but more than a goddamn frigate.
When you've actually had any involvement with sov at all, let me know. It's pretty obvious you have no idea what this system involves.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6818
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:19:19 -
[1031] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:[What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand? Out of curiosity where was this stated as a goal? Seems like a pretty silly goal for what is an alliance level mechanic. http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/politics-by-other-means/
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space. ...Our realistic goal for the new Sovereignty system is that a very small group of players in virtually any ship types should be able to completely conquer an undefended system... ...On the other hand, evicting an alliance that actively uses and defends their space should be a very difficult task indeed... Working. As. Intended. So you take "very small group of players" to mean "individuals"? It's an alliance level mechanic... Why do you people seem so intent on driving EVE to be a game played primarily by solo players?
Can't you have an alliance with one character? Or let's say two
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:30:50 -
[1032] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:It's just dumb that it's a threat to sov that needs a response. It allows a frigate to force a defensive response even though, like you say, in a utilised system they have NO chance of taking it, and it means that attackers can put nearly nothing on the line while defenders have their whole system on the line. All of the control is in the attackers hands. While it required far too much commitment from attackers in the old system it now requires far too little.
Lucas, your tears are getting more wet, get a grip and raise the quality, your arguments now are incredibly lacking.
Undocking a frigate against self-tackled target is now a "defensive response", hahaha no.
For a frigate to "put system on the line" requires a hour of self-tackled orbiting. Unless you allow him to do that, there is no system on the line here, and required response is no more than that against a random roamer, so the only change here is that a roamer can actually make you undock and fight him, which means more fights. And if it's a trollceptor, warp one of the mining procurers to him, done, you can now ignore him for 5-10 minutes. If taking a warp is too much to ask, then maybe you should play cookie clicker instead of eve, otherwise the concept of occupied space defense haven't changed a bit.
Lucas Kell wrote:Irrelevant, since I'm talking about the game mechanics being dull for defenders in systems they do utilise. Good job on you continued lack of comprehension on this. I couldn't really give a crap if a pod could take a system that nobody lives in, but a system that is actively used should take a committed force to assault, not just to take, but to contest at all. Not even a large force, but more than a goddamn frigate.
As it was said, there is no difference at all in taking on a roamer or entosis ceptor in the system defender does utilise, unless your concept of defense is "hole up and pray". The only difference is that now there is a way for the attacker to actually get a fight off some holed up bears, which requires the attacker to carry an expensive module with a number of restrictions and self-tackle when it's used.
If defending your space is too much to ask, then either stop defending or stop crying.
Lucas Kell wrote:When you've actually had any involvement with sov at all, let me know. It's pretty obvious you have no idea what this system involves.
The igewnorance: covering the sheer badness with sheer arrogance since 2013. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6611
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:38:25 -
[1033] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas, your tears are getting more wet, get a grip and raise the quality, your arguments now are incredibly lacking. Yeah yeah yeah...
I'm done with you. Come back when you have a valid opinion form an educated point of view rather than constant trolling and claims that anything said by an Imperium member is automatically tears. The level of "grr goons" in you is far too high to be taken seriously.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:50:08 -
[1034] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas, your tears are getting more wet, get a grip and raise the quality, your arguments now are incredibly lacking. Yeah yeah yeah... I'm done with you. Come back when you have a valid opinion form an educated point of view rather than constant trolling and claims that anything said by an Imperium member is automatically tears. The level of "grr goons" in you is far too high to be taken seriously.
So we're finally down to this argument.
According to your post, to have a conversation with you, I must present myself for the "ad gewnminem" (a special type of ad hominem attack that is pursued over any attempt to actually counter-argument), I have to stop calling tears tears, I hate to stop mocking the poor argumentation (or utter lack of any argumentation), I have to ignore some facts, and most of all I have to go down to your gewn level - and only then you'll talk.
I must express my gratitude for gewns who made an attempt to the best of their abilities to actually counter-argument, as it was their help that was crucial in achieving my goal of making gewns look stupid in addition to being stupid.
P.S. When you say you want you shiny back despite knowing fully that it's not longer yours, it's tears. So every time you cry about not being able to blueball a single frig because of the changes, it's tears. Too hard to defend empty space? Tears. Being butthurt about the fact a small entity outsmarting you? Tears. Can't counter a single self-tackled ship? Tears. Covering tears with bs like "they should commit" or "hurr durr alliance level srs bzns only"? Tears. They should commit no more than you do, and if you can't, that's not their, system, or CCP's problem - it's just you being a crybaby. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
702
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:51:55 -
[1035] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:[What part of "capture of uncontested sov should be doable with a single frigate" in goals of fozziesov you don't understand? Out of curiosity where was this stated as a goal? Seems like a pretty silly goal for what is an alliance level mechanic.
After having read the goals again and again, I've come to the conclusion that if you take each stated goal and give it the opposite meaning - CCP goals for sov have for the most part been met.
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.
>It isn't - Sorry try again. It is boring tedious and primarily based on conflict avoidance.
Interceptor based avoidance strategies, have all but replaced sov warfare - and is for the most part pretty bad design.
Goal #2: Clarify the process of taking, holding and fighting over star systems
> Done - Solo Ceptors troll sov. Once in a while there is a bit of what some might call PVP around sov. Generally it is less than 20 players, who don't plan on engaging in pvp (or even actually capturing the system). Many in fact go to great lengths to ensue they aren't engaging with other players.
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.
> Debatable- You bring enough to drive off trolls or you bring more to try and kill them (I'd rather get splatted by a blob than continue spending hours chasing ceptors around)
Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.
> Yeah, the next patch will go somewhat towards achieving this goal.
As long as 2 or 3 ratters can keep indexes up with a few hours effort per day, this will never be balanced. When there are systems that have no more than 10 players (often 2 or 3 players + alts) in system over several days but have ADM of 4.1, there is something not quite right in sov mechanic balance.
Goal #5: Provide significant strategic benefits from living in your space.
> I think the whole "living in your space" needs to be further defined for this - See Goal 4.
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.
> This has been pretty much achieved - There are no real sov "battles" (big or small) so server load should be very manageable.
Pos bashing on the other hand is still to a large extent dominated by super fleets, this is unlikely to affect server load though as they are for the most part very one sided.
Goal #7: Any new Sovereignty system should be adaptable enough to be rapidly updated and to incorporate future changes to EVE.
> For this one to be achieved Devs 1st need to update sov to suit current Eve. Future Eve becomes less relevant if current Eve is not achieving stated goals.
NB; Agreeing with Goons is not something I set out to do but sov needs to mean more than who flies a ceptor the best.
The cheap costs and trolling nature associated with Ceptor warfare reduces the value of every sov holding alliances efforts. It all but removes "warfare" from Sov.
Adjust Entosis use so that it is harder to just troll sov.
Tripple stront consumption (3) for the warm up + 2 stront per cycle. Give those ships designed to fit and use command links a bonus to Entosis link use - 50% reduction in Strontium use.
All ships that can currently fit and use an entosis link still can but ships with smaller cargo hold would need a support ship to keep them fueled, which would in turn need pvp'rs to guard the fuel truck, which in turn gives defenders targets. Which with a bit of love from BOB, could encourage PVP around capturing and defending sov.
-- - -- - -- - --
To encourage group/fleet sov activity (pvp), capture times could be tied to system activity in a real way - If there is only 1 ship in system, it increases cycle time. Multiple Entosis links from the same group speeds up capture process; This would need to be capped so as to not make it so 100 entosis links instantly capture a system but undefended/unoccupied systems could be captured quickly.
For this stacking penalties could come into play;
EG; 1 entosis link would take 20 minutes to capture, 2 reduces it to 18 minutes, 3 reduces to 17 mins and so on to a maximum of 10, reducing capture time to 5 minutes. Add system indexes into the equation and even an unoccupied system with reasonable indexes is going to fall quickly but it would require the attacker to commit more than a couple of interceptors.
Defenders/Owners of systems would actually need to reside in their systems - Or risk losing them.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6612
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 23:06:15 -
[1036] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas, your tears are getting more wet, get a grip and raise the quality, your arguments now are incredibly lacking. Yeah yeah yeah... I'm done with you. Come back when you have a valid opinion form an educated point of view rather than constant trolling and claims that anything said by an Imperium member is automatically tears. The level of "grr goons" in you is far too high to be taken seriously. So we're finally down to this argument. The argument we're down to is that you clearly have no experience with sov, you' obviously not interested in any other point of view , especially if it's from an imperium member (because grr goons) and that further discussion with you will go nowhere. Sine about 50% of your posts are "THE TEARS OMG THE TEARS" it's unlikely that CCP is going to take what you are positng seiously, so it's not worth my time going in circles with you.
Amusingly, you seem to be against wardecs too, so someone paying 50m to be able to fight a highsec corp annoys you (and supposedly you're a null player) yet someone paying less for be able to contest sov you think is fine. Clearly your point of view is "goons don't like it, therefore it is good". I'll be interested to see what you think of it once you realise the mechanics as they stand have made the Imperium more powerful.
Orca Platypus wrote:P.S. When you say you want you shiny back despite knowing fully that it's not longer yours By all means point to where I've claimed to want anything back. I don't want the sov system rolled back or only giant fleets to be able to compete, I simply want attackers to need to commit more than they currently do to attack alliance level infrastructure. That's not tears, it's basic common sense. It's certainly not "too hard" to defend, it's simply too boring, and the mechanic sis supposed to be entertaining.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
704
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 23:07:38 -
[1037] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas, your tears are getting more wet, get a grip and raise the quality, your arguments now are incredibly lacking. Yeah yeah yeah... I'm done with you. Come back when you have a valid opinion form an educated point of view rather than constant trolling and claims that anything said by an Imperium member is automatically tears. The level of "grr goons" in you is far too high to be taken seriously. So we're finally down to this argument.According to your post, to have a conversation with you, I must present myself for the "ad gewnminem" (a special type of ad hominem attack that is pursued over any attempt to actually counter-argument), I have to stop calling tears tears, I hate to stop mocking the poor argumentation (or utter lack of any argumentation), I have to ignore some facts, and most of all I have to go down to your gewn level - and only then you'll talk. I must express my gratitude for gewns who made an attempt to the best of their abilities to actually counter-argument, as it was their help that was crucial in achieving my goal of making gewns look stupid in addition to being stupid. P.S. When you say you want you shiny back despite knowing fully that it's not longer yours, it's tears. So every time you cry about not being able to blueball a single frig because of the changes, it's tears. Too hard to defend empty space? Tears. Being butthurt about the fact a small entity outsmarting you? Tears. Can't counter a single self-tackled ship? Tears. Covering tears with bs like "they should commit" or "hurr durr alliance level srs bzns only"? Tears. They should commit no more than you do, and if you can't, that's not their, system, or CCP's problem - it's just you being a crybaby.
Orca, where is it you say your mains alliance holds sov?
I only ask because I would be interested to see if your attitude to "Troll Ceptors" changes when they are used against you.
While hiding behind your NPC alt doesn't completely invalidate your "argument", it does limit it to seem you are posting what you "think" rather than experience.
PS; My little alliance is not blue to Goons.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 01:09:22 -
[1038] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:The argument we're down to is that you clearly have no experience with sov
We've already been there and confirmed I'm a lot more experienced with fozziesov than you are. Being a dominionfag means you suck at adaption, not experience.
Lucas Kell wrote:you' obviously not interested in any other point of view
If your "point of view" sees trollceptors as a thing, it is stupid and you should be ashamed for having it.
Lucas Kell wrote:especially if it's from an imperium member (because grr goons)
Well it's gewns who are in tears here, demonstrating the biggest ignorance and dominionfaggotry, like 2/3 of the topic is gewn tears and like 1/4th of that is you personally, so what do you expect?
Lucas Kell wrote:and that further discussion with you will go nowhere. Sine about 50% of your posts are "THE TEARS OMG THE TEARS" it's unlikely that CCP is going to take what you are positng seiously, so it's not worth my time going in circles with you.
Which is a usual outcome of a discussion where one side has nothing but tears to present.
And stop impersonating CCP, even though it's catering to gewn tears most of the time, it's not as stupid.
Lucas Kell wrote:Amusingly, you seem to be against wardecs too, so someone paying 50m to be able to fight a highsec corp annoys you (and supposedly you're a null player) yet someone paying less for be able to contest sov you think is fine. Clearly your point of view is "goons don't like it, therefore it is good". I'll be interested to see what you think of it once you realise the mechanics as they stand have made the Imperium more powerful.
By all means point to where I've claimed to want anything back. I don't want the sov system rolled back or only giant fleets to be able to compete, I simply want attackers to need to commit more than they currently do to attack alliance level infrastructure. That's not tears, it's basic common sense. It's certainly not "too hard" to defend, it's simply too boring, and the mechanic sis supposed to be entertaining.
I weren't born in null.
Someone paying less can't "contest your sov" because:
a) Even ceptor+entosis cost more than 50m.
b) Trollceptor cannot "contenst your sov", since it can only grab uncontested systems, and grabbing uncontested systems is not "contesting" by definiton.
It was supposed to make gewns more powerful, yes. However, with all the blunders and spectacular adaption failures gewns are showing, it didn't. At least not yet.
Attackers have to commit more than defenders to attack alliance infrastructure. It's just you being deeply emotionally attached to all the empty systems you try to defend for nothing but propagewnda reasons is making you feel like there is a problem where there's none. If it's boring, don't do it, let the problem solve itself. Any occupied system is immune to non-committing attacker almost by definition. It is a fight, a fight is always entertaining at least for one side, while your defense of useless empty systems is boring for both you and people who want them - and this is completely your fault. Then you come and cry for a fix of what is not a problem when it's perfectly possible for you to fix it by yourself - that is not common sense, that is pure tears. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1840
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 02:36:05 -
[1039] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:dominionfag
Ah yes, we're at this level of discourse now.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
79
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 03:05:12 -
[1040] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:It's just dumb that it's a threat to sov that needs a response. It allows a frigate to force a defensive response even though, like you say, in a utilised system they have NO chance of taking it, and it means that attackers can put nearly nothing on the line while defenders have their whole system on the line. All of the control is in the attackers hands. While it required far too much commitment from attackers in the old system it now requires far too little. Except the defenders don't have their whole system on the line. The trollceptor has no chance. Against a single frigate all that's "on the line" is 5 minutes out of the life of one of the systems ratters.
I'm sure it's not amusing to have to warp away from your ratting to go deal with somebody sov-ing for laughs. And I'm sure eventually the ratters will get frustrated, and bored, and want to stop defending. Maybe the Alliance needs to put a bounty on entosis attempts. Maybe somebody just needs to multibox a sniper to fend off frigates. Not going to pretend I've theorycrafted the best method of minimizing the ISK/hour impact of defending your space. |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6613
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 03:17:51 -
[1041] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:We've already been there and confirmed I'm a lot more experienced with fozziesov than you are. Being a dominionfag means you suck at adaption, not experience. You've not confirmed anything beyond the fact that you're a troll. Your a butthurt NPC player, probably lost a hauler or something and now are trying to derail feedback threads. And I'm done with you.
Aerasia wrote:Except the defenders don't have their whole system on the line. The trollceptor has no chance. Against a single frigate all that's "on the line" is 5 minutes out of the life of one of the systems ratters. But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Now matter how much border control is put in place, a nullified stabbed ship can just plough on through. It's not healthy for an attacker to have that much power and I'm pretty sure the reason for that will be demonstrated soon.
Aerasia wrote:I'm sure it's not amusing to have to warp away from your ratting to go deal with somebody sov-ing for laughs. And I'm sure eventually the ratters will get frustrated, and bored, and want to stop defending. Maybe the Alliance needs to put a bounty on entosis attempts. Maybe somebody just needs to multibox a sniper to fend off frigates. Not going to pretend I've theorycrafted the best method of minimizing the ISK/hour impact of defending your space. And you don't see that as a problem? The #1 goal of fozziesov was "ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved", and yet you're effectively agreeing here that it's such a chore for defender that alliances will have to actually pay their members to do it. How can it be described as anything but a failure if that's the case? An enjoyable mechanic players would choose to interact with.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
61
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 03:35:27 -
[1042] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:And you don't see that as a problem? The #1 goal of fozziesov was "ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved", and yet you're effectively agreeing here that it's such a chore for defender that alliances will have to actually pay their members to do it. How can it be described as anything but a failure if that's the case? An enjoyable mechanic players would choose to interact with.
except that fending off lone ceptor isn't exactly "fighting for a system"
with your deployment to provi you have a perfect opportunity to show how sov can be taken with troll ceptors.
i hope that you will stick to the ideas your coalition members expressed in this thread, and only use 1 ceptor per system at the time to illustrate how broken the system is. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
69
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 03:42:26 -
[1043] - Quote
Querns wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:dominionfag Ah yes, we're at this level of discourse now.
Ah, to pick exactly one word without any context at all and pick on it.
This is truly the skill at the peak of gewn school of debate.
Failing at ad gewnminem they studied prior posts to pick on anything at all. Failing that too, we're down to picking literally single words out. What's next? Oh yes, declaring me insane pubbie sh*tlord, and claiming none of my arguments matter because gewn said so.
I really should start making those gewn tears bingo cards. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6613
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 03:42:29 -
[1044] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:And you don't see that as a problem? The #1 goal of fozziesov was "ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved", and yet you're effectively agreeing here that it's such a chore for defender that alliances will have to actually pay their members to do it. How can it be described as anything but a failure if that's the case? An enjoyable mechanic players would choose to interact with. except that fending off lone ceptor isn't exactly "fighting for a system" with your deployment to provi you have a perfect opportunity how sov can be taken with troll ceptors. i hope that you will stick to the ideas your coalition members expressed in this thread, and only use 1 ceptor per system at the time to illustrate how broken the system is. It's all part of the mechanic. the only reason the interceptor needs to be chased is because if you don't he succeeds in contesting the system.
Noone is suggesting that a lone ceptor can take a system, in fact if he could it would be less of a problem (though there would be other issues). The problem is that it's the optimal strategy to annoy an alliance by repeatedly sending in trollceptors knowing that each and every one will need to be responded to. It's "fighting with boredom" as Fozzie put it for dominion, and it's one of the things the mechanic is supposed to be against. We're taking it one step further and will be running a different type of campaign but will be equally uninterested in holding the sov. Sov mechanics are no longer a way of fighting over control of a system, they are just a way to annoy the people that live there and a way to claim unused space.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 03:50:35 -
[1045] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
Noone is suggesting that a lone ceptor can take a system.
strange, the impression i got from previous 51 pages of this thread was that this was exactly what your coalition members suggested |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6613
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 04:13:01 -
[1046] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:strange, the impression i got from previous 51 pages of this thread was that this was exactly what your coalition members suggested Then you need to work on your comprehension. It's been stated multiple times, not just by us:
Lucas Kell wrote:It's not that it's too difficult, it's simply boring. There's no fun in endlessly chasing frigates around simply because you have to to hold space. baltec1 wrote:Defending isn't a problem, the issue is that trollcepters are even more boring than the old sov mechanics. Sgt Ocker wrote:It is boring tedious and primarily based on conflict avoidance.
Interceptor based avoidance strategies, have all but replaced sov warfare - and is for the most part pretty bad design. Jenn aSide wrote:They literally took a system that could be equal parts boredom (structure grinding) and Epicness and made it ALL boring (and then counted that as a win). I thought the change (ie massive over-reaction) from POS based sov to dominion was bad, but this one is worse, at least Dominion preserved the spirit of 0.0 space fighting.
This new system is EASIER to defend, my wallets have never been so fat from null sec isk, but Aegis SOV has sucked the 'awesome' out of the game. For some reason, some people think the opposition is about not liking change, or not wanting to adapt, or losing. But we HAVE all adapted , and no one of consequence has lost anything.
I've run out of ability to add more quotes to this post but there are many many many more.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
69
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 04:13:28 -
[1047] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:You've not confirmed anything beyond the fact that you're a troll. Your a butthurt NPC player, probably lost a hauler or something and now are trying to derail feedback threads. And I'm done with you.
Yet another tear-filled ad gewnminem attempt, prefaced with the word "probably" for bonus tears of desperately shooting in the dark just to make something hit. Miss, bubba.
Why is it always when I talk entosis you talk ad gewnminems? Must be me being too right and you being too butthurt about it, otherwise there is no reason to try derailing it so hard.
Lucas Kell wrote:But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Now matter how much border control is put in place, a nullified stabbed ship can just plough on through. It's not healthy for an attacker to have that much power and I'm pretty sure the reason for that will be demonstrated soon.
"bawwwwwwwwwwwwwww attacker can HAS force to make me stop ratting for a minute qqqqqq".
I'm trying to find how to call this other than tears, but this is just too wet, too salty and too sounds too butthurt to be anything else.
You literally cry over an inty showing up in your system and self-tackling himself on your station!
You are clueless about entosis mechanics as well too, since the system is not lost, but reinforced first. Same for station and ihub. And if you can't win the tug against trollceptors, you really shouldn't be sov holder. There are only 10 nodes. Man them all with entosis caracal, done, you won the tug. Man half of them, then once you done, go to the other half, squash or chase off the trollceptors and man their nodes, done, they don't have enough time to win the tug now.
tg;tr (too gewn to read) To lose an occupied system to trollceptors you have to be completely unable to undock. There is no other way to lose. If you are crying about that, that just means undocking is too much of a bother to ask from you.
Lucas Kell wrote:And you don't see that as a problem? The #1 goal of fozziesov was "ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved", and yet you're effectively agreeing here that it's such a chore for defender that alliances will have to actually pay their members to do it. How can it be described as anything but a failure if that's the case? An enjoyable mechanic players would choose to interact with.
There is no problem. The process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable. What you face, however, is best described as a self-tackling teethless roamer. What you cry about this whole post is that now you have to deal with this incredible 90 dps threat, and you didn't have to before, and now you cry that want your consequence-free bearhole you manned every time they came given back to you.
tg;tr (too gewn to read) Defending occupied system against trollceptor is not a sov defense, it's a light easy version of roam defense against a solo 90dps self-tackled roamer who put 80m on the line to make you "react", and would lose if you put 5m of a T1 combat frig on the line against him. You didn't have to react before, rules changed, now you have to commit 14 times less than attacker to win, and that made you cry for 10 pages. Man up, HTFU. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6613
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 04:14:36 -
[1048] - Quote
Hush now Orca. I'm not reading that.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
69
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 04:22:23 -
[1049] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Hush now Orca. I'm not reading that.
So now it's "lalala I can't hear you".
You still haven't hit the bottom, but it's approaching at the speed of an imminent dialectic fiasco. |
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
79
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 04:23:40 -
[1050] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Which, perversely, works in the defenders favor. Mittani explains better than I.
Lucas Kell wrote:And you don't see that as a problem? No. The attacker spends 30-60 minutes hacking a structure, the defender spends 5 minutes saying "No, go away." As annoying as it might be fore the defender, it's even moreso for the attacker.
I have no doubt that EVE harbors the right type of personalities to have one side or the other dedicate themselves to those efforts for months. But in order for an undefended system to be vulnerable to a single frigate, a defended system needs to be approachable for that same frigate. And if the result of that is a few dozen ratters groaning in frustration as they get pulled away from their AFK ISK farming for the 4th time this week? I'm OK with that. |
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 04:41:38 -
[1051] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Warmeister wrote:strange, the impression i got from previous 51 pages of this thread was that this was exactly what your coalition members suggested Then you need to work on your comprehension. It's been stated multiple times, not just by us:
my comprehension is quite alright, thank you. it's also been stated many times by your members, yourself included that 'troll ceptors shouldn't be allowed to take sov'. so now you are actually contradicting yourself....again |
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
3218
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 04:56:04 -
[1052] - Quote
So I have read about 16.5 pages of posts and all I have to contribute are these two links.
Link 1.
Link 2.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 06:07:11 -
[1053] - Quote
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 |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1628
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 06:10:39 -
[1054] - Quote
Aerasia wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Which, perversely, works in the defenders favor. Mittani explains better than I. Lucas Kell wrote:And you don't see that as a problem? No. The attacker spends 30-60 minutes hacking a structure, the defender spends 5 minutes saying "No, go away." As annoying as it might be fore the defender, it's even moreso for the attacker. I have no doubt that EVE harbors the right type of personalities to have one side or the other dedicate themselves to those efforts for months. But in order for an undefended system to be vulnerable to a single frigate, a defended system needs to be approachable for that same frigate. And if the result of that is a few dozen ratters groaning in frustration as they get pulled away from their AFK ISK farming for the 4th time this week? I'm OK with that.
The fact that if your indexes are high enough you can ignore another player for 45 minutes, then finally go respond to them, and then either kill them or chase them away, is still not good game play. Eve is supposed to be a fun and exciting game. CCP should be trying to find ways to make content denial the least viable strategy.
Fundamentally, at either extreme of the indexes, Aegis Sov still rewards conflict evasion tactics - and that is why it is not a good system.
Many years ago, CCP changed the aggression mechanics so that logging off your tackled Supercapital was no longer the best strategy. This was a great change. Logging off the game - not playing the game - making other players waste time - should never be the best strategy.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 06:12:17 -
[1055] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Now matter how much border control is put in place, a nullified stabbed ship can just plough on through. It's not healthy for an attacker to have that much power and I'm pretty sure the reason for that will be demonstrated soon.
.
you are exaggerating
in order for defender to lose the sov he has to not show up twice.
first time when the structure is RF'd. second time when it comes out of RF and the lone ceptor has to grind through beacons. i think it's 12 of them after this patch.
if that has happened i think defender has no one to blame but himself. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1630
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 06:24:53 -
[1056] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Now matter how much border control is put in place, a nullified stabbed ship can just plough on through. It's not healthy for an attacker to have that much power and I'm pretty sure the reason for that will be demonstrated soon.
. you are exaggerating in order for defender to lose the sov he has to not show up twice. first time when the structure is RF'd. second time when it comes out of RF and the lone ceptor has to grind through beacons. i think it's 12 of them after this patch.
To me, that is part of the problem. I would rather see a system in which the defender always has to be ready to fight for his space - at least during his designated prime time - but the attacker has to make a concerted effort to go for it.
That way, if the attacker makes an effort to attack, and the defender fails to show up once, he should lose that space. The attacker will always get the initiative - he chooses the date and place for the fight. The defender gets to choose the vulnerability window - but can never decide "Let's blue ball them today and ping for more numbers two days from now."
Not showing up to the fight should never be a viable strategy for a sov holding alliance. At the same time, making an attempt on sovereignty should require enough effort on the part of the attacker that it is not undertaken lightly.
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
3219
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 06:35:40 -
[1057] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Now matter how much border control is put in place, a nullified stabbed ship can just plough on through. It's not healthy for an attacker to have that much power and I'm pretty sure the reason for that will be demonstrated soon.
. you are exaggerating in order for defender to lose the sov he has to not show up twice. first time when the structure is RF'd. second time when it comes out of RF and the lone ceptor has to grind through beacons. i think it's 12 of them after this patch. if that has happened i think defender has no one to blame but himself.
I think you are missing the overall point many are making against Fozziesov. It is not that a well organized coalition is going to fall to one dude in an interceptor, but that Sov Trolling is on par with AFK cloaking as a form of game play. Over all it sucks and is not fun.
Hopefully AFK cloaking will go the way of the dodo with the observatory array and local will too (as the default to be clawed back with the observatory array which is vulnerable....to the entosis link no less) and in upcoming iterations so will Sov Trolling.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 06:54:33 -
[1058] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:
I think you are missing the overall point many are making against Fozziesov. It is not that a well organized coalition is going to fall to one dude in an interceptor, but that Sov Trolling is on par with AFK cloaking as a form of game play. Over all it sucks and is not fun.
Hopefully AFK cloaking will go the way of the dodo with the observatory array and local will too (as the default to be clawed back with the observatory array which is vulnerable....to the entosis link no less) and in upcoming iterations so will Sov Trolling.
once the local goes, so does the problem of supposed invincibility of ceptors, as they will only know that someone has come for them once they are about to land on grid, thus making the argument moot
at a higher level, harassment is a valid game play in my opinion. if CCP is going to change mechanics to make it impossible, they would have to look at lots of things, like suicide ganking for example.
they could for example require people participating in Jita burn put some skin on the line and use ships that match the value of freighters they are killing ;) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6614
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 07:14:17 -
[1059] - Quote
Aerasia wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:But a defender HAS to respond, otherwise the system is lost. There's no other option. Just by showing up the attacker forces a response because no matter how utilised the system, the system is still vulnerable to an evasion fit ship. Which, perversely, works in the defenders favor. Mittani explains better than I. That's not it being an advantage, that simply the reason that it's also boring for the attacker. The attacker still has the full choice of whether to do it and the defender is still forced to respond every time without fail.
Aerasia wrote:No. The attacker spends 30-60 minutes hacking a structure, the defender spends 5 minutes saying "No, go away." As annoying as it might be fore the defender, it's even moreso for the attacker. So you don't see it as a problem that both sides of the mechanic is boring?
Aerasia wrote:I have no doubt that EVE harbors the right type of personalities to have one side or the other dedicate themselves to those efforts for months. But in order for an undefended system to be vulnerable to a single frigate, a defended system needs to be approachable for that same frigate. And if the result of that is a few dozen ratters groaning in frustration as they get pulled away from their AFK ISK farming for the 4th time this week? I'm OK with that. But an undefended system is undefended. It doesn't matter what you bring, it will still fall to a solo ship. If they made battlecurisers for example the minimum for entosis links, the same groups would still only need to bring one ship to take it. The only reason to support interceptors taking sov is so they can run away when defenders are about.
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
6614
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 07:21:09 -
[1060] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:once the local goes, so does the problem of supposed invincibility of ceptors, as they will only know that someone has come for them once they are about to land on grid, thus making the argument moot Because d-scan doesn't exist
Warmeister wrote:at a higher level, harassment is a valid game play in my opinion. if CCP is going to change mechanics to make it impossible, they would have to look at lots of things, like suicide ganking for example. Harassment yes, boredom no. One of the problems Fozzie stated the old mechanic had is that people could use it as a weapon to create boredom for their opponents. Letting the new mechanic work so easily for the same goal is bad.
Warmeister wrote:they could for example require people participating in Jita burn put some skin on the line and use ships that match the value of freighters they are killing ;) I'm acually for this. I think ganking risk should be increased. I've posted on this many times.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
63
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 07:27:12 -
[1061] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Because d-scan doesn't exist
in case you haven't been playing eve for the past year or two, there are now ships that don't show up on d-scan, as well as ships that can warp at 8.0au/sec base speed. so absence of local will be a massive game changer
Quote:
Harassment yes, boredom no. One of the problems Fozzie stated the old mechanic had is that people could use it as a weapon to create boredom for their opponents. Letting the new mechanic work so easily for the same goal is bad.
in my opinion, the only time fozziesov becomes boring is when one of the sides doesn't show up. when both sides show up it can be anything but boring |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1812
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 07:30:46 -
[1062] - Quote
Kystraz wrote: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
CFC's announcement to the providence invasion is certainly the best way to make the system enjoyable and fascinating for all players. /s
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
ISD FlowingSpice
ISD STAR
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 07:47:37 -
[1063] - Quote
Cleaned up some posts.
Play nice. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16548
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 08:06:04 -
[1064] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Kystraz wrote: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 CFC's announcement to the providence invasion is certainly the best way to make the system enjoyable and fascinating for all players. /s
Not with what we are planning to do.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 08:15:13 -
[1065] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:The fact that if your indexes are high enough you can ignore another player for 45 minutes, then finally go respond to them, and then either kill them or chase them away, is still not good game play. Eve is supposed to be a fun and exciting game. CCP should be trying to find ways to make content denial the least viable strategy.
Fundamentally, at either extreme of the indexes, Aegis Sov still rewards conflict evasion tactics - and that is why it is not a good system.
Many years ago, CCP changed the aggression mechanics so that logging off your tackled Supercapital was no longer the best strategy. This was a great change. Logging off the game - not playing the game - making other players waste time - should never be the best strategy.
There is no conflict evasion. There is no content denial. As said to you 10 times before, trollceptor is only capable of taking uncontested sov. If he comes for occupied system, unless it's occupied with gewn bots/dockupbears, he's failing by design - fozziesov working as intended.
Many years ago CCP did the unrelated thing which somehow involving logoff, which is completely unrelated to fozziesov, but gotta derail, because gewn. Once again, if defending your systems is wasting time, don't waste time, it's your own decision to waste time, don't cry about it.
FT Diomedes wrote:To me, that is part of the problem. I would rather see a system in which the defender always has to be ready to fight for his space - at least during his designated prime time - but the attacker has to make a concerted effort to go for it.
That way, if the attacker makes an effort to attack, and the defender fails to show up once, he should lose that space. The attacker will always get the initiative - he chooses the date and place for the fight. The defender gets to choose the vulnerability window - but can never decide "Let's blue ball them today and ping for more numbers two days from now."
Not showing up to the fight should never be a viable strategy for a sov holding alliance. At the same time, making an attempt on sovereignty should require enough effort on the part of the attacker that it is not undertaken lightly.
Which is, what a coincidence, exactly how it works where people aren't emotionally attached to deprecated thought patterns and actually adapted.
tg;tr (too gewn to read) trollceptor is only a thing where you are completely unable to contest your own sov, in which case it's uncontested sov capture and working as intended. |
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 08:31:47 -
[1066] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:tg;tr (too gewn to read) trollceptor is only a thing where you are completely unable to contest your own sov, in which case it's uncontested sov capture and working as intended.
https://timerboard.net/
Nope, nothing there for Imperium space.
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, solo interceptor v. solo griffin isn't enjoyable or fascinating for all players involved. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6614
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 09:22:08 -
[1067] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:in case you haven't been playing eve for the past year or two, there are now ships that don't show up on d-scan, as well as ships that can warp at 8.0au/sec base speed. so absence of local will be a massive game changer Indeed there are and I'm sure it would, but it won't render trollcetors useless. They'll still be the cheap and easy way to fly straight though any border controls and force a respond in any given system.
Warmeister wrote:in my opinion, the only time fozziesov becomes boring is when one of the sides doesn't show up. when both sides show up it can be anything but boring Then you haven't really used it much. When you have to constantly fly to a node to chase away a frigate, both sides have showed up and it's still boring. Like with FW, it's non-content and it's bad.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 09:54:38 -
[1068] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
As said to you 10 times before, trollceptor is only capable of taking uncontested sov.
Repeating this "fact" does not make it true. Goons managed to weaponise boredom under dominion sov what makes you think the new mechanics are any different? I fully believe they will stick to their plan of trolling sov with fight-evading ships for months until people are too bored to show up to defend. Is that really good gameplay? Unfortunately boredom is one of the best tactics in eve, people enjoy fights even if they lose some. Nobody enjoys blueballing tactics and that's why they work, the defenders morale will slowly be worn down until they can no longer field enough numbers.
P.S. I'm not a goon |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1813
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 10:13:43 -
[1069] - Quote
Disallowing ceptors from entosising does not change that. What it will do is shift the problem. From evading to not being able to attack in the first place. This is not better in any way, shape or form.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1859
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 10:24:48 -
[1070] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:I fully believe they will stick to their plan of trolling sov with fight-evading ships for months until people are too bored to show up to defend.
See, here's the thing. A similar thing was said with siphons...nothing happened.
Furthermore, I am slightly curious - if the entry barrier and effort levels are so long...why hasn't it started yet?
Why are people talking it up as opposed to making provi burn?
I genuinely don't understand and honestly...I'm impatient to see how it pans out. It's strange, really, set against the backdrop of many complaints that taking sov is too easy, any idiot can do it, low barrier of entry, easy to take....yet no-one is actually doing it.
/shrugs
|
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
67
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 10:25:35 -
[1071] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Indeed there are and I'm sure it would, but it won't render trollcetors useless. They'll still be the cheap and easy way to fly straight though any border controls and force a respond in any given system.
they are intended to do that. i'm not a big fan of bubble immunity myself, and i think it should be stripped from all ships in game including T3. but that's got nothing to do with sov mechanics. and inties still will be able to get through border controls even if they aren't nullified
Lucas Kell wrote:
Then you haven't really used it much. When you have to constantly fly to a node to chase away a frigate, both sides have showed up and it's still boring. Like with FW, it's non-content and it's bad.
i've used it enough. i think FW guys will disagree with your comment that the way they are playing it is boring. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6614
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 10:40:22 -
[1072] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Disallowing ceptors from entosising does not change that. What it will do is shift the problem. From evading to not being able to attack in the first place. This is not better in any way, shape or form. So are you claiming that if it took one battlecuriser or above to attack a solar system you would be incapable of attacking sov? If that's the case you'd stand no chance of defending sov anyway.
Warmeister wrote:they are intended to do that. i'm not a big fan of bubble immunity myself, and i think it should be stripped from all ships in game including T3. but that's got nothing to do with sov mechanics. and inties still will be able to get through border controls even if they aren't nullified No, they aren't. Interceptors, as their name suggests, are designed to intercept. They are designed to be scouts and designed to tackle. They aren't designed to be a near unstoppable method of blasting through defenses to take potshots at sov structures.
Rivr Luzade wrote:i've used it enough. i think FW guys will disagree with your comment that the way they are playing it is boring. lol, the only reason FW guys will disagree with that is because they are making fat bank off of the LP stores from playing the system. FW is widely known to be a horrendously broken system.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 10:49:26 -
[1073] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Mr Mieyli wrote:I fully believe they will stick to their plan of trolling sov with fight-evading ships for months until people are too bored to show up to defend. See, here's the thing. A similar thing was said with siphons...nothing happened. Furthermore, I am slightly curious - if the entry barrier and effort levels are so long...why hasn't it started yet? Why are people talking it up as opposed to making provi burn? I genuinely don't understand and honestly...I'm impatient to see how it pans out. It's strange, really, set against the backdrop of many complaints that taking sov is too easy, any idiot can do it, low barrier of entry, easy to take....yet no-one is actually doing it. /shrugs
Leaving your sov space for a deployment makes you very vulnerable especially in the new system (and since phoebe) where it takes very little to reinforce a structure. Give it some time/ nerfs until people feel comfortable leaving their own space and then we'll see large scale deployments.
If it's now much easier for small groups to take sov why would it not be correspondingly easier for a large well-organised group? A large group can leave half their guys at home for home defence and take the other half out in entosis ships and bore a region to death before capturing it. If it is mechanically possible and also strategically viable then people will do it (in this case avoid fights in interceptors until people are too bored to defend)
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6818
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 10:59:41 -
[1074] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:i've used it enough. i think FW guys will disagree with your comment that the way they are playing it is boring. lol, the only reason FW guys will disagree with that is because they are making fat bank off of the LP stores from playing the system. FW is widely known to be a horrendously broken system.
While I'm glad fweddit wanted to join us in null for the fun, I'm afraid now that sov has become... well less so
This is the moment we need their staging-camping and button-orbiting prowess :) I guess they also know a lot about interceptors
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1859
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 11:01:54 -
[1075] - Quote
Remember this was meant to be the flight of the trollceptors...it's not hard to rock about in them. A full scale deployment naturally takes longer, but then it is a sovwar and not the flight of the ceptors soooooo....
As to why it will be harder they're taking it from entrenched, high indexed holders. Not sprawling "a guy every 3 systems" overstretched, used to afk/passive defence sovholders. Sov got easy to take from slack holders, not easier to take from all.
I've already stated I think it will be a hell of a lot harder than people expect. I could be wrong and have also said as much. It will however, be interesting whether I was correct or not.
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1814
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 11:39:50 -
[1076] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Disallowing ceptors from entosising does not change that. What it will do is shift the problem. From evading to not being able to attack in the first place. This is not better in any way, shape or form. So are you claiming that if it took one battlecuriser or above to attack a solar system you would be incapable of attacking sov? If that's the case you'd stand no chance of defending sov anyway.
Finally you start to understand. I've already had given up hope. Now just use your brain to fill the blanks who the people are who would cause this and we are one step closer to a solution.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
472
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 11:44:43 -
[1077] - Quote
I would imagine that after the Providence war, no-one in nullsec is going to bother with I-hubs anymore. This will make all sov everywhere essentally worthless.
Maybe that was the idea.
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.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16549
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:03:15 -
[1078] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Disallowing ceptors from entosising does not change that. What it will do is shift the problem. From evading to not being able to attack in the first place. This is not better in any way, shape or form. So are you claiming that if it took one battlecuriser or above to attack a solar system you would be incapable of attacking sov? If that's the case you'd stand no chance of defending sov anyway. Finally you start to understand. I've already had given up hope. Now just use your brain to fill the blanks who the people are who would cause this and we are one step closer to a solution.
The only solution here is you growing a backbone and actually fighting the sov owners for their sov.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1814
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:06:52 -
[1079] - Quote
baltec, please listen to Mitten's recording and then think about what you just said. Then return and edit your post with your conclusion.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Natya Mebelle
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
312
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:24:42 -
[1080] - Quote
The only thing that always rubbed me the wrong way with the new sovereignty is the Tech2 Entosis link.
250km range? Seriously? I thought it was supposed to be short-ranged and right in between the fight. The Entosis II is just too good overall. it's like "T2 entosis is mandatory to do anything seriously" instead of just an upgrade to the T1 Entosis. Upping the skill requirement for the T2 Entosis, fixing some of the variables, and I think this is going to help with some of the "troll-ships" as well.
250km. Really.
I'm also not happy that everything is just simulation passive again. You activate a module. Wow. Done. Much participation. I'd much rather see more activity going on. The Entosis module is "taking over", so basically hacking the thing. Cue hacking minigame? Each time it is done, a new one pops up, and for each completed hacking minigame you get a little extra nudge on that progression bar. This would allow multiple participants to fight on a "non-combat" level instead of an automatic, boring stalemate. Defenders would be doing the same thing. They link to their structure with the Entosis, and for each successful hacking minigame solved, they're pushing the attacker bar down. |
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16550
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:35:08 -
[1081] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec, please listen to Mitten's recording and then think about what you just said. Then return and edit your post with your conclusion.
I was there and I'm looking forwards to once again forcing CCP to deal with a broken mechanic by using said mechanic to put another region to the torch.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1814
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:44:20 -
[1082] - Quote
And replace it with just another broken mechanic? What you are trying to do in Providence is only going to be the prime showcase of mechanics failing in face of numbers as any mechanic can be exploited exponentially by numbers.
Growing a backbone is not enough to attack your sov, neither with ceptors nor with BC or ships without prop mods. Disallowing ceptors or any tactics is making space like yours again unassailable, whereas now it is at least trollable and causing you headache.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16550
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:51:42 -
[1083] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:And replace it with just another broken mechanic? What you are trying to do in Providence is only going to be the prime showcase of mechanics failing in face of numbers as any mechanic can be exploited exponentially by numbers.
Growing a backbone is not enough to attack your sov, neither with ceptors nor with BC or ships without prop mods. Disallowing ceptors or any tactics is making space like yours again unassailable, whereas now it is at least trollable and causing you headache.
One guy alone sure, a dozen, two dozen small gangs attacking at the same time is a lot more challenging.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1814
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:59:34 -
[1084] - Quote
Which you can easily counter with, what was the number in the recording again, 60 people, 80 people (and this was deployment numbers, not numbers available at home)? You have more than enough people to counter anything that even tries to cross the border and obliterate it. The rest, see my posts before. If people can't even cause you headache anymore in border areas, your space is unassailable, even more than it already is.
Elsewhere in the universe, people do not have the problems that you have. Elsewhere, people already have the conflicts that you need to search far away from home. Go figure. vOv
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6614
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 13:14:10 -
[1085] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Which you can easily counter with, what was the number in the recording again, 60 people, 80 people (and this was deployment numbers, not numbers available at home)? You have more than enough people to counter anything that even tries to cross the border and obliterate it. The rest, see my posts before. If people can't even cause you headache anymore in border areas, your space is unassailable, even more than it already is. Our space isn't unassailable, just when there's an alliance consisting of 3 people they can't do much. You want them to be able to, and I get it, they want to attack the big bad, but they have to understand they need to bring something to the field to be a threat.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Elsewhere in the universe, people do not have the problems that you have. Elsewhere, people already have the conflicts that you need to search far away from home. Go figure. vOv Except of course that the majority of null sov players, big and small, have claimed that the new system is boring. The only people going "YAY" are people with no intention of holding sov. That's pretty telling in itself.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
359
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 13:43:43 -
[1086] - Quote
Gewns telling other people to grow backbones. Just sayin'.... |
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
81
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 13:45:35 -
[1087] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:The fact that if your indexes are high enough you can ignore another player for 45 minutes, then finally go respond to them, and then either kill them or chase them away, is still not good game play. Eve is supposed to be a fun and exciting game. CCP should be trying to find ways to make content denial the least viable strategy.
Fundamentally, at either extreme of the indexes, Aegis Sov still rewards conflict evasion tactics - and that is why it is not a good system. Lucas Kell wrote:That's not it being an advantage, that simply the reason that it's also boring for the attacker. The attacker still has the full choice of whether to do it and the defender is still forced to respond every time without fail. The point being that it's even more boring for the attacker. And it's entirely the attacker's prerogative to go the trollceptor route. To a certain extent it's like mining to make ISK. Not the most exciting, but if you keep doing it you've got nobody to blame but yourself.
On the other hand, what if the attacker brings an actual fleet to start the Entosis? I think the 60 minute timer is actually pretty reasonable if you find yourself needing to counter a 100 person attacking force. I don't think we're going to see these types of attacks become common until all of the low index space has been "trolled" away, but it's not like the option isn't there.
So while I'm generally not in favor of boring game mechanics, the boring parts of the sov system are either minimal, or outright optional.
- Attacking trollceptors spend far more time bored than defenders.
- Defenders have the option of multiboxing a defending ship to pre-empt the troll.
- The lack of killmaill for a ship that runs away is a completely uncompelling argument.
- Even if the troll is successful, an uncontested defence now only take 12 minutes. That's barely longer than defending against the troll, and gives you a few days troll immunity to boot. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 14:13:39 -
[1088] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:tg;tr (too gewn to read) trollceptor is only a thing where you are completely unable to contest your own sov, in which case it's uncontested sov capture and working as intended. https://timerboard.net/
Nope, nothing there for Imperium space.
So why are they overfilling my tear bucket here? Your guess?
Kystraz wrote: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, solo interceptor v. solo griffin isn't enjoyable or fascinating for all players involved.
It's probably a good thing that a trollceptor doesn't contest sov then. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 14:35:55 -
[1089] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
It's probably a good thing that a trollceptor doesn't contest sov then.
See my last post about trollceptors.
How long are alliances of real life players (who could be playing something fun) going to continue logging in to defend their space from nothing but interceptors? You've said in your posts if it's not worth holding the space then don't do it; what kind of sov system do we have where the best thing to do is not hold sov?
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 14:39:22 -
[1090] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Repeating this "fact" does not make it true.
Calling it not true without arguments isn't going to make it less true either.
Mr Mieyli wrote:Goons managed to weaponise boredom under dominion sov what makes you think the new mechanics are any different?
Check this thread. They are clueless about the tactics of actual sov contest. They aren't even thinking of what comes past reinforcement. They are ignoring even the latest node changes clearly underestimating how fast competent defender will wrap capture events up. They are clueless about tug of war tactics as well because it's just way over their heads at their current level.
tg;tr gewns are clearly failing in new mechanics, weaponized boredom is the defender's weapon, and they don't even know that, trying to attack with it.
Mr Mieyli wrote:I fully believe they will stick to their plan of trolling sov with fight-evading ships for months until people are too bored to show up to defend. Is that really good gameplay? Unfortunately boredom is one of the best tactics in eve, people enjoy fights even if they lose some. Nobody enjoys blueballing tactics and that's why they work, the defenders morale will slowly be worn down until they can no longer field enough numbers.
Any attrition will have to be dealt with using an actual force. Trollceptoring attrition is impossible. If they are going to stick to trollceptor, they will fail pathetically for the whole eve to laugh.
Mr Mieyli wrote:P.S. I'm not a goon
So you are their pet? |
|
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 16:02:01 -
[1091] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec, please listen to Mitten's recording and then think about what you just said. Then return and edit your post with your conclusion. I was there and I'm looking forwards to once again forcing CCP to deal with a broken mechanic by using said mechanic to put another region to the torch.
Meh, when you have a 40k coalition, it is not hard to make anything look broken. I'm just looking forward to more cry post six months from now about lack of content because of that one mega-coalition can't find any sustainable conflict drivers since the remnants of null sec are a bunch of small groups like CCP planned. Maybe at some point the Imperium will cease because the only targets will be themselves... or yeah, perhaps not. Will be fun to watch as the lack of content generation continues to take its toll. But hey, at least there is a week in Providence, amirite? |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 16:15:20 -
[1092] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec, please listen to Mitten's recording and then think about what you just said. Then return and edit your post with your conclusion. I was there and I'm looking forwards to once again forcing CCP to deal with a broken mechanic by using said mechanic to put another region to the torch. Meh, when you have a 40k coalition, it is not hard to make anything look broken. I'm just looking forward to more cry post six months from now about lack of content because of that one mega-coalition can't find any sustainable conflict drivers since the remnants of null sec are a bunch of small groups like CCP planned. Maybe at some point the Imperium will cease because the only targets will be themselves... or yeah, perhaps not. Will be fun to watch as the lack of content generation continues to take its toll. But hey, at least there is a week in Providence, amirite?
You do realize there are other coalitions besides us right? Here is a visual: http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/coalitionsov/Coalitioninfluence.png
The only reason Imperium looks so big on the map is because Branch & Deklein highlighted areas extend past the normal boundaries. |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation
Adaptation.
68
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 16:43:45 -
[1093] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Hendrink Collie wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec, please listen to Mitten's recording and then think about what you just said. Then return and edit your post with your conclusion. I was there and I'm looking forwards to once again forcing CCP to deal with a broken mechanic by using said mechanic to put another region to the torch. Meh, when you have a 40k coalition, it is not hard to make anything look broken. I'm just looking forward to more cry post six months from now about lack of content because of that one mega-coalition can't find any sustainable conflict drivers since the remnants of null sec are a bunch of small groups like CCP planned. Maybe at some point the Imperium will cease because the only targets will be themselves... or yeah, perhaps not. Will be fun to watch as the lack of content generation continues to take its toll. But hey, at least there is a week in Providence, amirite? You do realize there are other coalitions besides us right? Here is a visual: http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/coalitionsov/Coalitioninfluence.png
The only reason Imperium looks so big on the map is because Branch & Deklein highlighted areas extend past the normal boundaries.
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/
Another resource for you, amigo. Shows known alliances within each "relevant" null sec coaltion currently in the game. I'd say it is a lot better than the 3 we had during the height of the cold war of 2014. I'd say that coalition map looks pretty good. I just hope for it to have even more colors at some point instead of it restructuring back to 3 or 4. Because those times sucked. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1815
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 16:52:13 -
[1094] - Quote
Of which all combined have just over 7k paper players more (counting out renters, and ESC is dead, and Provi will not leave Provi or participate in any deployment) and are scattered all over the universe doing what CCP's view for a healthy game looks like.
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/ You combine almost 2/5 of Null sec players under your banner. Whatever you understand under "grow a backbone", there is no backbone to grow under these conditions as most of the players seek safety and rather go to CFC than other alliances as other alliances cannot provide the desired safety and stability.
Removing ceptors from creating headache, to you and elsewhere, is not going to help.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6616
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 16:56:48 -
[1095] - Quote
There there.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1815
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 17:08:53 -
[1096] - Quote
I must be grateful time and again that you willfully jump to prove me right.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 17:27:40 -
[1097] - Quote
Let me clarify: we have almost 2/5 of EVE's ratting alts. |
Vic Jefferson
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
550
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 18:10:35 -
[1098] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Elsewhere in the universe, people do not have the problems that you have. Elsewhere, people already have the conflicts that you need to search far away from home. Go figure. vOv
I find this statement and your general moral high ground to be more than a little hypocritical. It wasn't all that long ago that Ineluctable played the evil empire bit in the microcosm of Syndicate. You didn't seem to have any issues with being the biggest fish in that pond and throwing your weight around to the detriment of the ecosystem, but now that you are on the other side of the equation, suddenly you decry this behavior. This leads me to believe you are just angry and confused that one group is more successful than yours.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1815
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 18:32:56 -
[1099] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Elsewhere in the universe, people do not have the problems that you have. Elsewhere, people already have the conflicts that you need to search far away from home. Go figure. vOv I find this statement and your general moral high ground to be more than a little hypocritical. It wasn't all that long ago that Ineluctable played the evil empire bit in the microcosm of Syndicate. You didn't seem to have any issues with being the biggest fish in that pond and throwing your weight around to the detriment of the ecosystem, but now that you are on the other side of the equation, suddenly you decry this behavior. This leads me to believe you are just angry and confused that one group is more successful than yours.
Biggest fish in the pond? I was not aware that our 300 people were bigger than the then CFC's 400 men Black Omega Security department (Who, back then, alone could field more people than Noway and Usurper combined) combined with the then Psychotic Tendencies, Cynosural Field theory, Suddenly Spaceships (at some point), Nova Prime and your 200 people. Count in the then EVOKE an VEGA's from outer Syndi and IRED's and 404's hordes from central Syndi. It was basically NOWAY and Usurper against the rest of Syndicate. Our Noway fleets rarely exceeded 50 people and we were constantly up against odds, and people regularly resorted to call Psychotic or BOS for help, while we had little help in Low sec fights from Escalated Quickly. Even back then, you were bad at twisting numbers. Your skills there clearly have not improved
I am not quite following what I decry, but what we did back then was healthy medium scale warfare in a local area around our home. We held moons in a limited area, we staged in a limited area, we fought in a limited area and we did not quench or quell opposition, which, considering our numbers was not quite possible anyways. We surely kept some of it at bay on our side of Syndicate as much as we could, but at no point in time was Noway able to remove any entity from Syndicate.
Accusations of this nature from a then CFC pet and entity dealing with 50 tones of shady Roses (I still have that screenshot somewhere ) is more than tragic.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Vic Jefferson
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
550
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 19:32:56 -
[1100] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote: your 200 people.
Groon. 200 people? I don't even...
Yeah I get it. You tried to play the the big fish in a microcosm but every single little fish found your behaviour so obnoxious you were booted out; Syndicate residents are happy to trade welps of fleets but having a 5 guardian minimum to even undock didn't win you any friends. The only difference I'm really seeing here is that the Imperium has made itself all but immune to the consequences of bullying, whereas you were not equipped for the rest of the playground uniting.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1816
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 19:53:18 -
[1101] - Quote
Clockwork Pinapples, not just Groon. You had around 400-500 people on paper back then, Noway was never well above 400. Or do you really want to compare active players? In this case, the statistics show the same pattern: We against the rest. I also do not see why people should welp a not properly set up fleet into a hard counter outside our station when they had at least one PSYCHO cyno with them and their caps on standby. There are welps when fight go wrong and then there are welps which only stupid FCs start for no reason because they want to undock and then complain about losses. I rather enjoyed being mostly in the first camp with Noway. So, could you please stop trying to use numbers to salvage whatever you have of your points?
We were not booted out. We left on our own terms after Phoebe (for whatever reason, I still don't get why we went for Uemon and Etherium. I think finding fights was the goal, but finding fights in Sov Null except for Provi was back then and still is a contradiction in itself. vOv) and then basically folded as corps left for other alliances. If we had made us immune by collecting more blue friends, we would have just dried out that pond even further than what CFC and other entities there already had drained due to their presence, and would have had no activity at all. We maintained our opponents like a little zoo that sometimes went out of hand and created very nice fights. We never intended to create a comfort zone, we never tried to blue up Syndicate to be safe. This was never our plan and the then and now CFC is the best example why we did not do that. So, please stop trying to compare us to CFC. It is a disgusting insult.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 20:37:53 -
[1102] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Elsewhere in the universe, people do not have the problems that you have. Elsewhere, people already have the conflicts that you need to search far away from home. Go figure. vOv
Rivr Luzade wrote:I think finding fights was the goal, but finding fights in Sov Null except for Provi was back then and still is a contradiction in itself.
What. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1816
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 20:56:22 -
[1103] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Elsewhere in the universe, people do not have the problems that you have. Elsewhere, people already have the conflicts that you need to search far away from home. Go figure. vOv Rivr Luzade wrote:I think finding fights was the goal, but finding fights in Sov Null except for Provi was back then and still is a contradiction in itself. What.
What do you mean? I am talking about conflicts, not fights in the first quote. Now we here in Catch have activity and some kind of conflict sparked by ELs. We have bigger battles here and there but most of the time the ratters in whatever area just dock up (naturally) and throw some ridiculous fleet at you that's suitable for invading a region, not for creating fights. Or places that Triumvirate talked about a couple of pages prior, they also have battles, but nothing for the size of Noway back then.
The second quote also relates to back then. Not now. Back when Dominion was still in place. Noway wanted to find fights as an outsider, a third party thing in an area that didn't need third parties as small as we were back then. There was nothing to do or what was there was too big for us. Nowadays, most of Sov Null sec is still empty, you roam around empty systems and have very little to do.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Terraj Oknatis
Capital Punishments
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 20:59:13 -
[1104] - Quote
Here is an idea... Entosis link is now a cruiser + size module. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
71
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 23:54:03 -
[1105] - Quote
so looks like cfc have failed miserably at their goal of taking provi and not giving any fights
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=3712&b=6650907&e=210&t=ApoJlmWcakacaIaaG&r=1
once again this proves that troll ceptors alone don't work. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 01:12:41 -
[1106] - Quote
Terraj Oknatis wrote:Here is an idea... Entosis link is now a cruiser + size module.
It already is when you talk actual sov contest and not just grabbing uncontested sov against a bunch of holed up bears.
Well it's not like they haven't been warned that trollceptors are as good in sov contest as battle badgers against a HAC fleet. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
3235
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 03:37:47 -
[1107] - Quote
/thread
We have an off topic post about Groon/A Clockwork Pinapple.
Another post about restricting what ships the entosis link can be on.
A post stating the obvious.
Nothing new is being presented.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 04:36:42 -
[1108] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:/thread
We have an off topic post about Groon/A Clockwork Pinapple.
Another post about restricting what ships the entosis link can be on.
A post stating the obvious.
Nothing new is being presented.
But there are still no big fights in fozziesov. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2298
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 05:11:57 -
[1109] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:Gewns telling other people to grow backbones. Just sayin'....
Wise old Goon says ... "why have one backbone, when you can have 40,000"
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 05:17:01 -
[1110] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:/thread
We have an off topic post about Groon/A Clockwork Pinapple.
Another post about restricting what ships the entosis link can be on.
A post stating the obvious.
Nothing new is being presented. But there are still no big fights in fozziesov.
That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved. |
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1820
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 05:39:26 -
[1111] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:/thread
We have an off topic post about Groon/A Clockwork Pinapple.
Another post about restricting what ships the entosis link can be on.
A post stating the obvious.
Nothing new is being presented. But there are still no big fights in fozziesov. That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved.
Neither is a super-coalition steamrolling all over a region creating 94 timers in one night, especially not when you take into consideration that soon enough a lot of your assets will be in a destructible structures.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1860
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 07:13:44 -
[1112] - Quote
Yeah, it doesn't look like trollceptors taking sov to me. They are a tactical element to probe weakness, but yeah....so much for steamrollering it with interceptors.
Provi also holding better than many expected though worse than I had hoped to see, but...if you can't hold grid you cant hold grid.
Was I completely wrong? I dunno, feels like I was in the middle with my expectation/prediction - more space is falling than expected but with the methods I expected. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 07:17:28 -
[1113] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved.
Solo interceptor is a roamer, not a sov contest fleet, thus having NOTHING to do with goals or fozziesov itself.
Please clarify what are you crying about: Roamers, or the fact you now have to react on a mighty 90 dps threat who just tackled itself on your station? |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
705
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 07:54:21 -
[1114] - Quote
Is there a link that doesn't just load a black page?
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6616
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 08:00:26 -
[1115] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Yeah, it doesn't look like trollceptors taking sov to me. They are a tactical element to probe weakness, but yeah....so much for steamrollering it with interceptors. Provi also holding better than many expected though worse than I had hoped to see, but...if you can't hold grid you cant hold grid. Was I completely wrong? I dunno, feels like I was in the middle with my expectation/prediction - more space is falling than expected but with the methods I expected. When was the plan ever to steamroll with interceptors? WTF have you guys been smoking? We've been stating over and over that interceptors demand a response yet can't take sov solo. The problem is that the vast majority of "attacks" in null are now just one guy in an interceptor running away. That doesn't mean that when we actually attack region with the intention of actually finishing the timers that we are going to do so in interceptors, lol.
The biggest thing provi have going for them is their high ADM meaning some of the windows are pretty small and the initial assault takes a bit of time. 38% of the regions timers in one night though isn't bad going.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
71
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 08:05:42 -
[1116] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Is there a link that doesn't just load a black page?
just copy paste it, the forum has converted URL to rubbish for some reason. the face of it is ok though |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
72
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 08:07:12 -
[1117] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:When was the plan ever to steamroll with interceptors? WTF have you guys been smoking? We've been stating over and over that interceptors demand a response yet can't take sov solo. The problem is that the vast majority of "attacks" in null are now just one guy in an interceptor running away. That doesn't mean that when we actually attack region with the intention of actually finishing the timers that we are going to do so in interceptors, lol.
The biggest thing provi have going for them is their high ADM meaning some of the windows are pretty small and the initial assault takes a bit of time. 38% of the regions timers in one night though isn't bad going.
it's amazing how the tune is changing after one night :D |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 08:10:42 -
[1118] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:When was the plan ever to steamroll with interceptors? WTF have you guys been smoking?
We've been smoking your posts that openly stated gewnies were going to demosntrate that trollceptor is broken by using it.
Don't bother denying, we all heard you and other cryers.
Lucas Kell wrote:We've been stating over and over that interceptors demand a response yet can't take sov solo.
What a turnadround! You've been stating exactly the opposite all along.
Was it one night that made you pull backward?
Lucas Kell wrote:The problem is that the vast majority of "attacks" in null are now just one guy in an interceptor running away.
Citation needed - which is a gewn equivalent of "that's bs".
Lucas Kell wrote:That doesn't mean that when we actually attack region with the intention of actually finishing the timers that we are going to do so in interceptors, lol.
It's funny cuz it what you said you're going to do.
Lucas Kell wrote:The biggest thing provi have going for them is their high ADM meaning some of the windows are pretty small and the initial assault takes a bit of time. 38% of the regions timers in one night though isn't bad going.
interceptors are:
a) not majority
b) not a sov attack
If you are crying about self-tackling solo roamer, you're the biggotest carebear ever. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
705
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 08:38:39 -
[1119] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Kystraz wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:/thread
We have an off topic post about Groon/A Clockwork Pinapple.
Another post about restricting what ships the entosis link can be on.
A post stating the obvious.
Nothing new is being presented. But there are still no big fights in fozziesov. That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved. Neither is a super-coalition steamrolling all over a region creating 94 timers in one night, especially not when you take into consideration that soon enough a lot of your assets will be in a destructible structures.
Sadly though. That is exactly the game CCP is designing.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 08:40:55 -
[1120] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Kystraz wrote:That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved. Solo interceptor is a roamer, not a sov contest fleet, thus having NOTHING to do with goals or fozziesov itself. Please clarify what are you crying about: Roamers, or the fact you now have to react on a mighty 90 dps threat who just tackled itself on your station?
It has an entosis module and is participating in aegis sov mechanics in a way that is not "enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved". |
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16551
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 08:59:46 -
[1121] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Kystraz wrote:That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved. Solo interceptor is a roamer, not a sov contest fleet, thus having NOTHING to do with goals or fozziesov itself. Please clarify what are you crying about: Roamers, or the fact you now have to react on a mighty 90 dps threat who just tackled itself on your station? It has an entosis module and is participating in aegis sov mechanics in a way that is not "enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved".
They just cant grasp that point we keep on making. How many ways can we say having to respond trollcepters attacking sov is more boring than the old sov mechanics?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1821
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 09:07:23 -
[1122] - Quote
Speak for yourself. We have fun. As long as bored PVPers get into space and stop spinning ships in outposts or play other games, it is fine.
Numbers, on the other hand, are a far greater problem than people getting fed up by not getting a kill mail when they undock.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 09:59:51 -
[1123] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Kystraz wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Kystraz wrote:That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved. Solo interceptor is a roamer, not a sov contest fleet, thus having NOTHING to do with goals or fozziesov itself. Please clarify what are you crying about: Roamers, or the fact you now have to react on a mighty 90 dps threat who just tackled itself on your station? It has an entosis module and is participating in aegis sov mechanics in a way that is not "enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved". They just cant grasp that point we keep on making. How many ways can we say having to respond trollcepters attacking sov is more boring than the old sov mechanics?
The point you're making is that essentially you're crying over a roamer who uses entosis without "fighting over a system" (thus making goal #1 inapplicable) just to force some holed up bears to undock their battle badger and waste 1 minute to deal with him. 30 seconds if he's entosising a station.
Is that a "nerf roam" tears I see? |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6616
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 10:05:41 -
[1124] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:it's amazing how the tune is changing after one night :D It was never the tune. The plan was to invade Provi long before the mechanics were out. Since interceptors can't actually take sov and can only troll defenders into response, it would be weird to assume that we were going to attack in that way. We want to actually finish the timers and watch provi burn, not just ring the doorbell and run away.
Orca, you're not very good at trolling. Shush now. I have no interest in responding to your posts until you know what you are talking about and have the basic common decency to have a constructive discussion.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 10:29:24 -
[1125] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Warmeister wrote:it's amazing how the tune is changing after one night :D It was never the tune. The plan was to invade Provi long before the mechanics were out. Since interceptors can't actually take sov and can only troll defenders into response, it would be weird to assume that we were going to attack in that way. We want to actually finish the timers and watch provi burn, not just ring the doorbell and run away. Orca, you're not very good at trolling. Shush now. I have no interest in responding to your posts until you know what you are talking about and have the basic common decency to have a constructive discussion.
So first gewns teach others backbones, now decency? With all the ad gewnminems you thrown, decency? THE IRONY.
And I'm a bit lazy to browse posts (you may have deleted the relevant ones by now anyway) but it was exactly the tune you turned 180 degrees somewhere this night. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16551
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 10:30:52 -
[1126] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Kystraz wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:Kystraz wrote:That has nothing to do with solo interceptor v. solo griffin being not enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved. Solo interceptor is a roamer, not a sov contest fleet, thus having NOTHING to do with goals or fozziesov itself. Please clarify what are you crying about: Roamers, or the fact you now have to react on a mighty 90 dps threat who just tackled itself on your station? It has an entosis module and is participating in aegis sov mechanics in a way that is not "enjoyable and fascinating for all players involved". They just cant grasp that point we keep on making. How many ways can we say having to respond trollcepters attacking sov is more boring than the old sov mechanics? The point you're making is that essentially you're crying over a roamer who uses entosis without "fighting over a system" (thus making goal #1 inapplicable) just to force some holed up bears to undock their battle badger and waste 1 minute to deal with him. 30 seconds if he's entosising a station. Is that a "nerf roam" tears I see?
Only its not 1 minute, its 4 hours at the very least.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2083
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 10:32:44 -
[1127] - Quote
Remove entosis COMPLETELY from frigates and T3 (avoid the nullification issue).
Give ab onus to Combat Battecruiser using entosis ( finaly they will have a role again)
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 10:44:11 -
[1128] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Only its not 1 minute, its 4 hours at the very least.
And those guys were telling me they know entosis mechanics... it's 2 hours at most unless you're one of the people whos rear parts gets on fire when mining laser is used. And even if you don't know how to camp node in a recon, dealing with him for the day, you only need to tend to the ceptor like once every 10 minutes for him to not make enough progress to complete capture within the vulnerability time window. And once only an hour is left and his progress is 0, you can ignore him for the rest of the duration.
Get up to date with your tactics already. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16551
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:04:27 -
[1129] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Only its not 1 minute, its 4 hours at the very least. And those guys were telling me they know entosis mechanics... it's 2 hours at most unless you're one of the people whos rear parts gets on fire when mining laser is used. And even if you don't know how to camp node in a recon, dealing with him for the day, you only need to tend to the ceptor like once every 10 minutes for him to not make enough progress to complete capture within the vulnerability time window. And once only an hour is left and his progress is 0, you can ignore him for the rest of the duration. Get up to date with your tactics already.
And when we look at sov space we find we find that only two regions had high industrial index so most of sov null. You can also attack station services at any time. So that comment you made saying we only needed to spend 30 seconds to a minute defending space is an outright lie, glad you admitted it.
We also know that the vast bulk of entosising is being done with interceptors followed by nullified cloaky t3s, built to avoid fights which is the exact opposite of the goals set for the new sov system.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2083
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:14:17 -
[1130] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
We also know that the vast bulk of entosising is being done with interceptors followed by nullified cloaky t3s, built to avoid fights which is the exact opposite of the goals set for the new sov system.
And that is why removing all frigates and nullified t3 from using entosis is the most important thing to fix the issues with fozzie sov.
A bonus to ships like BC that are almost never used would be a cherry over the cake.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
|
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:14:29 -
[1131] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:And when we look at sov space we find we find that only two regions had high industrial index so most of sov null fall under your "people whos rear parts gets on fire when mining laser is used".
gewnull is not all null.
baltec1 wrote:You can also attack station services at any time.
Except you cannot attack them if you have an active entosis cycle after being chased away and have to redo warmup.
Seriously, I had no idea you are so bad at fozziesov. I started handing you advanced stuff and now I know why you couldn't understand it - it's because you haven't even drilled the basics yet.
baltec1 wrote:So that comment you made saying we only needed to spend 30 seconds to a minute defending space is an outright lie, glad you admitted it.
The fact you understood nothing from what I said, rather. Gewn's trademark reading comprehension failure.
baltec1 wrote:We also know that the vast bulk of entosising is being done with interceptors followed by nullified cloaky t3s, built to avoid fights which is the exact opposite of the goals set for the new sov system.
Citation needed (c).
Once again, and I'll repeat it till even the dimmest of gewns get it, trollceptor can only grab uncontested sov, and if your sov goes uncontested, you don't deserve it.
I've yet to see T3 used in entosis in south, but how the hell does it avoid being caught? Can't even imagine, unless it's a T2 entosis fit, which I admittedly haven't seen yet. Is it?
I mean, you can just land on it like you do on a 100MN links T3 except entosis T3 can't just warp away, which is like the only defense link T3 has. So how? |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2084
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:25:11 -
[1132] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
Once again, and I'll repeat it till even the dimmest of gewns get it, trollceptor can only grab uncontested sov, and if your sov goes uncontested, you don't deserve it.
I've yet to see T3 used in entosis in south, but how the hell does it avoid being caught? Can't even imagine, unless it's a T2 entosis fit, which I admittedly haven't seen yet. Is it?
I mean, you can just land on it like you do on a 100MN links T3 except entosis T3 can't just warp away, which is like the only defense link T3 has. So how?
The point is not about people getting sov with interceptors. IS that peopel are not wantign to get sov, they just want to **** and make angry sov holders using interceptors.
And clearly a LOT of people are doing that, and the result is a not fun scenario for a large player base. Interceptors are very hard to keep away from your territory due to nullification. SO you not only need to keep the territory guarded and sued, you need to keep goign into your backyard every few minutes to scare the pigeons that land there and start doing anoying noises.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
AtramLolipop
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:29:16 -
[1133] - Quote
bye bye caps, hello troll ceptors and 10 man frigate gangs.... we hope. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6616
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:30:02 -
[1134] - Quote
Just hide his posts. He doesn't want to get it and has no intention of having a constructive discussion because "grr goons".
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:31:23 -
[1135] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:The point is not about people getting sov with interceptors. IS that peopel are not wantign to get sov, they just want to **** and make angry sov holders using interceptors.
They are legit roamers with a newfound ability to make bears undock. Except that, nothing is there which wasn't there in roams, except roams don't get self-tackled on your station.
Kagura Nikon wrote:And clearly a LOT of people are doing that
Citation needed (c).
I don't see a lot of people in trollceptors, because there's no uncontested sov they can grab nearby.
If your sov can be grabbed uncontested, it shouldn't be yours in the first place.
Kagura Nikon wrote:and the result is a not fun scenario for a large player base. Interceptors are very hard to keep away from your territory due to nullification. SO you not only need to keep the territory guarded and sued, you need to keep goign into your backyard every few minutes to scare the pigeons that land there and start doing anoying noises.
Well sorry if defending your territory from a mighty 90 dps self-tackled threat is too much to ask. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:35:08 -
[1136] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Just hide his posts. He doesn't want to get it and has no intention of having a constructive discussion because "grr goons".
I find your lack of arguments disturbing.
If you have any, bring them on.
If all you have is more tears, by all means keep crying, delicious.
And that was a nice switcheroo you pulled on a trollceptor there today! Like a true propagewndean. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2084
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 11:54:19 -
[1137] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:The point is not about people getting sov with interceptors. IS that peopel are not wantign to get sov, they just want to **** and make angry sov holders using interceptors. They are legit roamers with a newfound ability to make bears undock. Except that, nothing is there which wasn't there in roams, except roams don't get self-tackled on your station. Kagura Nikon wrote:And clearly a LOT of people are doing that Citation needed (c). I don't see a lot of people in trollceptors, because there's no uncontested sov they can grab nearby. If your sov can be grabbed uncontested, it shouldn't be yours in the first place. Kagura Nikon wrote:and the result is a not fun scenario for a large player base. Interceptors are very hard to keep away from your territory due to nullification. SO you not only need to keep the territory guarded and sued, you need to keep goign into your backyard every few minutes to scare the pigeons that land there and start doing anoying noises. Well sorry if defending your territory from a mighty 90 dps self-tackled threat is too much to ask.
Citation needed is one of the most stupid thigns you can post on a forum discussion, specially when you are posting with a NPC corp character. People that are in the sov hodlers corps are the ones that get the bennefit of not needign a citiation, if YOU want to prove otherwise it is up to you to bring proof, because you are not in a position to make anyoen beleive in you when you post from an NPC corp that has no place in sov game.
The fact that you point the 90 dps as even a factor just proves how ignorant of the problem you are, a gunless ship is as dangerous to sov as a a 1 trillion dps ship would be.
If you cannot understand that sacrificing a interceptor every few minutes just to anger other players is too effective way of MEta warfare tha do nto generate combat, just play the psycological game, then you do nto deserve new answers.
Trollceptors are just the new version of the "DENY ALL CONTENT"problem of the previous system.
Fozzie, we need content, not trolceptors. Banish frigates from using them and you will achieve it.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1822
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 12:02:35 -
[1138] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:And clearly a LOT of people are doing that, and the result is a not fun scenario for a large player base. Interceptors are very hard to keep away from your territory due to nullification. SO you not only need to keep the territory guarded and sued, you need to keep goign into your backyard every few minutes to scare the pigeons that land there and start doing anoying noises. This is the entire point of occupancy based sov. You need to be there to claim it as yours. If you are not there, your claim is void and open to attacks. If you need to get there, you do not occupy it, you only exert an empty claim.
The only issue is that entities like CFC still need more than 1 region to sustain themselves and thus offer such a large attackable surface. As soon as you can cram dozens of active people into one system, provide them with what they need to live there (PVE and PVP-wise. Only having PVE ships in a system because it's your ratting location is already something that needs to be abolished), and have them active, trolling of whatever kind is quickly dealt with.
Banishing ceptors from using ELs is not going to give fights. It is, as said, only going to shift the problem from evading fights to not being able to start a fight to begin with. If nothing else, the current steamrolling of Providence at least tells that. Making it possible for powerful entities such as CFC (2/5 of the Null population is powerful) to be practically unassailable as any attempt can be easily dealt with, is nothing that should be supported.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
207
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 12:09:34 -
[1139] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Fozzie, we need content, not trolceptors. Banish frigates from using them and you will achieve it.
I would like to take this opportunity to repeat my earlier suggestion. Have it so entosis link now gives a 5% speed boost, qualifies as a prop mod, and thusly you cannot activate another prop mod with it engaged. This way interceptors and T3's cannot be used to troll nearly as much, as they are a near-guaranteed kill while entosising unless they have a supporting fleet and they have genuine control of the grid.
I'd rather that, than strip the entosis link from any given ship class, due to Fozzie having stated that he wants to put the most minimal impact on ship doctrines to capture sov.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6616
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 12:52:21 -
[1140] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Just hide his posts. He doesn't want to get it and has no intention of having a constructive discussion because "grr goons". I find your lack of arguments disturbing. If you have any, bring them on. We've had plenty, you've just chosen not to respond to them and just sit about going "grr goons abloobloobloo". It's not surprising since that character appears to have been designed specifically to whine about goons, but there's simply no point in engaging you in this discussion. You've not intention of even acknowledging the arguments being made let alone having a constructive discussion about them.
At the end of the day, sov mechanics are supposed to be entertaining for all sides and for most people they aren't. CCP will eventually get around to fixing these issues even if they take an extraordinarily long time to do it. Your butthurt over whatever it was that goons did to upset you will not change that.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
117
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 12:53:33 -
[1141] - Quote
hmm....it doesn't appear to be so much this:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675936/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675935/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675935/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675583/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/
....
....
as it is....
this:
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/
The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530
Black Legion. (2.29%) - 2486
Borderlands Syndicate (6.54%) - 7089
Dank Meme Dominion (5.74%) - 6215
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020
Elite Space Coalition (3.26%) - 3529
Guardians of the Galaxy (7.60%) - 8233
Lethal Ironingboards (0.67%) - 724
Pandemic Legion (4.22%) - 4575
Red Menace (3.36%) - 3637
Stain Wagon (6.54%) - 7090
...so, if this were a team deathmatch on pretty much any shooter (heck, let's just say Dust514, why not, it still exists....right....right?), we are looking at a team of 8 vs a team of 2, and the team of 8 is gloating, taunting, and talking about being bored...just sayin (this last part is for the threads saying stuff about not winning fast enough...or something) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6616
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 13:04:11 -
[1142] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:This is the entire point of occupancy based sov. You need to be there to claim it as yours. If you are not there, your claim is void and open to attacks. If you need to get there, you do not occupy it, you only exert an empty claim.
The only issue is that entities like CFC still need more than 1 region to sustain themselves and thus offer such a large attackable surface. How do you still not understand that this has nothing to do with what we are saying here? For a start, Our space is relatively safe. We're one of the few groups that is actively using their space.
Secondly, the problem isn't that people can take space too easily. One ship SHOULD be able to take an uncontested system, and if it's really uncontested an interceptor IS NOT REQUIRED. You could land a ship with anchor rigs on an uncontested TCU and not worry about it. The reason people want interceptors is for easily attacking, but not taking space that people are using.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Banishing ceptors from using ELs is not going to give fights. It is, as said, only going to shift the problem from evading fights to not being able to start a fight to begin with. No it's not. For the most part, interceptors aren't being used to start fights. Fights are being started by combat capable ships. Trollceptors are mostly used for content denial, for evasion, not to start fights.
Rivr Luzade wrote:If nothing else, the current steamrolling of Providence at least tells that. Making it possible for powerful entities such as CFC (2/5 of the Null population is powerful) to be practically unassailable as any attempt can be easily dealt with, is nothing that should be supported. We're the best at taking and holding our space. No system is going to suddenly make it possible for a tiny group to destroy our space without also making it ridiculously easy for us to contest theirs. That we triggered 38% of the timers in the highest ADM region in a single day clearly indicates this is the case.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 13:07:53 -
[1143] - Quote
I do like the idea of battlecruisers / command ships getting a bonus to using the Entosis Link.
Also thanks for the info on 'hiding posts', no more Orca rabblings in the thread. Now everyone just needs to stop quoting his trolling. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6616
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 13:09:11 -
[1144] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:...so, if this were a team deathmatch on pretty much any shooter (heck, let's just say Dust514, why not, it still exists....right....right?), we are looking at a team of 8 vs a team of 2, and the team of 8 is gloating, taunting, and talking about being bored...just sayin (this last part is for the threads saying stuff about not winning fast enough...or something) And would the solution be to tell the people in the team deathmatch to abandon their team and swap over to another faction to fight, or would the solution be to fix the system so that team sizes were balanced out during matchmaking?
We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so, and we're more than happy to provide feedback on why they failed.
I love how it always falls on us, like we must destroy ourselves and if we choose not to we're evil. I tell you what, as those stats show, we are 38% of the nullsec coalition playerbase. Why don't you put the other 62% together and destroy us.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1822
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 14:04:39 -
[1145] - Quote
You cannot balance teams into equal team numbers if one team has already sucked up most of the available players and there's nothing left to put in other teams. You have to destroy yourself in order for a matchmaking to be able to create equal team sizes. However, this can only happen from the players themselves. As long as they only seek safety and stability (read: avoid fights and conflict), this is not going to happen.
There is more than 38% of Null sec under your banner, now that the Drone Land Russians also work closely with you. We are looking at nearly 50% of Null sec working together. I wonder where you want to get the players from for the other team?
Interceptors are very well able to start fights and create distraction so that a defender has a harder time. Interceptors are also a valid choice to make taking sov of abandoned space go faster and get uncontested capture events done quicker so that actual content, like roams or camps can take place.
If you'd use your space actively, you would not have a "backyard". You certainly use your space a lot, but as long as you have a backyard, you are too big space-wise.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
75
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 14:26:50 -
[1146] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Citation needed is one of the most stupid thigns you can post on a forum discussion
That is funny considering gewnie named baltec is the most frequent user of that. I was just parodying him.
Other than picking on my parody, any real evidence? No? So you spewed baseless bs and now you derail.
Kagura Nikon wrote:specially when you are posting with a NPC corp character.
You looking for ad gewnminem too?
Kagura Nikon wrote:People that are in the sov hodlers corps are the ones that get the bennefit of not needign a citiation, if YOU want to prove otherwise it is up to you to bring proof, because you are not in a position to make anyoen beleive in you when you post from an NPC corp that has no place in sov game.
Confirming sov holder corp members are "special".
But that includes me! Oh snap...
Kagura Nikon wrote:The fact that you point the 90 dps as even a factor just proves how ignorant of the problem you are, a gunless ship is as dangerous to sov as a a 1 trillion dps ship would be.
Oh my god, that tearnado made me laugh. Tear-nado. See what I did there?
"CCP HALP THERE IS A TRILLION DPS DANGER APPROACHING ME, MY ANU... ahem... SOV IS IN DANGER AND I'M SPECIAL REMOVE HIM NAO".
trollceptor is as much threat to sov as he is to a carrier. Unless you are completely afk for an hour, you lose nothing.
Kagura Nikon wrote:If you cannot understand that sacrificing a interceptor every few minutes just to anger other players is too effective way of MEta warfare tha do nto generate combat, just play the psycological game, then you do nto deserve new answers.
Trollceptors are just the new version of the "DENY ALL CONTENT"problem of the previous system.
Fozzie, we need content, not trolceptors. Banish frigates from using them and you will achieve it.
[/quote]
"CCP HALP THEY ROAM ME WITH A CEPTOR TO ANGER ME, CALM MY **** NAO"
Entosis ceptor is ~80m. Every few minutes, let's say 10, brings us to 480m an hour.
Someone paying 480m/hour to get a reaction out of you, deserves it.
Trollceptors are just the new version of MAKE BEARS UNDOCK ROAM, you're about to make a deluge warning with your tears about a simple roamer. Aren't you ashamed of yourself?
I believe that'll be 11th repetition in this thread, but it'll be carried out till you understand: Trollceptors cannot claim sov, unless completely uncontested, and if it's uncontested, then it's not yours. Since they cannot claim sov, they are no more than roamers, the only difference being that they now can force you out of your bearhole, stop crying about it, nothing is changed in the way roaming works. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6716
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 14:29:10 -
[1147] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:You cannot balance teams into equal team numbers if one team has already sucked up most of the available players and there's nothing left to put in other teams. You have to destroy yourself in order for a matchmaking to be able to create equal team sizes. However, this can only happen from the players themselves. As long as they only seek safety and stability (read: avoid fights and conflict), this is not going to happen. And we're not going to voluntarily cripple ourselves so that you can be balanced without having to figure out how to work with others. That leaves the only viable option to be for CCP to go ahead and do what they have needed to and develop a system where we either choose to dismantle ourselves or benefit less by attacking outside of our size brackets. All the time it's more rewarding and less risk to form together into coalitions, that's what will happen. If not us then someone else.
Rivr Luzade wrote:There is more than 38% of Null sec under your banner, now that the Drone Land Russians also work closely with you. It's only for this war, we're not really working together in the normal sense, they simply have a statement to make and assisting in Provi helps them make the statement. It wouldn't be too hard to combine a few groups against us, but the problem isn't just our size, it's our level of organisation and dedication. And of course that most "grr goons" groups who would want to form against us are so high on the autistic spectrum that noone wants to associate with them. *shrug*
Rivr Luzade wrote:Interceptors are very well able to start fights and create distraction so that a defender has a harder time. But in general they don't start fights, they are evasion fit. Evading is not fighting. 10 individual ceptors are less distracting than a 10 man cruiser gang.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Interceptors are also a valid choice to make taking sov of abandoned space go faster and get uncontested capture events done quicker so that actual content, like roams or camps can take place. They are, but there's no reason to use interceptors. Abandoned space has no defenders, so a battlecruiser would take the space as easily as an interceptor. Most would also be pre-fit for combat as the entosis would go in the utility slot, meaning they can even more quickly get into actual content. The evasion fit interceptor has to go back and ship into a combat ship.
The only reason to use interceptors is to run away from defenders. If you are running away from defenders you weren't attacking uncontested sov.
Rivr Luzade wrote:If you'd use your space actively, you would not have a "backyard". You certainly use your space a lot, but as long as you have a backyard, you are too big space-wise. All of our space is our back yard and we do use it actively. I'm not at all worried that we're going to lose space, even less so knowing that most players will opt to go the safe route of using evasion fit interceptors instead of forming a real attack force. My problems with fozziesov are legitimately for the entertainment of the system all round, even if certain people want to claim adamantly that it's for self-preservation. I'm less worried about us losing space than I was in dominion.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
117
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:01:22 -
[1148] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so, and we're more than happy to provide feedback on why they failed.
This is not a mechanics driven issue anymore, it certainly used to be under dominion, however it is not under Aegus Sov. We are into voluntary boredom territory now, and no mechanic is forcing a circle of "friends" to force march each other (in the form of PAP links) into mining and ratting CTAs in space nobody cares about so it can be bragged that all their indexes are up, and they are better than others. That burnout will be theirs to enjoy, and not the fault of any mechanic that forced those people into those systems.
At this point boredom is a choice, and there are no mechanics that would support, require, or even drive some random percentage of the remaining player base to "rally" themselves to help un-bore those the choose to be bored (remember that whole jump fatigue thing meant to prevent this "coming togetherness" requirement). This is simply the slow very natural transition from mega-coalitions to smaller independent groups, where some are adapting faster than others (in terms of fun and retention sustainability). We are not there yet, and there are plenty of new mechanics that need to be made to further drive this transition, none of which will encourage the continuation of the numbers seen in the charts below:
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/
The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020
Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530
Black Legion. (2.29%) - 2486
Borderlands Syndicate (6.54%) - 7089
Dank Meme Dominion (5.74%) - 6215
Elite Space Coalition (3.26%) - 3529
Guardians of the Galaxy (7.60%) - 8233
Lethal Ironingboards (0.67%) - 724
Pandemic Legion (4.22%) - 4575
Red Menace (3.36%) - 3637
Stain Wagon (6.54%) - 7090 |
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
207
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:03:38 -
[1149] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:A lot of things over many posts on a lot of pages
For whatever it's worth, I feel you make a compelling case. It's too bad the powers that be didn't listen a bit more closely when setting up these things. I remember it was brought up back then. There has to be a better way to set up this system.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
117
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:07:07 -
[1150] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:A lot of things over many posts on a lot of pages For whatever it's worth, I feel you make a compelling case. It's too bad the powers that be didn't listen a bit more closely when setting up these things. I remember it was brought up back then. There has to be a better way to set up this system.
It appears as though these guys found a way:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675936/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675935/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675583/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/ |
|
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:30:09 -
[1151] - Quote
Congratulations on finding 4 interceptor losses out of the literal hundreds we have thrown out to Entosis. In other words "Trollceptors aren't a problem! They can be killed ~2% of the time!"
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
117
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:34:44 -
[1152] - Quote
These are all pre-speed nerf patch to the dreaded troll ceptor in provi....just a few I gathered:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48665775/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48665948/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668129/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668120/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668115/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668681/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48669543/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674414/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674311/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/
...there are plenty plenty more, but those are just a few of the solo troll kills from a variety of defending type ships. This is a very useful demonstration indeed.
Don't forget this though (when systems start falling as the actual reason):
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/
The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020
Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530 |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6716
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:51:43 -
[1153] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:This is not a mechanics driven issue anymore, it certainly used to be under dominion, however it is not under Aegus Sov. We are into voluntary boredom territory now, and no mechanic is forcing a circle of "friends" to force march each other (in the form of PAP links) into mining and ratting CTAs in space nobody cares about so it can be bragged that all their indexes are up, and they are better than others. That burnout will be theirs to enjoy, and not the fault of any mechanic that forced those people into those systems. It's not "voluntary boredom", it's that the mechanics don't encourage people to do beyond the minimum when interacting with them. Defending is now easier since you only need to defend at preselected times and for attackers it's easier to simply annoy sov holders with frigates in multiple places rather than form up a group capable of actually taking sov to fight in one.
I'm not sure why you think we'll burn out pushing indices though, since we've spent several years forming fleets to fire missiles at structures for several hours which gains us nothing on an individual level. Now we can rat and mine (which many of us choose to do in our spare time anyway) with a full fleet support and a good bit of banter while knowing that it's helping keep our space defended.
Harry Saq wrote:(remember that whole jump fatigue thing meant to prevent this "coming togetherness" requirement) No it wasn't, it was to support people using caps to escalate without every battle ending in someone dogpiling the fleet from afar. A supercap pilot in catch shouldn't be worried about a whole fleet jumping across the map from Branch when he chooses to use his ship. "coming togetherness" will always be a desirable factor in MMOs, it's one of the main draws especially in one as socially driven as EVE.
Harry Saq wrote:This is simply the slow very natural transition from mega-coalitions to smaller independent groups, where some are adapting faster than others (in terms of fun and retention sustainability). We are not there yet, and there are plenty of new mechanics that need to be made to further drive this transition, none of which will encourage the continuation of the numbers seen in the charts below There's no transition, that's just wishful thinking on your part. The new system makes it even better to form into a mega-coalition than it was before, since any serious groups deploying against one another will be more vulnerable to small groups. While they can get their space back with ease from the smaller groups, it's healthier not to lose it, so non-invasion pacts are preferable at a minimum. With systems now supporting more players, mega-coalitions can be even more tightly grouped, and with staggered timers can ensure the most availability for neighboring alliances to assist where needed.
I doubt CCP even wants to get rid of mega-coalitions to be honest. Consider how much of the game is based around things the mega-coalitions do. I doubt CCP want to get rid of that. They simply want to make enough room for some of the smaller guys to join in a bit, which I'm fine with - if the mechanics are entertaining for all.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:56:29 -
[1154] - Quote
Half of those aren't even trollceptor fits. Also you don't know how they were killed / where they were killed, quite possible they were sitting afk somewhere not paying attention.
The Imperium only has around 2000< people or so in Provi so your number reasoning is a bit unjustified.
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
472
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 16:54:22 -
[1155] - Quote
[quote=Lucas Kell] We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so. [quote]
I think thats the general idea.
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.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6716
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 16:57:17 -
[1156] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so. I think thats the general idea. Erm... no. Game mechanics should at the very least encourage content. Aegis sov actively discourages it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1824
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 17:16:54 -
[1157] - Quote
They do not. They give players choices. And players use all the choices appropriately. Unfortunately for you, ceptors are the only way to cause you some headache.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16552
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 17:41:23 -
[1158] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
Citation needed (c).
The patch you downloaded with a change specifically aimed at nerfing trollcepers and their t3 counterparts isnt enough for you?
Orca Platypus wrote:
I mean, you can just land on it like you do on a 100MN links T3 except entosis T3 can't just warp away, which is like the only defense link T3 has. So how?
Simple, you build them with the goal of evasion not combat.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6718
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 17:49:51 -
[1159] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:They do not. They give players choices. And players use all the choices appropriately. Lol? You think game mechanics aren't there to encourage content? Those choices you have, they have risk reward balances with them and you'll tend to find the ones that reward the most are the ones with the most engagement with others. The problem with Aegis is that it's a bit backwards, the best choice in many cases is evasion and reduced interaction.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Unfortunately for you, ceptors are the only way to cause you some headache. Wrong. They're not even the best way to give me some headache. People using them will eventually figure out they do very little and be back here whining for new ways to annoy us. It's a shame CCP don't just work from the feedback they're getting right now telling them it's the case before too many pilots burn out from trollceptoring.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1825
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 18:04:09 -
[1160] - Quote
If they burn themselves out, it's their choice. They are free to use a different ship or approach whenever they want; nothing is holding them back from going for a cruiser and enter the meat grinder. If they do not do this, it's their decision. The current way the mechanics are give you that freedom.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
3242
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 19:19:56 -
[1161] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:
Unfortunately for you, ceptors are the only way to cause you some headache.
Wrong. They're not even the best way to give me some headache.
Confirming Lucas is correct, I'm the best way to give him a headache.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
76
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 21:41:29 -
[1162] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:The patch you downloaded with a change specifically aimed at nerfing trollcepers and their t3 counterparts isnt enough for you?
Of course not.
Aside from the obvious fact that it doesn't state the reason for these changes, it's obvious that CCP routinely catered to gewn tears without sufficient analysis, like it did many times before.
So I'm all for asking for a reason to this patch before it's even a candidate for needed citation.
baltec1 wrote:Simple, you build them with the goal of evasion not combat.
Unfortunately this is not the case where mechanics permit evasion. Since you ignored the question, I have to assume typical goon bs. You can still give a legit explanation to break that assumption, but until you do, it stands. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
DARKNESS.
2693
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 21:59:10 -
[1163] - Quote
On the off chance that ccp dudes are still reading this and care for more feedback, I'll post some thoughts on the current sov system.
The core sov system is, fundamentally, not bad. Structure shoots are gone, which is good. Capital fleets crisscrossing the entire map in 5 minutes is no longer a thing, which is good. Smaller groups have, at least briefly, been able to take sov in areas of unused space, which is good. With structure shoots gone, taking undefended space is much faster, which makes sense.
There are however, some issues. Sov used to be the domain of 200+ man cruiser, T3, Capital, BS, and BC fights. I enjoyed many of those fights - those fights which are becoming increasingly rare. Now it's the domain of Ceptors and T3D's.
The problem isn't that I can't catch ceptors, I can with some success using remote sebos and the like. The problem is that hunting trollceptors all day long gets stale, fast. It's tedious low risk combat. If I wanted that, I'd go to fac war - it pays better. Hell, most of the time it isn't even combat - most trollceptors don't shoot back.
The entosis link has fundamentally shifted core sov doctrines away from cruisers, battleships, and capitals to interceptors and T3 destroyers. This is bad. Very many low risk frigate fights lead to tedium. The content I was getting pre-aegis (100 man cruiser fights against reavers) was more engaging then the content I'm getting now. This is bad. We already have an arena for many low risk fights - fac war. Why do we need a second fac war? And where do the people that like 200 man cruiser fights go for their content?
Fortunately, there are knobs that can be turned in this system. One knob is ship speed. Taking sov should require a commitment of ships to a particular grid. You try to take a sov node? You take it or you loose your ship. No middle ground.
To that end, I would suggest reducing max velocity of entosis ships to somewhere around 1000 m/s - this is afterburner frigate speed, and I believe it to be entirely reasonable. Better still would be to set speed to 0 m/s ala cynos - that way you'd have to (god forbid) bring a support fleet to take sov, but I don't think you'll go for that. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16554
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 22:13:02 -
[1164] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
Of course not.
Aside from the obvious fact that it doesn't state the reason for these changes, it's obvious that CCP routinely catered to gewn tears without sufficient analysis, like it did many times before.
So I'm all for asking for a reason to this patch before it's even a candidate for needed citation.
They also confirmed it on the meta show, grudgingly.
Orca Platypus wrote:
Unfortunately this is not the case where mechanics permit evasion. Since you ignored the question, I have to assume typical goon bs. You can still give a legit explanation to break that assumption, but until you do, it stands.
So despite stating over and over you are having fun with trollcepters you don't know how to fit one?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2087
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 22:42:50 -
[1165] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:baltec1 wrote:Simple, you build them with the goal of evasion not combat. Unfortunately this is not the case where mechanics permit evasion. Since you ignored the question, I have to assume typical goon bs. You can still give a legit explanation to break that assumption, but until you do, it stands.
You know, goons are not among the wiesest and brighest of eve, and I do not like them, but you know who has even less sttus to talk about what is right or wrong? Pator tech school.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6819
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 23:03:08 -
[1166] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:So despite stating over and over you are having fun with trollcepters you don't know how to fit one?
Who is dumb enough to do that in a place where it might cause them to not be able to trollceptor in the future?
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Shun Makoto
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
59
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 00:34:11 -
[1167] - Quote
If you want examples of how this Sov Mechanic is being used just look to Providence. 50+ man trollceptor fleets rolling around capturing everything in sight. I logged in today with 355 notifications about captured services. Within 3-5 hours I had at least another 100.
Caldari Independant Navy Reserve - Junior Diplomat
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
...................................
Kaalakiota Corporation
Patriot Faction
My Personal Log
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 02:41:18 -
[1168] - Quote
Shun Makoto wrote:If you want examples of how this Sov Mechanic is being used just look to Providence. 50+ man trollceptor fleets rolling around capturing everything in sight. I logged in today with 355 notifications about captured services. Within 3-5 hours I had at least another 100.
Would you say that this is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved? |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
94
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 02:42:03 -
[1169] - Quote
Shun Makoto wrote:If you want examples of how this Sov Mechanic is being used just look to Providence. 50+ man trollceptor fleets rolling around capturing everything in sight. I logged in today with 355 notifications about captured services. Within 3-5 hours I had at least another 100.
Well, we tried to warn everyone about this.
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 05:59:31 -
[1170] - Quote
And again: In this particular case, where is the difference between 100 Trollceptors and 100 Cruisers or BC? As long as players (and one group in particular) have nothing better to do than to exhaust mechanics to the extreme, the situation itself is not going to change.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
|
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2301
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 06:00:47 -
[1171] - Quote
Shun Makoto wrote:If you want examples of how this Sov Mechanic is being used just look to Providence. 50+ man trollceptor fleets rolling around capturing everything in sight. I logged in today with 355 notifications about captured services. Within 3-5 hours I had at least another 100.
The Cancer of New Eden will do cancerous things. No sane people that want the game to survive would ever do the things Goons are so proud off.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 06:13:26 -
[1172] - Quote
100 cruisers or battlecruisers leads to a fight that is interesting and enjoyable for all players involved. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 06:25:28 -
[1173] - Quote
In dozens of systems? Easily relocatable into 200, 300 people, crushing on a defending fleet? So back to Tidi fights that everyone loved so much prior to Aegis. Or cruisers that are specifically fitted to evade fights and kill ceptors that try to intercept?
You don't want to see that numbers are going to ruin every single mechanic CCP puts out in the wild, do you?
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 06:36:18 -
[1174] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
You don't want to see that numbers are going to ruin every single mechanic CCP puts out in the wild, do you?
well, CCP could introduce arenas, so that it's always 1 v 1 and whoever wins - gets the structure |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE
Fidelas Constans
2707
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 06:44:23 -
[1175] - Quote
Has there been any discussion or even mention of chamging the vulnerability window to not only be for a single TZ? |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 06:45:33 -
[1176] - Quote
What a fantastic suggestion.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6719
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 07:16:38 -
[1177] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:And again: In this particular case, where is the difference between 100 Trollceptors and 100 Cruisers or BC? As long as players (and one group in particular) have nothing better to do than to exhaust mechanics to the extreme, the situation itself is not going to change. Interceptors can easily blast through gatecamps and bubbles, able to have their own bubbles deployed on grid to cause defenders who aren't in interceptors problems. BCs cannot.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1827
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 07:21:16 -
[1178] - Quote
Which is a problem in itself if you can screw an entire gate grid with several dozens of large bubbles for hundreds of kilometers and completely immobilized such a group.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
76
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 07:25:11 -
[1179] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:
Of course not.
Aside from the obvious fact that it doesn't state the reason for these changes, it's obvious that CCP routinely catered to gewn tears without sufficient analysis, like it did many times before.
So I'm all for asking for a reason to this patch before it's even a candidate for needed citation.
They also confirmed it on the meta show, grudgingly.
Citation needed.
baltec1 wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:
Unfortunately this is not the case where mechanics permit evasion. Since you ignored the question, I have to assume typical goon bs. You can still give a legit explanation to break that assumption, but until you do, it stands.
So despite stating over and over you are having fun with trollcepters you don't know how to fit one?
So despite being stated at least twice that was about evasion built T3 nullified cruisers you still gewned and demonstrated typical reading comprehension failure in attempting to switch the context back to trollceptors?
Kagura Nikon wrote:You know, goons are not among the wiesest and brighest of eve, and I do not like them, but you know who has even less sttus to talk about what is right or wrong? Pator tech school.
ad gewnminem at its finest. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
76
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 07:27:25 -
[1180] - Quote
Shun Makoto wrote:If you want examples of how this Sov Mechanic is being used just look to Providence. 50+ man trollceptor fleets rolling around capturing everything in sight. I logged in today with 355 notifications about captured services. Within 3-5 hours I had at least another 100.
Being outnumbered at least 1 to 5 had nothing to do with it *sarcasm*. |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6719
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 07:37:36 -
[1181] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Which is a problem in itself if you can screw an entire gate grid with several dozens of large bubbles for hundreds of kilometers and completely immobilized such a group. So you think the problem is bubbles? So should all ships be nullified? Or should people just not be allowed to use defensive measures in their space?
Bubble are a powerful way for people to held defend their borders. Alone they do nothing but they improve the ability of a defender to keep people out. Nullified ships are intended to get past them so they can scout, set up cynos, etc. The problem comes when nullified ships are given advantages on a strategic level like they have now. You can now threaten sov with nullified ships, or like in our case just blast enormous numbers of them about with a couple of support fleets to stop other people getting to them very easily.
I'm honestly curious about what you think should be done, if anything to balance out the system as it is.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1828
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 07:47:11 -
[1182] - Quote
It is not the bubbles in itself, it is how people use them. A handful of bubbles to cover a gate is fine, hundreds of bubbles to break the grid, to prevent warp for hundreds of kilometers, to create lag and make brackets and overview hard/impossible to read (CCP, where are the bubble improvements that you hinted at FF2014. Stop your work on SKINS and actually improve the game!).
Again: Exhaustion of game mechanics to the extreme is a problem.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6719
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 07:58:23 -
[1183] - Quote
That rarely if ever happens. I've not yet seen enough bubbles to create lag and if you don't have a ships only combat overview tab you're doing EVE wrong.
In any MMO (hell, in any game - seen speed runs?), people are always going to push the mechanics to the extreme. In EVE moreso due to the types of players and how into the game they get. The trick is that the mechanics should be balanced enough that it doesn't screw the opposing side out of fun. Losing should also be an entertaining experience.
Edit: And it seems a little unclear reading back so I'll clarify. That doesn't mean that the extreme will always win. Mechanics should also be flexible enough for people to counter.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1829
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 08:30:36 -
[1184] - Quote
I'm not that insane to have bubbles in overviews that matter, it's the graphical effects that cause these issues.
Right now, this tactic is primarily employed in some ratting systems or rarely to slow down incoming opponents known to be in non-nullified ships. But this is only because of ceptor nullification. If ceptors were out of the picture for sov defenses, these grid tactics would become a whole lot more enticing for people like your coalition.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6719
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 08:36:31 -
[1185] - Quote
They're already enticing if we fee threatened. As we've already discussed, nullified ships aren't really going to do much alone. If we were worried about invasion then they would keep out most unwanted attention. If people are forced to cyno in attack forces, they'll have a much harder time when they need to disengage.
For defenders, bubbles are useless since you can be over 100km away and switch of an attackers entosis link. Suicide ECM is a thing which is quite funny now.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
76
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 08:43:44 -
[1186] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:blast enormous numbers of them about with a couple of support fleets to stop other people getting to them very easily.
Or just blast enormous fleets with a couple of support ceptors, which is more accurately reflecting what was done. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 08:44:20 -
[1187] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:And again: In this particular case, where is the difference between 100 Trollceptors and 100 Cruisers or BC? As long as players (and one group in particular) have nothing better to do than to exhaust mechanics to the extreme, the situation itself is not going to change. Interceptors can easily blast through gatecamps and bubbles, able to have their own bubbles deployed on grid to cause defenders who aren't in interceptors problems. BCs cannot.
BCs can easily avoid all the camps completely by using wormholes |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1646
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 08:49:51 -
[1188] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
@FT Diomedes
What would that solve? Make you as a single-TZ entity in Null sec vulnerable in 2 windows out of which one you can potentially not defend your stuff in?
Rivr, I think you misread my post.
Quote:The attacker will always get the initiative - he chooses the date and place for the fight. The defender gets to choose the vulnerability window...
Another way of saying that is that the spaceholding alliance [Defender] gets to choose the vulnerability window. In other words, he chooses the time zone for the fight. The attacker still gets to pick the date and the place he will attack.
I would also give the defender the opportunity to set multiple vulnerability windows. That way an alliance strong in both EUTZ and USTZ could provide defensive content, if they so desired.
As an incentive to have a larger vulnerability window, or multiple vulnerability windows, I'm thinking some sort of lowered sovereignty cost, lowered fuel cost, etc.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6719
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 09:48:03 -
[1189] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:And again: In this particular case, where is the difference between 100 Trollceptors and 100 Cruisers or BC? As long as players (and one group in particular) have nothing better to do than to exhaust mechanics to the extreme, the situation itself is not going to change. Interceptors can easily blast through gatecamps and bubbles, able to have their own bubbles deployed on grid to cause defenders who aren't in interceptors problems. BCs cannot. BCs can easily avoid all the camps completely by using wormholes If they are there, they can find them and they can get to them, yeah. That's their reward for their effort.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16559
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 09:51:58 -
[1190] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:
Citation needed.
Go look up, its not exactly hard.
Orca Platypus wrote:
So despite being stated at least twice that was about evasion built T3 nullified cruisers you still gewned and demonstrated typical reading comprehension failure in attempting to switch the context back to trollceptors?
So you a don't know t3 fits, glad you have admitted you infact have no experience with any of these ships being used.
Orca Platypus wrote:
ad gewnminem at its finest.
This is about all you have to input into this debate, grr gons.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6719
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 09:55:20 -
[1191] - Quote
Hide posts. It's a winner when people stop quoting the guy. He has noting to add to this discussion.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2089
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 09:56:37 -
[1192] - Quote
For the bilionth time, if entosis is to represent peopel controling the grid, allow it only on ships that peopel woudl only get to that place if they really control the grid, like battlecruisers and battleships taht are stoo slow to evade all type of conflict and just go troll someone without any control of any grid.
The system will work wonderfully if thta is made.. BC and ABOVE, ONLY
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1865
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 10:09:57 -
[1193] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
The system will work wonderfully if thta is made.. BC and ABOVE, ONLY
No.
Not ever.
Think past the end of your nose as to why. Hint: it is not k space. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1829
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 10:34:51 -
[1194] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Another way of saying that is that the spaceholding alliance [Defender] gets to choose the vulnerability window. In other words, he chooses the time zone for the fight. The attacker still gets to pick the date and the place he will attack.
I would also give the defender the opportunity to set multiple vulnerability windows. That way an alliance strong in both EUTZ and USTZ could provide defensive content, if they so desired.
As an incentive to have a larger vulnerability window, or multiple vulnerability windows, I'm thinking some sort of lowered sovereignty cost, lowered fuel cost, etc.
That is already possible. Not for one system, but for spread over your entire sov holdings. You can set vulnerability windows on a system-by-system basis.
I have not misread it, I have thought it out further ahead the road.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 10:56:03 -
[1195] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:For the bilionth time, if entosis is to represent peopel controling the grid, allow it only on ships that peopel woudl only get to that place if they really control the grid, like battlecruisers and battleships taht are stoo slow to evade all type of conflict and just go troll someone without any control of any grid.
why should someone be disallowed the chance to entosis something if they control the grid in an inty? you are not gonna suggest that someone can entosis the structure in an inty when the defender controls the grid, are you? |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2090
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 11:20:53 -
[1196] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
The system will work wonderfully if thta is made.. BC and ABOVE, ONLY
No. Not ever. Think past the end of your nose as to why. Hint: it is not k space.
Sorry I do not visit much w space. Entosis is sued in anythign there right now?
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2090
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 11:21:48 -
[1197] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:For the bilionth time, if entosis is to represent peopel controling the grid, allow it only on ships that peopel woudl only get to that place if they really control the grid, like battlecruisers and battleships taht are stoo slow to evade all type of conflict and just go troll someone without any control of any grid.
why should someone be disallowed the chance to entosis something if they control the grid in an inty? you are not gonna suggest that someone can entosis the structure in an inty when the defender controls the grid, are you?
Because if you control the grid, it wil be no problem for you to bring a BC.
But an inty , while it can be used while you control the space, it can ALSO be used when you do NOT control the space.
Simple logic, even a goon can understand.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1865
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 11:23:44 -
[1198] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
The system will work wonderfully if thta is made.. BC and ABOVE, ONLY
No. Not ever. Think past the end of your nose as to why. Hint: it is not k space. Sorry I do not visit much w space. Entosis is sued in anythign there right now?
No, but it will be used on structures imminently.
So what happens when you want to kick someones stuff over, but you only have small hole access? Or it's a wolf rayet and bringing big stuff is straight up ?
See, you're all arguing like null is the only area affected here, which granted it CURRENTLY is, but with no regard for the fact that the mechanic will be used EVERYWHERE.
What "works" for null, doesn't work everywhere. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2091
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 11:46:24 -
[1199] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
The system will work wonderfully if thta is made.. BC and ABOVE, ONLY
No. Not ever. Think past the end of your nose as to why. Hint: it is not k space. Sorry I do not visit much w space. Entosis is sued in anythign there right now? No, but it will be used on structures imminently. So what happens when you want to kick someones stuff over, but you only have small hole access? Or it's a wolf rayet and bringing big stuff is straight up ? See, you're all arguing like null is the only area affected here, which granted it CURRENTLY is, but with no regard for the fact that the mechanic will be used EVERYWHERE. What "works" for null, doesn't work everywhere.
If it comes to be used in wormhole space then it might be soemeting to solve then. But as of now, it is like to worry with the imminent invasion of the aliens.. that there are no evidences of... but you know.. might happen.
A simple example of how to solve that is to create a specific frigate or destroyer type that CAN exceptionally fit the entosis but has very very bad infiltration capability.
ON the wolf r type of system, that is not supposed to be a problem, after all you are supposed to use the entosis when you CONTROL THE GRID. The systems where a BC cannot enter although are a real issue I would tend to agree.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1865
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 11:55:15 -
[1200] - Quote
No, it is not "worry with the imminent invasion of the aliens" it is happening. 100% confirmed.
Go read the new structure blogs. http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/shake-my-citadel/
Controlling the grid is one thing, but why would we take a non small ship there in the first place? This isn't null, mate, we can't just YOLO some BCs through the gates because the pathways can and DO close behind you at a moments notice. Equally you don't drag along a slowass ship "just in case" and going back for one isn't always an option and nor can we bridge one in.
What happens when we log off in system to siege the system? We need to pour useless ships (except for one role) into the hole blowing the mass limits along the way thus closing it to other more useful ships?
You're assuming mechanics and pathways to be the same out there and they simply are not. |
|
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2091
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 12:08:17 -
[1201] - Quote
afkalt wrote:No, it is not "worry with the imminent invasion of the aliens" it is happening. 100% confirmed. Go read the new structure blogs. http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/shake-my-citadel/
Controlling the grid is one thing, but why would we take a non small ship there in the first place? This isn't null, mate, we can't just YOLO some BCs through the gates because the pathways can and DO close behind you at a moments notice. Equally you don't drag along a slowass ship "just in case" and going back for one isn't always an option and nor can we bridge one in. What happens when we log off in system to siege the system? We need to pour useless ships (except for one role) into the hole blowing the mass limits along the way thus closing it to other more useful ships? You're assuming mechanics and pathways to be the same out there and they simply are not.
And you are assuming that changes in the mechanics should not reflect changes in tactics andoperations of the players. And things do not work like that.
The only real problem you rised that is valid are the systems with only too small holes to pass large enough ships.
Anyway, I doubt you will then be able to move a citatel to inside a system that you cannot move a BC into ... solikely thisproblem will not really exist.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1865
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 12:10:03 -
[1202] - Quote
You literally don't understand how wormholes work, do you? |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16559
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 12:10:45 -
[1203] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
The system will work wonderfully if thta is made.. BC and ABOVE, ONLY
No. Not ever. Think past the end of your nose as to why. Hint: it is not k space. Sorry I do not visit much w space. Entosis is sued in anythign there right now? No, but it will be used on structures imminently. So what happens when you want to kick someones stuff over, but you only have small hole access? Or it's a wolf rayet and bringing big stuff is straight up ? See, you're all arguing like null is the only area affected here, which granted it CURRENTLY is, but with no regard for the fact that the mechanic will be used EVERYWHERE. What "works" for null, doesn't work everywhere.
Which is why I am a growing fan of an entosis link simply turning off the MWD/AB.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1865
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 12:24:59 -
[1204] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:afkalt wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
The system will work wonderfully if thta is made.. BC and ABOVE, ONLY
No. Not ever. Think past the end of your nose as to why. Hint: it is not k space. Sorry I do not visit much w space. Entosis is sued in anythign there right now? No, but it will be used on structures imminently. So what happens when you want to kick someones stuff over, but you only have small hole access? Or it's a wolf rayet and bringing big stuff is straight up ? See, you're all arguing like null is the only area affected here, which granted it CURRENTLY is, but with no regard for the fact that the mechanic will be used EVERYWHERE. What "works" for null, doesn't work everywhere. Which is why I am a growing fan of an entosis link simply turning off the MWD/AB.
I prefer a modest drop to speed (3500-3750), which webs affect and increase mass to kick align time up.
It's a little less restrictive to meta options but makes active defence really pretty easy.
This would, naturally, be alongside changes to increase the worth of sov/increased ability to condense members/system ratio. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1829
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 12:25:21 -
[1205] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Which is why I am a growing fan of an entosis link simply turning off the MWD/AB. Remains the question: Once the player actives it in order to allow traveling, in particular of bigger ships (like burning back to gates in a camp or cover distances from a random stop/drag bubble) or always, ie. just by fitting it as it currently caps the speed.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter
Absolute Zero.
1040
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 12:29:34 -
[1206] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Remains the question: Once the player actives it in order to allow traveling, in particular of bigger ships (like burning back to gates in a camp or cover distances from a random stop/drag bubble) or always, ie. just by fitting it as it currently caps the speed.
What would be a point to disable prop mod even if link isn't cycling though?
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16559
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 12:34:50 -
[1207] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:Which is why I am a growing fan of an entosis link simply turning off the MWD/AB. Remains the question: Once the player actives it in order to allow traveling, in particular of bigger ships (like burning back to gates in a camp or cover distances from a random stop/drag bubble) or always, ie. just by fitting it as it currently caps the speed.
While active not all the time.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 14:11:06 -
[1208] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:For the bilionth time, if entosis is to represent peopel controling the grid, allow it only on ships that peopel woudl only get to that place if they really control the grid, like battlecruisers and battleships taht are stoo slow to evade all type of conflict and just go troll someone without any control of any grid.
why should someone be disallowed the chance to entosis something if they control the grid in an inty? you are not gonna suggest that someone can entosis the structure in an inty when the defender controls the grid, are you?
No one controls the grid in an interceptor. At best you are the running back for an NFL team running circles around some fat kid with unlimited stamina.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 14:39:30 -
[1209] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Because if you control the grid, it wil be no problem for you to bring a BC.
.
i think you don't understand what the grid control is.
i suggest you look up the difference between controlling the grid, and controlling the space/borders
while you can certainly control the grid in both inty and BC, bringing BC is totally different story.
which is precisely why all the goonies are crying, cause they can't hide behind the stacks of bubbles. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 14:42:39 -
[1210] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Warmeister wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:For the bilionth time, if entosis is to represent peopel controling the grid, allow it only on ships that peopel woudl only get to that place if they really control the grid, like battlecruisers and battleships taht are stoo slow to evade all type of conflict and just go troll someone without any control of any grid.
why should someone be disallowed the chance to entosis something if they control the grid in an inty? you are not gonna suggest that someone can entosis the structure in an inty when the defender controls the grid, are you? No one controls the grid in an interceptor. At best you are the running back for an NFL team running circles around some fat kid with unlimited stamina.
that's plainly wrong.
anyone can control grid in interceptor, it depends on the ships the defenders bring... or don't |
|
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2093
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 14:49:52 -
[1211] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
Because if you control the grid, it wil be no problem for you to bring a BC.
.
i think you don't understand what the grid control is. i suggest you look up the difference between controlling the grid, and controlling the space/borders while you can certainly control the grid in both inty and BC, bringing BC is totally different story. which is precisely why all the goonies are crying, cause they can't hide behind the stacks of bubbles.
Controlling the grid for a few minutes is NOT what CCP means when they say control the grid, and YOU KNOW IT.
Pretending you are dumber than you are is not a good way to convey your agenda.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16559
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 15:39:08 -
[1212] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
Because if you control the grid, it wil be no problem for you to bring a BC.
.
i think you don't understand what the grid control is. i suggest you look up the difference between controlling the grid, and controlling the space/borders while you can certainly control the grid in both inty and BC, bringing BC is totally different story. which is precisely why all the goonies are crying, cause they can't hide behind the stacks of bubbles.
Given we own the most secure space without using bubble camps it's clear we are not having issues in defending. The problem we keep on pointing out is most of the entosising being done is by ships made to avoid fighting which is resulting in very boring game play and renders the vast bulk of ships useless.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
364
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 16:11:57 -
[1213] - Quote
Gewns complaining about people avoiding fights, and using weaponized boredom...just sayin' |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16560
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 16:29:03 -
[1214] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:Gewns complaining about people avoiding fights, and using weaponized boredom...just sayin'
Pointing out a system that is supposed to be producing more fights is producing fewer than the system it replaced is called feedback.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
119
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 16:53:53 -
[1215] - Quote
Once again, not so much these:
https://zkillboard.com/region/10000047/reset/group/831/losses/
...for variety cross reference against solo kills for even more fun
https://zkillboard.com/region/10000047/solo/
so much as it is this:
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/
The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020
Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530
I would say, with the numbers above, you will hold grid just about wherever you prefer in whatever you want to bring, why should it be drawn out...
...unless the invading force is moving in, taking the systems back will be just as easy, especially if they are empty.
...also, remember the new structures (citadels) will be able to fire back, hopefully they can carry that over to the sov structures eventually as well, but either way, the ship carrying the thing matters not when half of null takes on less than a 10th of it.
Reminder of what new structures will be designed to:
"We have established Citadels need to be able to take care of themselves in a fight.
As such they should:
- Repel trolling attempts from a single player trying to capture them with an Entosis module
- Act as force multipliers to deal with attacking fleets and promote asymmetric warfare (less defenders are required than attackers)
- Have engagement inertia, meaning they require time to acquire and switch targets
- Require support from defending fleets to successfully fend off attacks"
Reminders about where we are in the overall revamp, for those that want to go back, don't get it, or tinker with a transition piece that will be part of a bigger picture:
- Phase One contains the long-distance travel changes... <- Stick #1
- Phase Two...medium-term changes to...capture and hold Nullsec space and infrastructure...loosely...described as GÇ£occupancy-basedGÇ¥ systems and more GÇ£freeformGÇ¥ systems...decentralize... <- Stick 2 (Where we are)
- Phase Three is the stage that CCP Seagull discussed in the EVE Keynote at Fanfest this year. This stage is intended to build upon the changes that we are planning for starbases/structures and corps/alliances in 2015, changes that will open up new possibilities for more dynamic warfare and more granular control of territory. This phase is also intended to lead quite deliberately into the future through our vision for player-built stargates. <- Carrot
...this isn't about grrr anyone, but rather acknowledging where we are in the process, and highlighting the futility of scream crying about a system that is only two thirds implemented, where the last third gives the all important Why Bother
Phase 2 is fine as is (with tweaks only necessary after the effects of phase 3 are implemented, such as iHub cost and use) and allows ebb and flow for uncontested or un-lived in sov, with tweaks in defensive capability better addressed in Phase 3, where system infrastructure, defenses and enhancements/customization would, in theory, allow a smaller localized force the ability to better fortify and secure their system or constellation (NOTE - those that think in terms of region still don't get it).
This does require an actual change in thinking if you are offering design tips, whereas the vast majority in this thread are railing against the sticks given in phase 1 and 2 in order to lessen the impact which creeps us back to region sized thinking, instead of focusing on ideas that would allow for condensing and making holdings more efficient and defensible.
The game is broke, but purposely so due to a major transition, bellyaching about going back is a non-starter, focusing on phases designed to be punitive misses the point, and providing feedback and suggestions for the all important "Why Bother" phase 3 is about the only sensible thing to actually do.
The provi invasion demonstrates only how a horde can overrun even well indexed systems without any benefit whatsoever of whatever may come in Phase 3 for the defender, and illustrates no actual incentive to do said overrunning beyond basic boredom, which could also be attributed to lack of Phase 3 implementation.
Rather than focus on what ship can carry the phase 2 thing that does the thing, it would be better served to focus on feedback for the phase 3 things that can be designed to limit the effectiveness of that thing from phase 2. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6720
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 22:38:16 -
[1216] - Quote
That was far too long and far too "grr" for me to read more than the first sentence. Could you summarise it in 30 words or less? Better yet, make it a tweet.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
707
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 23:12:11 -
[1217] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:That was far too long and far too "grr" for me to read more than the first sentence. Could you summarise it in 30 words or less? Better yet, make it a tweet.
Harry believes CCP is on the right track, we should disregard "Interceptors online" because player built stargates and Citadels is going to fix everything.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
3247
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 03:41:52 -
[1218] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:That was far too long and far too "grr" for me to read more than the first sentence. Could you summarise it in 30 words or less? Better yet, make it a tweet.
Agreed. Stupid wall of text.
Oh, and just so you know....me agreeing with Lucas means Hell is about to freeze over.
And why do you keep putting in the number of pilots in the Imperium? Who cares if X number of players want to form a coalition, its a goddamn sandbox.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 03:56:38 -
[1219] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Controlling the grid for a few minutes is NOT what CCP means when they say control the grid, and YOU KNOW IT.
Pretending you are dumber than you are is not a good way to convey your agenda.
it's exactly what CCP meant for the cases where defender doesn't turn up.
agree about pretending etc. don't do it. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 04:29:17 -
[1220] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Pointing out a system that is supposed to be producing more fights is producing fewer than the system it replaced is called feedback.
actually your war in Provi proves that new system produces far more fights than the old one.
if you compare it to previous wars, there was nowhere near as many fights |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6721
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 06:48:13 -
[1221] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
Controlling the grid for a few minutes is NOT what CCP means when they say control the grid, and YOU KNOW IT.
Pretending you are dumber than you are is not a good way to convey your agenda.
it's exactly what CCP meant for the cases where defender doesn't turn up. And once again, the ONLY reason to use an interceptor is for when defenders DO show up. You don;t need an evasion fit ship if you have noone to evade.
Warmeister wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Pointing out a system that is supposed to be producing more fights is producing fewer than the system it replaced is called feedback.
actually your war in Provi proves that new system produces far more fights than the old one. if you compare it to previous wars, there was nowhere near as many fights So you weren't around during the fountain war then? There's were considerably more fights with considerably higher losses on both sides. The fights in Provi right now are barely larger than your average roam. When deployed to war the old system generated a lot more content and for a much longer time. It was just a case of motivating people to go to war, which neither system has a good method of accomplishing.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16564
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 10:29:41 -
[1222] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Pointing out a system that is supposed to be producing more fights is producing fewer than the system it replaced is called feedback.
actually your war in Provi proves that new system produces far more fights than the old one. if you compare it to previous wars, there was nowhere near as many fights
We have most of the big players of nullsec all crammed into provi most of which looking for fights. Outside of provi its intercepters/t3d online and inside provi the bulk of our attacking force is also cepters and t3d. Also you lot camping a station in nados doesn't constitute much of a fight, I have seen a lot more fights in past wars.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6820
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 11:06:28 -
[1223] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Warmeister wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Pointing out a system that is supposed to be producing more fights is producing fewer than the system it replaced is called feedback.
actually your war in Provi proves that new system produces far more fights than the old one. if you compare it to previous wars, there was nowhere near as many fights We have most of the big players of nullsec all crammed into provi most of which looking for fights. Outside of provi its intercepters/t3d online and inside provi the bulk of our attacking force is also cepters and t3d. Also you lot camping a station in nados doesn't constitute much of a fight, I have seen a lot more fights in past wars.
Warmeister's post is the kind of positive reinforcement ccp needs in these forums.
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1653
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 11:35:05 -
[1224] - Quote
afkalt wrote:You literally don't understand how wormholes work, do you?
It seems quite straightforward to me for CCP to have slightly different Entosis rules for Wormhole space and K-Space.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1866
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 11:53:30 -
[1225] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:afkalt wrote:You literally don't understand how wormholes work, do you? It seems quite straightforward to me for CCP to have slightly different Entosis rules for Wormhole space and K-Space.
Well yes, but then it starts getting a bit weird and niche and everyone is a special snowflake and the fitting rules are different depending on what bit of space you're in...They could but I don't like it. It's not a good play when there are other effective ways to deal with this.
I'm sticking with drop the speed cap slightly further (3500-3750), thus allow typical legit nano cruisers to function with it whilst making them pretty easy to catch if people turn up, make webs work right (if they've not fixed it already - not been on much since the patch) and increase the mass penalty or some other mechanism to enforce a minimum align time. I think in conjunction with the real priority (below) that'll be about perfect:
The real priority being improving the value of sov. It is intrinsic to the whole thing and if we don't fix that and only tunnel vision onto the link and the ships it'll get into compulsive balancing disorder.
Then they REALLY need to unveil the battlecruiser stuff they are working on. |
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
The Initiative.
472
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 11:57:57 -
[1226] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Warmeister wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Pointing out a system that is supposed to be producing more fights is producing fewer than the system it replaced is called feedback.
actually your war in Provi proves that new system produces far more fights than the old one. if you compare it to previous wars, there was nowhere near as many fights We have most of the big players of nullsec all crammed into provi most of which looking for fights. Outside of provi its intercepters/t3d online and inside provi the bulk of our attacking force is also cepters and t3d. Also you lot camping a station in nados doesn't constitute much of a fight, I have seen a lot more fights in past wars.
Seems to me that T3 destroyers are way out of control.
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.
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
365
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 13:15:28 -
[1227] - Quote
No more out of control than trollceptors. T3d's just happen to be good at destroying stuff, which is what a 'destroyer' should be able to do. They are the best counter to trollceptors (no tackle needed even), and very good at playing an anti-support role in big fleets (if you can fly it right). |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6721
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 14:12:03 -
[1228] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Well yes, but then it starts getting a bit weird and niche and everyone is a special snowflake and the fitting rules are different depending on what bit of space you're in...They could but I don't like it. It's not a good play when there are other effective ways to deal with this. Not really that difficult. 3 entosis links: Micro, T1, T2. T1 and T2 are as they are now but can only go on BC+, micro can go on anything. Micros can only be used on non-sov structures (including station services) while T1 and T2 can be used universally.
afkalt wrote:The real priority being improving the value of sov. It is intrinsic to the whole thing and if we don't fix that and only tunnel vision onto the link and the ships it'll get into compulsive balancing disorder. This is a big chunk of the problem, but it won't solve the issue that people not looking for value in sov have a mechanically driven method to attack those that do with boredom.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
73
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 14:28:01 -
[1229] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: And once again, the ONLY reason to use an interceptor is for when defenders DO show up. You don;t need an evasion fit ship if you have noone to evade.
wrong. you need an evasion fit ship to get to the system of your choice first and foremost, and not die to the first gate camp.
Lucas Kell wrote:So you weren't around during the fountain war then? There's were considerably more fights with considerably higher losses on both sides. The fights in Provi right now are barely larger than your average roam. When deployed to war the old system generated a lot more content and for a much longer time. It was just a case of motivating people to go to war, which neither system has a good method of accomplishing.
actually i was. there were larger fights during fountain war, but there were significantly less of them.. |
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1872
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 14:34:10 -
[1230] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:Well yes, but then it starts getting a bit weird and niche and everyone is a special snowflake and the fitting rules are different depending on what bit of space you're in...They could but I don't like it. It's not a good play when there are other effective ways to deal with this. Not really that difficult. 3 entosis links: Micro, T1, T2. T1 and T2 are as they are now but can only go on BC+, micro can go on anything. Micros can only be used on non-sov structures (including station services) while T1 and T2 can be used universally.
But let's be realistic, people will still cry when citadels get lasered by evasion mobiles, won't they? Especially since they won't shoot back without a sitter in there. |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6721
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 14:44:20 -
[1231] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:wrong. you need an evasion fit ship to get to the system of your choice first and foremost, and not die to the first gate camp. Erm... no, what you need is a scout and/or intel on gatecamps and that squishy thing between your ears to work out a safe route. This is why nullification on cheap ships is bad, it promotes laziness. Plain and simple, if the only way to get to a system and assault it is to use an evasion fit ship then you shouldn't really be allowed to assault it you lazy ****.
Warmeister wrote:actually i was. there were larger fights during fountain war, but there were significantly less of them.. How? I was in multiple fights almost every day for the first half of it and still a fair few right up to the end. In this one I brought 10 drakes with me in preparation, been in multiple fleets every day and I've only been in a couple of fights and lost half shield at most. I even AFKed a few times for several minutes, finding myself alone at a gate when I got back and STILL I couldn't get my slow ass drake blown up. At the rate this is going I'm actually gonna have 9 drakes to sell back in Amarr once we're done. It's horrendous.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
TinkerHell
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
175
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 14:46:11 -
[1232] - Quote
Until you allow remote repair on the entosis linked ship there is no reason ever to use a slower bulkier ship to ever entosis any of these beacons. Even if there is a fight going on over the beacon you are still better to zoom around and run away because running away is a much bigger chance of survival than tanking an entire fleet on your own.
Sov shouldnt be about capturing things with frigates or fast nano cruisers. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6721
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 14:46:53 -
[1233] - Quote
afkalt wrote:But let's be realistic, people will still cry when citadels get lasered by evasion mobiles, won't they? Especially since they won't shoot back without a sitter in there. People will cry about absolutely anything, that's just the way it is. A citadel is a much more personal structure than alliance level infrastructure, and so should be more vulnerable to individual passers by than sov structures though.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 15:31:11 -
[1234] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:...I brought 10 drakes with me in preparation, been in multiple fleets every day and I've only been in a couple of fights and lost half shield at most. I even AFKed a few times for several minutes, finding myself alone at a gate when I got back and STILL I couldn't get my slow ass drake blown up...It's horrendous.
This is more of a function of outnumbering your enemy 5:1, which is why I keep linking the coalition numbers.
I noticed you don't seem to have much of a problem losing toasting ceptors (not trolling you, but this has been one of the biggest subjects on this thread, so it is a must to point it out, as consistently and frequently as it was brought up):
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48686697/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48685775/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48684083/
Eve servers can't handle the big tidi fights, that is the real reason they are forced to design mechanics around smaller local fights, it is what it is, and I would rather CCP recognize that limitation and design to it, over hanging on to mechanics that eventually lead to huge fleet engagements that either crash servers, or utterly paralyze us into a tidi ridden misery fest.
I do love the concept of huge battles, but that isn't a technically feasible reality right now. The single shard sand-box is still the best draw about this game, and that means spreading us out and localizing conflict, as well as economies/communities/self-sufficiency/etc. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6721
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 15:42:15 -
[1235] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:...I brought 10 drakes with me in preparation, been in multiple fleets every day and I've only been in a couple of fights and lost half shield at most. I even AFKed a few times for several minutes, finding myself alone at a gate when I got back and STILL I couldn't get my slow ass drake blown up...It's horrendous. This is more of a function of outnumbering your enemy 5:1, which is why I keep linking the coalition numbers. Except of course that we're generally not forming up on a coalition level. I'm only flying with SMA (OK, yesterday we had a single bastion guy along for the ride) so most fights we have are just us. Your constant complaining that we have too many friends continues to be irrelevant.
All the time they can be used we're going to use them. Those particular losses you see there were from a specific op where we tried (and succeeded) to get a structure into overtime to give our main entosis fleet a shot at reinforcing it. Being able to fly through gatecamps and rapidly bail out when engaged helped with that. I'm against trollceptors exactly for those reasons, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to abuse the hell out of them while they are about.
Harry Saq wrote:Eve servers can't handle the big tidi fights, that is the real reason they are forced to design mechanics around smaller local fights, it is what it is, and I would rather CCP recognize that limitation and design to it, over hanging on to mechanics that eventually lead to huge fleet engagements that either crash servers, or utterly paralyze us into a tidi ridden misery fest.
I do love the concept of huge battles, but that isn't a technically feasible reality right now. The single shard sand-box is still the best draw about this game, and that means spreading us out and localizing conflict, as well as economies/communities/self-sufficiency/etc. No mechanics will prevent big fleet fights. All the time people can work together in large numbers (which is always, because this is an MMO) they will. That said, a lot of people love those big fights, tidi and all, and they certainly do a lot to get EVE to be more widely knows, so them becoming less common is a shame. Perhaps what they should be doing is working on ways to leverage threading for their solar system servers to make the servers more capable of handling those fights.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1874
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 15:46:43 -
[1236] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:But let's be realistic, people will still cry when citadels get lasered by evasion mobiles, won't they? Especially since they won't shoot back without a sitter in there. People will cry about absolutely anything, that's just the way it is. A citadel is a much more personal structure than alliance level infrastructure, and so should be more vulnerable to individual passers by than sov structures though.
I dunno, we will be anchoring supers at these things - Feels a tad more important than the flag in the sand which is a TCU! |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2094
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 16:55:04 -
[1237] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:...I brought 10 drakes with me in preparation, been in multiple fleets every day and I've only been in a couple of fights and lost half shield at most. I even AFKed a few times for several minutes, finding myself alone at a gate when I got back and STILL I couldn't get my slow ass drake blown up...It's horrendous. This is more of a function of outnumbering your enemy 5:1, which is why I keep linking the coalition numbers. I noticed you don't seem to have much of a problem losing toasting ceptors (not trolling you, but this has been one of the biggest subjects on this thread, so it is a must to point it out, as consistently and frequently as it was brought up): https://zkillboard.com/kill/48686697/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48685775/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48684083/
Eve servers can't handle the big tidi fights, that is the real reason they are forced to design mechanics around smaller local fights, it is what it is, and I would rather CCP recognize that limitation and design to it, over hanging on to mechanics that eventually lead to huge fleet engagements that either crash servers, or utterly paralyze us into a tidi ridden misery fest. I do love the concept of huge battles, but that isn't a technically feasible reality right now. The single shard sand-box is still the best draw about this game, and that means spreading us out and localizing conflict, as well as economies/communities/self-sufficiency/etc.
WRONG. If the servers could hold 1 BILLIOn people on same node, Still woudl be no big wars, Because whenonly 2 powerful sides remain and a few game reserve regions, these 2 sides will avoid fightign each other at any cost, because no side can ever kill the other and the COST of even trying will be absurdly high.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16576
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 17:05:50 -
[1238] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:afkalt wrote:Well yes, but then it starts getting a bit weird and niche and everyone is a special snowflake and the fitting rules are different depending on what bit of space you're in...They could but I don't like it. It's not a good play when there are other effective ways to deal with this. Not really that difficult. 3 entosis links: Micro, T1, T2. T1 and T2 are as they are now but can only go on BC+, micro can go on anything. Micros can only be used on non-sov structures (including station services) while T1 and T2 can be used universally. But let's be realistic, people will still cry when citadels get lasered by evasion mobiles, won't they? Especially since they won't shoot back without a sitter in there.
Also debatable how effective said weapons are going to be, if they are capital sized then there will be issues with trollcepters and other small fast junk.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16576
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 17:08:04 -
[1239] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Seems to me that T3 destroyers are way out of control.
Thats a whole other argument with t3d being too overpowered and invalidating things like AF completely.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 19:07:46 -
[1240] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:...I brought 10 drakes with me in preparation, been in multiple fleets every day and I've only been in a couple of fights and lost half shield at most. I even AFKed a few times for several minutes, finding myself alone at a gate when I got back and STILL I couldn't get my slow ass drake blown up...It's horrendous. This is more of a function of outnumbering your enemy 5:1, which is why I keep linking the coalition numbers. Except of course that we're generally not forming up on a coalition level. I'm only flying with SMA (OK, yesterday we had a single bastion guy along for the ride) so most fights we have are just us. Your constant complaining that we have too many friends continues to be irrelevant. The numbers do in fact matter, since you are attacking the entire region spread out according to assignments. That means the defenders are also spread out, and with much much fewer of them to pull from you are going to see alot less of them. Numbers are what they are, and it isn't complaining, just want to make sure your complaining is in context.
In particular, this context:
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/
The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020
----------------vs---------------
Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530
Where the 53k group is saying the game isn't producing enough opportunities for us to fight big battles against our 10.5k enemies.
Lucas Kell wrote:No mechanics will prevent big fleet fights....That said, a lot of people love those big fights, tidi and all, and they certainly do a lot to get EVE to be more widely knows, so them becoming less common is a shame. Perhaps what they should be doing is working on ways to leverage threading for their solar system servers to make the servers more capable of handling those fights. Agreed, no mechanics can or should stop it, however normal conquest mechanics should not REQUIRE it as a logical bi-product as with the old system. They worked on trying to solve the tidi problems for years, at some point you need to change direction. Perhaps they eventually crack it and the experience is better, but until then what is certain is that they have failed thus far, and atleast they are moving on to something solvable. Since mechanics no longer require the big escalation, we will be free to escalate as much as we please voluntarily and find out if the servers can hold. |
|
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 20:05:42 -
[1241] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote: stuff i didn't read
That's the 3rd, 4th, or 5th time you have linked ~coalition numbers~. I want you to know that every time you bring up numbers your post gets completely overlooked and is assumed to be nothing of importance.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16579
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 21:05:05 -
[1242] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:
The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020
----------------vs---------------
Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530
Where the 53k group is saying the game isn't producing enough opportunities for us to fight big battles against our 10.5k enemies.
We have perhaps two thousand deployed not 53k and that number is spread out over several timezones.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6721
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 21:13:52 -
[1243] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:...I brought 10 drakes with me in preparation, been in multiple fleets every day and I've only been in a couple of fights and lost half shield at most. I even AFKed a few times for several minutes, finding myself alone at a gate when I got back and STILL I couldn't get my slow ass drake blown up...It's horrendous. This is more of a function of outnumbering your enemy 5:1, which is why I keep linking the coalition numbers. Except of course that we're generally not forming up on a coalition level. I'm only flying with SMA (OK, yesterday we had a single bastion guy along for the ride) so most fights we have are just us. Your constant complaining that we have too many friends continues to be irrelevant. The numbers do in fact matter, since you are attacking the entire region spread out according to assignments. That means the defenders are also spread out, and with much much fewer of them to pull from you are going to see alot less of them. Numbers are what they are, and it isn't complaining, just want to make sure your complaining is in context. Oh good lord stop linking the godamn coalitions. Yes our coalition is big. You don't like it. Tough. Deal with it or quit. You're telling us that because we're the single largest group in EVE that our educated feedback on mechanics should simply be ignored. That's simply not how it works. Get over whatever butthurt it is we caused you and discuss the actual mechanics.
In this specific instance, it's completely irrelevant, since while they may be spread out as we are, the fleets we are engaging are on par with our own. It doesn't matter if there are goons 10 jumps away or more CVA a few jumps over if they aren't involved in the fight.
Harry Saq wrote:Agreed, no mechanics can or should stop it, however normal conquest mechanics should not REQUIRE it as a logical bi-product as with the old system. They worked on trying to solve the tidi problems for years, at some point you need to change direction. Perhaps they eventually crack it and the experience is better, but until then what is certain is that they have failed thus far, and atleast they are moving on to something solvable. Since mechanics no longer require the big escalation, we will be free to escalate as much as we please voluntarily and find out if the servers can hold. Whatever system they put in place, it's an alliance level mechanic. It will always come down to numbers. Always. If they somehow invented a mechanic that made a solo player as powerful as an entire alliance they would have broken the game.
I don't know how much you've played with the new mechanics, but they are whack a mole in space. They are insanely dull to deal with regardless of size, and they won't help in the long run once the initial novelty wears off.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 22:05:05 -
[1244] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:...I brought 10 drakes with me in preparation, been in multiple fleets every day and I've only been in a couple of fights and lost half shield at most. I even AFKed a few times for several minutes, finding myself alone at a gate when I got back and STILL I couldn't get my slow ass drake blown up...It's horrendous. This is more of a function of outnumbering your enemy 5:1, which is why I keep linking the coalition numbers. Except of course that we're generally not forming up on a coalition level. I'm only flying with SMA (OK, yesterday we had a single bastion guy along for the ride) so most fights we have are just us. Your constant complaining that we have too many friends continues to be irrelevant. The numbers do in fact matter, since you are attacking the entire region spread out according to assignments. That means the defenders are also spread out, and with much much fewer of them to pull from you are going to see alot less of them. Numbers are what they are, and it isn't complaining, just want to make sure your complaining is in context. Oh good lord stop linking the godamn coalitions. Yes our coalition is big. You don't like it. Tough. Deal with it or quit. You're telling us that because we're the single largest group in EVE that our educated feedback on mechanics should simply be ignored. That's simply not how it works. Get over whatever butthurt it is we caused you and discuss the actual mechanics. I am completely dispassionate about it, certainly comparatively to your outburst. I am however simply providing context to your "educated feedback on mechanics" in terms of the perspective it is coming from. Provi is a teachable moment, it is important to understand the relative strengths of the parties involved, as embarrassing as it may be for either. What I don't understand is why it bothers you so much, or by what logic you use such that numbers aren't relevant to said mechanics and quality of play. Big coalitions are living monuments to old Dominion Sov mechanics, the teachable moment isn't whether a bigger group can beat a smaller group, but instead how big is too big to be sustained, and part of sustaining is having a reason for being. You said it yourself, whatever is designed to will be an alliance level mechanic, coalitions are external player created entities never supported by actual in-game mechanics, which speaks to design intent. Aegus Sov is apparently just re-emphasizing play geared towards alliances and corporations. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
707
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 22:22:29 -
[1245] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: And once again, the ONLY reason to use an interceptor is for when defenders DO show up. You don;t need an evasion fit ship if you have noone to evade. wrong. you need an evasion fit ship to get to the system of your choice first and foremost, and not die to the first gate camp.
Yes you do need and SHOULD need an evasion ship - To scout the FLEET in that is contesting sov.
No individual should ever be able to reach and contest a system simply with evasion tactics.
Easiest fix for troll ceptors is to balance the amount of Stront per cycle so that a single frigate needs support to effectively contest anything.
3 Stront for startup cycle - 1 Stront per cycle. This way a troll ceptor who is simply there to screw with defenders is only going to manage a few attempts before having to get more Stront.
While a ceptor that is part of an attacking fleet only needs one startup per structure and fleet members carry extra Stront as needed.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
707
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 23:32:33 -
[1246] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:I am completely dispassionate about it, certainly comparatively to your outburst. I am however simply providing context to your "educated feedback on mechanics" in terms of the perspective it is coming from. Provi is a teachable moment, it is important to understand the relative strengths of the parties involved, as embarrassing as it may be for either. What I don't understand is why it bothers you so much, or by what logic you use such that numbers aren't relevant to said mechanics and quality of play. Big coalitions are living monuments to old Dominion Sov mechanics, the teachable moment isn't whether a bigger group can beat a smaller group, but instead how big is too big to be sustained, and part of sustaining is having a reason for being. You said it yourself, whatever is designed to will be an alliance level mechanic, coalitions are external player created entities never supported by actual in-game mechanics, which speaks to design intent. Aegus Sov is apparently just re-emphasizing play geared towards alliances and corporations.
Problem is, many alliances would not survive without coalition support so band together to try and keep what little (or overly much) they have.
Take the Provi deployment as an example.
The Imperium says they have "only" 2,000 deployed - So there are still in theory 39,000 left to defend their combined space - The 2,000 that are deployed aren't risking anything (except the odd ship loss). Risk vs Reward favours the attacker.
Where if there was no coalitions, deploying becomes a whole new ballgame - You need to commit to the deployment and fight to win because there is a big chance another alliance is going to notice, you are deployed and your sov is lightly defended.
Eve has evolved to where that type of risk vs reward = join a coalition.
Not GRRR Goons but - Goons have space that other alliances would like to take, without coalitions it is possible someone could in fact take, at least part, of Goon space but while ever coalitions exist there will be no "sov wars" (replace Goon space with any other sov alliance that is part of a coalition - the same applies). Just the odd fight hear and there because he said, she said, he did it and I have a point to prove.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2095
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 23:59:57 -
[1247] - Quote
Just to be clear. I like a lot the new sov system. But I hate interceptors using the entosis sicne goes agaisnt the whole proposition of the system. And I also hate that they made EVEYR SINGLE structure be attaked by entosis, they should left a few as DPS target, to keep some use for capitals.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2095
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 00:01:03 -
[1248] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Seems to me that T3 destroyers are way out of control.
Thats a whole other argument with t3d being too overpowered and invalidating things like AF completely.
To be fair with a couple of exceptions AF were invalid even before the confessor appeared :P
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Terraj Oknatis
Capital Punishments
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 04:13:53 -
[1249] - Quote
So Im maybe possibly double backing on this whole "troll ceptor thing" Because you null bears don't like it doesn't mean its a bad thing.
I watched a youtube video the other day labeled "EVE is easy troll ceptor" and this guy said he was having loads of fun attempting to disable services in his ceptor and making all the people in the station UNDOCK to catch him. I actually found this to be quite hilarious because he was pretty good at it and made you guys chase him all around the system while picking off frigs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3uTVTBKb_E
I don't think his aim was really to take sov with the ceptor but to just have fun screwing with the station and making people do this crazy thing called undocking...
I have noticed that null seconites routinely will squirel away in their hidey' hole everytime a neut comes in local. CCP is actually trying to fix that as you will be required to maintain your own local grids with future structures.
CCP is just trying to get you guys to un dock and play the game without blobbing up tremendously every time you want to do something. you know bringin' solo back.
I don't really know if this entosis link is properly implemented yet and has tremendous issues outside of null sec space but in null sec i think its probably for the best as you guys usually have more than enough people sittiing in a station to defend it. this is unlike a small wormhole corp that logs in once every few days to perform routine maintenance.
As a side note i do believe the entosis link should be just to off line station modules but to actually destroy the station should require dreads and caps.
Random thoughts
that is all.... |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6721
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 07:46:56 -
[1250] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:by what logic you use such that numbers aren't relevant to said mechanics and quality of play. And I'e already covered this. Hush now. Your posts are no longer relevant as you've made it clear they are simply "grr goons". Big groups will always exist, get used to it.
After having a deployment revolving heavily around fozziesov, I can say conclusively that it's the most boring mechanics in the game. There were several people begging for tidi to be brought back instead. The problem is that it ends up with both sides babysitting nodes while people rush around trying to oneshot or ECM the entosis guy off their respective node. For most of the people involved it's simply sitting around wishing someone would actually fight watching their miner mine a structure.
Seriously, I thought it was just boring back when it was just being defensive and though "a deployment, hell yeah, those are fun". Boy was I wrong.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Kieron VonDeux
72
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 13:05:32 -
[1251] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:by what logic you use such that numbers aren't relevant to said mechanics and quality of play. And I'e already covered this. Hush now. Your posts are no longer relevant as you've made it clear they are simply "grr goons"....
Something tells me your Ego is getting the best of you, and since you have the most posts in this thread, its hard to say otherwise.
Trying to invalidate someone's ideas because they don't like you or your org is the oldest trick in the book.
It clearly looks like some are having fun at the expense of others with the new Sov mechanic. The same was said about Dom Sov. Some had fun there at the expense of others.
What is different is that in Dom Sov the ones who were the biggest were having fun burning down all the little guys stuff. Now the shoe is on the other foot and the little guys gets to have fun at the expense of the bigger guy, and the bigger guy doesn't like it.
Too bad I say.
CCP has tried to re-invent this game many times. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But, I must say they have really outdone themselves this time. They have made it so the biggest can't automatically have more fun than the small guys in Sov warfare. They made it so the small guy can have fun harassing the big guy.
Face it, the large orgs don't like Aegis Sov because it takes more effort from them as a whole to maintain their sprawling empires.
The little guy likes it because he can get into their areas and force them to react, frequently poorly.
The big guy wants to say its all boring and it was better in the old days, where it wasn't so much effort to maintain.
The little guy is having a blast at their expense.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
The big guy just needs to adapt and reduce the size of their claim to make it less of an effort to maintain, and the small guy will still be having fun getting them to react, sometimes poorly.
But the big guy will most likely not change and require their members to try and maintain an oversized amount of space and blame CCP if their numbers drop.
Just another case of failing to adapt to change.
Change is good btw, it allows the best to adapt to a new environment and re-experience the game, but there is a drawback, we sometimes lose the thick headed ones who refuse to adapt their play style.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6722
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 13:50:05 -
[1252] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:Something tells me your Ego is getting the best of you, and since you have the most posts in this thread, its hard to say otherwise. I'm vocal thus my opinions are invalid? This is twice as funny considering your next point.
Kieron VonDeux wrote:Trying to invalidate someone's ideas because they don't like you or your org is the oldest trick in the book. Th guy keeps posting up the coalition graph as if the number of players my alliances chooses to befriend is relevant to providing feedback on a game mechanic I use every day. I was in a fleet outnumbered 2:1 yesterday, yet supposedly my opinion dooesn't count because I'm a blobber.
Kieron VonDeux wrote:It clearly looks like some are having fun at the expense of others with the new Sov mechanic. The same was said about Dom Sov. Some had fun there at the expense of others.
What is different is that in Dom Sov the ones who were the biggest were having fun burning down all the little guys stuff. Now the shoe is on the other foot and the little guys gets to have fun at the expense of the bigger guy, and the bigger guy doesn't like it.
Too bad I say. Even the smaller groups are starting to get bored now they've realised our empire isn't going to crumble. Even if that were the case and the little guys really were havign fun minig structures, you do have to ask yourself this: Why is it a good thing that CCP are making the game less fun for the biggest single collection of players just to make it more fun for small minorities?
There were lots of problems with domionion, but when it worked it worked really well. Fozziesov has just as many problems, the difference being that when it works it's still boring for all involved.
Kieron VonDeux wrote:CCP has tried to re-invent this game many times. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But, I must say they have really outdone themselves this time. They have made it so the biggest can't automatically have more fun than the small guys in Sov warfare. They made it so the small guy can have fun harassing the big guy.
Face it, the large orgs don't like Aegis Sov because it takes more effort from them as a whole to maintain their sprawling empires.
The little guy likes it because he can get into their areas and force them to react, frequently poorly. How long will the fun really last. The little guy is having "fun" right nwo because he thinks that it's causing a massive disruption. It's not, it's a minor nuisance and only encourages us to gather more people into our big group of blues. As more of the smaller guys start realising that the effect of this is minimal, you'll see them complaining even more.
I take it you've not used the new sov system then? I say this because it is in fact easier for the larger groups now. Defending is significantly easier than attacking and preventing timers can be done without having to have a proper form up in a time window chosen by the defender. The reason groups hold less space is they don't need to hold as much now. Each system supports significantly more players, so you only need a fraction of the space compared to dominion.
Kieron VonDeux wrote:The big guy wants to say its all boring and it was better in the old days, where it wasn't so much effort to maintain.
The little guy is having a blast at their expense.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
The big guy just needs to adapt and reduce the size of their claim to make it less of an effort to maintain, and the small guy will still be having fun getting them to react, sometimes poorly.
But the big guy will most likely not change and require their members to try and maintain an oversized amount of space and blame CCP if their numbers drop.
Just another case of failing to adapt to change.
Change is good btw, it allows the best to adapt to a new environment and re-experience the game, but there is a drawback, we sometimes lose the thick headed ones who refuse to adapt their play style. No, the big guy is saying "firing a mining laser at a structure is bad gameplay". The only reason the little guys "like it" is because they feel they have the edge over the big guys right now. If that feeling wasn't there, they'd hate the mechanics as much as anyone else, since it's waiting, that's all it is. Even your post here shows that, you've not said a single thing about the actual mechanics themselves being good, only that you like how it's made the little guys feel.
And no, change is not always good. There are countless examples of games throwing in big changes and killing themselves off because they failed to maintain their core playerbase. By supporting boring mechanics simply because you feel they benefit you, you are supporting the death of EVE.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 14:48:24 -
[1253] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:by what logic you use such that numbers aren't relevant to said mechanics and quality of play. And I'e already covered this. Hush now. Your posts are no longer relevant as you've made it clear they are simply "grr goons". Big groups will always exist, get used to it. After having a deployment revolving heavily around fozziesov, I can say conclusively that it's the most boring mechanics in the game. There were several people begging for tidi to be brought back instead. The problem is that it ends up with both sides babysitting nodes while people rush around trying to oneshot or ECM the entosis guy off their respective node. For most of the people involved it's simply sitting around wishing someone would actually fight watching their miner mine a structure. Seriously, I thought it was just boring back when it was just being defensive and thought "a deployment, hell yeah, those are fun". Boy was I wrong.
Lucas, if anyone needs to hush it is you, or atleast, perhaps think a bit more first. Coalition size is only one of my points I have been making along with several others (in fact it is more of an observation of a natural bi-product to a change in design), the coalition size just happens to be the one you reacted most violently and harshly to. Perhaps it is more about you than me in that regards. You are failing to even attempt to grasp the point, and honestly it isn't about you, or the CFC, 5 to 1 overall size should be as boring as it seems like it would be, just because you are confusing random tactical scenarios with the overall campaign doesn't make your singular experiences more valid. You are experiencing pretty much exactly what you should, it would be like me complaining about being bored triple boxing level II missions. I am free to do it, but because I can do it, and choose to do it, doesn't mean my opinion is more correct than the guy pointing out how dumb it is. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6722
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 15:07:14 -
[1254] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Lucas, if anyone needs to hush it is you, or atleast, perhaps think a bit more first. Coalition size is only one of my points I have been making I've not seen any other points, but then I'll only read a paragraph or two of "grr" before I simply skip over the rest of the post.
Harry Saq wrote:You are failing to even attempt to grasp the point, and honestly it isn't about you, or the CFC, 5 to 1 overall size should be as boring as it seems like it would be, just because you are confusing random tactical scenarios with the overall campaign doesn't make your singular experiences more valid. You are experiencing pretty much exactly what you should, it would be like me complaining about being bored triple boxing level II missions. I am free to do it, but because I can do it, and choose to do it, doesn't mean my opinion is more correct than the guy pointing out how dumb it is. See, here we go again. What you are saying is "it's only boring because of numbers". No, it's boring because it's mining a structure for 30 minutes at a time. It doesn't matter how many (or few) people you have, the mechanic comes down to one person firing a mining laser at a structure for an extended period of time until either he gets stopped or the switch flips.
This is the problem with people like yourself. No matter what we say or what points we make, you keep just going "well it's cos you're in a big group" even though we're repeatedly stated why that's not the case. The fact that several small groups are also pointing out how boring whack-a-mole sov is seems to go right past you too. You're too caught up in your own prejudice to have a reasonable discussion about this, which is why simply ignoring you becomes the best course of action.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 15:32:03 -
[1255] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Lucas, if anyone needs to hush it is you, or atleast, perhaps think a bit more first. Coalition size is only one of my points I have been making I've not seen any other points, but then I'll only read a paragraph or two of "grr" before I simply skip over the rest of the post. Harry Saq wrote:You are failing to even attempt to grasp the point, and honestly it isn't about you, or the CFC, 5 to 1 overall size should be as boring as it seems like it would be, just because you are confusing random tactical scenarios with the overall campaign doesn't make your singular experiences more valid. You are experiencing pretty much exactly what you should, it would be like me complaining about being bored triple boxing level II missions. I am free to do it, but because I can do it, and choose to do it, doesn't mean my opinion is more correct than the guy pointing out how dumb it is. See, here we go again. What you are saying is "it's only boring because of numbers". No, it's boring because it's mining a structure for 30 minutes at a time. It doesn't matter how many (or few) people you have, the mechanic comes down to one person firing a mining laser at a structure for an extended period of time until either he gets stopped or the switch flips. This is the problem with people like yourself. No matter what we say or what points we make, you keep just going "well it's cos you're in a big group" even though we're repeatedly stated why that's not the case. The fact that several small groups are also pointing out how boring whack-a-mole sov is seems to go right past you too. You're too caught up in your own prejudice to have a reasonable discussion about this, which is why simply ignoring you becomes the best course of action.
Negative sir, you miss the point again...and I am sorry that you can't read. What I am doing is called analysis of reality, I believe you brought the prejudice. Try looking at it from a different perspective and without all of the mental baggage you are carrying. Where are we in the three tiered process, why are we here, and what is still theoretically to come? When you tie all of those together, you might start to comprehend why the thing carrying the toaster shouldn't matter, and think in terms of how making it matter less is far more important than making it matter more. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6722
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 15:49:03 -
[1256] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Negative sir, you miss the point again...and I am sorry that you can't read. What I am doing is called analysis of reality, I believe you brought the prejudice. Try looking at it from a different perspective and without all of the mental baggage you are carrying. Where are we in the three tiered process, why are we here, and what is still theoretically to come? When you tie all of those together, you might start to comprehend why the thing carrying the toaster shouldn't matter, and think in terms of how making it matter less is far more important than making it matter more. What you are doing is called wishful thinking, or the soon(tm) principle. "The next patch will be the one that stops it being boring", right? Even though the mechanics for taking space will still be "mine a structure for 15-60 minutes". We'll all just enjoy sitting and ship spinning in space at that point, I'm sure.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 16:45:48 -
[1257] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Negative sir, you miss the point again...and I am sorry that you can't read. What I am doing is called analysis of reality, I believe you brought the prejudice. Try looking at it from a different perspective and without all of the mental baggage you are carrying. Where are we in the three tiered process, why are we here, and what is still theoretically to come? When you tie all of those together, you might start to comprehend why the thing carrying the toaster shouldn't matter, and think in terms of how making it matter less is far more important than making it matter more. What you are doing is called wishful thinking, or the soon(tm) principle. "The next patch will be the one that stops it being boring", right? Even though the mechanics for taking space will still be "mine a structure for 15-60 minutes". We'll all just enjoy sitting and ship spinning in space at that point, I'm sure.
I have been playing this game on and off since the first month it came out, naivety and wishful thinking are things I grew out of long ago (tech II mining lasers anyone). It is what it is, and CCP are who they are, wishful thinking is denying reality and holding on to what was already taken away. I eventually hated Dominion Sov (because it always broke the servers, and grinding sucks, and and and), and was a member of the CFC because it was the most likely place to find fun (really it was because I came back to the game after a break and my corp was already in it), I don't particularly love Aegus Sov, but I know being in a big group with a huge amount of space isn't where the fun is going to be. Let go Luke....er...Lucas...Trust me...Use the toast Luke...er..Lucas...
...but seriously...if it hurts this bad, you are probably doing it wrong...and note, I am not telling you how to play your game, just laying down counters and numbers behind recalcitrant arguments seeking half measures to go back to what's comfortable as opposed to embracing reality, and providing forward looking feedback so CCP might accidentally do something sort of right eventually...and not taking forever to do what they already plan on doing anyway...and poorly at that. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6724
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 17:02:32 -
[1258] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:I have been playing this game on and off since the first month it came out, naivety and wishful thinking are things I grew out of long ago (tech II mining lasers anyone). It is what it is, and CCP are who they are, wishful thinking is denying reality and holding on to what was already taken away. Yet you hold out hope that the newly broken sov system is just a stepping stone to greatness? I've been playing over 10 years myself and honestly it wouldn't surprise me if the next big expansion rolled round and it was focused on something random like highsec salvaging, and a year from now we're still sitting with half a system going "uhh, where'd the rest go?".
Harry Saq wrote:I eventually hated Dominion Sov (because it always broke the servers, and grinding sucks, and and and), and was a member of the CFC because it was the most likely place to find fun (really it was because I came back to the game after a break and my corp was already in it), I don't particularly love Aegus Sov, but I know being in a big group with a huge amount of space isn't where the fun is going to be. Let go Luke....er...Lucas...Trust me...Use the toast Luke...er..Lucas... I liked it. I get that some people don't like the colossal fights, but I loved them. The thing is, there's load of room in the game for both, yet people seem to want to have the playstyle I loved stripped out and replace with what is effectively faction warfare. Why reduce the options for gameplay? If people don't like big fights, then don't go to big fights. I don't like exploration mechanics, but I wouldn't go to CCP demanding that exploration mechanics be removed and replaced with mining.
Harry Saq wrote:...but seriously...if it hurts this bad, you are probably doing it wrong...and note, I am not telling you how to play your game, just laying down counters and numbers behind recalcitrant arguments seeking half measures to go back to what's comfortable as opposed to embracing reality, and providing forward looking feedback so CCP might accidentally do something sort of right eventually...and not taking forever to do what they already plan on doing anyway...and poorly at that. It's not that it hurts, it's simply boring. It's a structure and you mine it. While one person mines it, other players just sit there and watch.
I'm not asking to go back to dominion, but if my gameplay style is going to be stripped out and replaced they could at least replace it with something entertaining. I have made suggestions to make the mechanic mildly tolerable, though I've come to realise that the biggest issue is the core mechanic itself, which makes it a bigger problem.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Media freak
His Majesty's Privateers
Warden.
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 17:39:54 -
[1259] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Negative sir, you miss the point again...and I am sorry that you can't read. What I am doing is called analysis of reality, I believe you brought the prejudice. Try looking at it from a different perspective and without all of the mental baggage you are carrying. Where are we in the three tiered process, why are we here, and what is still theoretically to come? When you tie all of those together, you might start to comprehend why the thing carrying the toaster shouldn't matter, and think in terms of how making it matter less is far more important than making it matter more. What you are doing is called wishful thinking, or the soon(tm) principle. "The next patch will be the one that stops it being boring", right? Even though the mechanics for taking space will still be "mine a structure for 15-60 minutes". We'll all just enjoy sitting and ship spinning in space at that point, I'm sure. I have been playing this game on and off since the first month it came out, naivety and wishful thinking are things I grew out of long ago (tech II mining lasers anyone). It is what it is, and CCP are who they are, wishful thinking is denying reality and holding on to what was already taken away. I eventually hated Dominion Sov (because it always broke the servers, and grinding sucks, and and and), and was a member of the CFC because it was the most likely place to find fun (really it was because I came back to the game after a break and my corp was already in it), I don't particularly love Aegus Sov, but I know being in a big group with a huge amount of space isn't where the fun is going to be. Let go Luke....er...Lucas...Trust me...Use the toast Luke...er..Lucas... ...but seriously...if it hurts this bad, you are probably doing it wrong...and note, I am not telling you how to play your game, just laying down counters and numbers behind recalcitrant arguments seeking half measures to go back to what's comfortable as opposed to embracing reality, and providing forward looking feedback so CCP might accidentally do something sort of right eventually...and not taking forever to do what they already plan on doing anyway...and poorly at that.
you eventually hated dominion sov. Just wait till the novelty of this new one wears off and it will be just live dominion sov boring for all involved expect on rare occasions.
I went trolling the other day for sov and it does as much for me as mining does. |
Jenn aSide
Ascendent.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
12261
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 18:41:15 -
[1260] - Quote
Media freak wrote:
you eventually hated dominion sov. Just wait till the novelty of this new one wears off and it will be just live dominion sov boring for all involved expect on rare occasions.
I went trolling the other day for sov and it does as much for me as mining does.
+1
This whole 'discussion' is a replay of Dominion, people were RABID in their support of Dominion in the beginning, like some (like Harry) are about Aegis. i think this is mainly due to 2 factors, utter dislike of the ills of the old system (notice Harry says he 'came to dislike dominion', means he liked it at 1st) coupled with a deep level of support for the GOALs of Aegis.
The second part is important, because when people believe in a goal, the are more likely to support the process that promises to deliver the goal, even when that process is fatally flawed. Harry isn't alone, it took YEARS for the die hard Dominion lovers to come to their senses and see what we really happening, and by then the bad effects of Dominion were well entrenched in the cluture of the null sec population (ie the Coalitions had been formed, and matured).
History shows that you can't been unrealistic enthusiasm with arguments (that just makes it worse. Those of us who are fathers of now adult women know what I'm about to say: you can tell her how bad the guy is,how there is no future with him, how he's just using her, but doing so just pushes her closer to him. She's going to have to learn on her own and only time can do that....
...Like Dominion did to Harry |
|
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 19:47:04 -
[1261] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:This whole 'discussion' is a replay of Dominion, people were RABID in their support of Dominion in the beginning, like some (like Harry) are about Aegis. i think this is mainly due to 2 factors, utter dislike of the ills of the old system (notice Harry says he 'came to dislike dominion', means he liked it at 1st) coupled with a deep level of support for the GOALs of Aegis. The second part is important, because when people believe in a goal, the are more likely to support the process that promises to deliver the goal, even when that process is fatally flawed. Harry isn't alone, it took YEARS for the die hard Dominion lovers to come to their senses and see what we really happening, and by then the bad effects of Dominion were well entrenched in the cluture of the null sec population (ie the Coalitions had been formed, and matured). History shows that you can't been unrealistic enthusiasm with arguments (that just makes it worse. Those of us who are fathers of now adult women know what I'm about to say: you can tell her how bad the guy is,how there is no future with him, how he's just using her, but doing so just pushes her closer to him. She's going to have to learn on her own and only time can do that.... ...Like Dominion did to Harry
Jane, your response was full of so many false assumptions, pretenses and caricature building, I am curious whom you were actually responding to, because it certainly wasn't me.
In terms of "coming to hate Dominion Sov", I had to learn it coming back from a long break from the game, and fortunately missed its implementation, my phrasing was to indicate I approached it as is, without presupposing what it should be before I learned it (could have phrased it more clearly).
The rest of what you said was more of a justification to quit Eve entirely over providing feedback to a game you do not actually own or develop. In fact it would have fit perfectly in an AA meeting or perhaps a suicide cult ascending to some other place better than the rest of us losers who are stuck in reality.
Because I am realistic about the perils of going back vs just going balls deep so we don't have to suffer the baby step of appeasement does not mean I am giving RABID support. This is a three part implementation of which we are two parts in, I am just saying focus fire on providing productive feedback to the third part vs hemming and hawing on parts 1 and 2.
This has some great feedback and perspective: https://kaskenkronicles.wordpress.com/2015/08/28/burning-providence-lessons-learned-while-fcing-in-a-smaller-alliance/
As does this (but more so when combined with the comments): http://targetcaller.blogspot.com/2015/08/goon-providence-war.html
...there will be plenty of time to cry about the whole thing when it is fully developed, until then, might as well influence what is actively being designed. |
Media freak
His Majesty's Privateers
Warden.
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 22:09:28 -
[1262] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:This whole 'discussion' is a replay of Dominion, people were RABID in their support of Dominion in the beginning, like some (like Harry) are about Aegis. i think this is mainly due to 2 factors, utter dislike of the ills of the old system (notice Harry says he 'came to dislike dominion', means he liked it at 1st) coupled with a deep level of support for the GOALs of Aegis. The second part is important, because when people believe in a goal, the are more likely to support the process that promises to deliver the goal, even when that process is fatally flawed. Harry isn't alone, it took YEARS for the die hard Dominion lovers to come to their senses and see what we really happening, and by then the bad effects of Dominion were well entrenched in the cluture of the null sec population (ie the Coalitions had been formed, and matured). History shows that you can't been unrealistic enthusiasm with arguments (that just makes it worse. Those of us who are fathers of now adult women know what I'm about to say: you can tell her how bad the guy is,how there is no future with him, how he's just using her, but doing so just pushes her closer to him. She's going to have to learn on her own and only time can do that.... ...Like Dominion did to Harry Jane, your response was full of so many false assumptions, pretenses and caricature building, I am curious whom you were actually responding to, because it certainly wasn't me. In terms of "coming to hate Dominion Sov", I had to learn it coming back from a long break from the game, and fortunately missed its implementation, my phrasing was to indicate I approached it as is, without presupposing what it should be before I learned it (could have phrased it more clearly). The rest of what you said was more of a justification to quit Eve entirely over providing feedback to a game you do not actually own or develop. In fact it would have fit perfectly in an AA meeting or perhaps a suicide cult ascending to some other place better than the rest of us losers who are stuck in reality. Because I am realistic about the perils of going back vs just going balls deep so we don't have to suffer the baby step of appeasement does not mean I am giving RABID support. This is a three part implementation of which we are two parts in, I am just saying focus fire on providing productive feedback to the third part vs hemming and hawing on parts 1 and 2. This has some great feedback and perspective: https://kaskenkronicles.wordpress.com/2015/08/28/burning-providence-lessons-learned-while-fcing-in-a-smaller-alliance/
As does this (but more so when combined with the comments): http://targetcaller.blogspot.com/2015/08/goon-providence-war.html
...there will be plenty of time to cry about the whole thing when it is fully developed, until then, might as well influence what is actively being designed.
the issue is most of us have learned that we aren't going to influence the design. Also there is no timeline for part 3. If you want to look at the long game just think of this as part 2 of dominion sov. The first part was to be able to build up null (putting in stations) and getting people to work together for common goals. now in part 2 they trying to make it so that sov can change hands a little more. part 3 will be in about another decade when the issues and dislike of part 2 is at a peak.
if you need a timeline look at POS how long people have reported issues with them and look at how long CCP took to do anything with them which still isn't in game yet.
Also most of jenn's comment was directed at me I believe as it was I he quoted. |
Sovox
Eve Defence Force
The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 01:05:15 -
[1263] - Quote
Not enough! The attackers need to commit and imo the Entosis Linking needs its own class of ships, something tanky and kind of slow like a Mastodon that is nullified and ill even say give it a limited cyno jump range, anything that requires attackers and defenders to commit to a fight would be good. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1658
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 03:26:56 -
[1264] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:History shows that you can't been unrealistic enthusiasm with arguments (that just makes it worse. Those of us who are fathers of now adult women know what I'm about to say: you can tell her how bad the guy is,how there is no future with him, how he's just using her, but doing so just pushes her closer to him. She's going to have to learn on her own and only time can do that.... ...Like Dominion did to Harry
Is this the newest Hollywood blockbuster? When Harry met Dominion
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
711
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 08:18:19 -
[1265] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Lucas, if anyone needs to hush it is you, or atleast, perhaps think a bit more first. Coalition size is only one of my points I have been making I've not seen any other points, but then I'll only read a paragraph or two of "grr" before I simply skip over the rest of the post. Harry Saq wrote:You are failing to even attempt to grasp the point, and honestly it isn't about you, or the CFC, 5 to 1 overall size should be as boring as it seems like it would be, just because you are confusing random tactical scenarios with the overall campaign doesn't make your singular experiences more valid. You are experiencing pretty much exactly what you should, it would be like me complaining about being bored triple boxing level II missions. I am free to do it, but because I can do it, and choose to do it, doesn't mean my opinion is more correct than the guy pointing out how dumb it is. See, here we go again. What you are saying is "it's only boring because of numbers". No, it's boring because it's mining a structure for 30 minutes at a time. It doesn't matter how many (or few) people you have, the mechanic comes down to one person firing a mining laser at a structure for an extended period of time until either he gets stopped or the switch flips. This is the problem with people like yourself. No matter what we say or what points we make, you keep just going "well it's cos you're in a big group" even though we're repeatedly stated why that's not the case. The fact that several small groups are also pointing out how boring whack-a-mole sov is seems to go right past you too. You're too caught up in your own prejudice to have a reasonable discussion about this, which is why simply ignoring you becomes the best course of action.
Actually Lucas you are wrong, it very much has to do with numbers.
Sure entosis links as a mechanic suck, it has nothing to do with pvp, it is by design a troll mechanic and needs to be seriously overhauled BUT it could create content for you if it weren't for the huge barrier to creating content involving members of the largest coalition in the game - NUMBERS vs numbers.
Simply removing troll ceptors is not going to create content for the large unassailable groups, fear cannot be removed by changing a game mechanic. Only they can do that by reducing their reliance on numbers for protection and showing they can fight for what they have.
Fear of losing is the only thing keeping coalitions together;
Answer 1 question - Can we as an alliance hold our space without the need for thousands of allies
Yes (we can keep it)
No (we should not have it)
Don't know (leave the coalition and find out)
Could a 3,000 man alliance beat a 10,000 man alliance without 3rd party help - In Eve, We will never know.
Large dominating groups are their own worst enemy - by being too afraid to risk anything.
Change all the game mechanics you like, as long as fear of loss is the primary driver, eve will never be more than a huge primarily stagnant gank fest.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16594
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 08:19:44 -
[1266] - Quote
So BL just gave up on fountain stating that chasing interceptors around is no fun as one of the primary reasons.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 08:49:53 -
[1267] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Actually Lucas you are wrong, it very much has to do with numbers.
Sure entosis links as a mechanic suck, it has nothing to do with pvp, it is by design a troll mechanic and needs to be seriously overhauled BUT it could create content for you if it weren't for the huge barrier to creating content involving members of the largest coalition in the game - NUMBERS vs numbers.
Simply removing troll ceptors is not going to create content for the large unassailable groups, fear cannot be removed by changing a game mechanic. Only they can do that by reducing their reliance on numbers for protection and showing they can fight for what they have.
Fear of losing is the only thing keeping coalitions together;
Answer 1 question - Can we as an alliance hold our space without the need for thousands of allies
Yes (we can keep it)
No (we should not have it)
Don't know (leave the coalition and find out)
Could a 3,000 man alliance beat a 10,000 man alliance without 3rd party help - In Eve, We will never know.
Large dominating groups are their own worst enemy - by being too afraid to risk anything.
Change all the game mechanics you like, as long as fear of loss is the primary driver, eve will never be more than a huge primarily stagnant gank fest. Except of course that throughout the whole provi fights I wasn't in a single fleet about 200 members. Just because a group has lots of friends, doesn't mean they are all deployed at the same time. We were outnumbered a few times.
But you're right, whatever mechanic get put in the game, it will eventually come down to numbers. But since there's no way that groups like the Imperium are going to cripple themselves by plitting up just to make whiners happy, CCP need to work on mechanics that are fun for all sizes. Fozziesov isn't fun for any size, since it's mining a structure. It's a prime example of a badly designed mechanic. At first I thought "get rid of trollceptors", but quite honestly I now see that the problem is the core mechanic.
I think that swapping to a raw occupancy model would be the best idea. So something like: ships killed, PI, PvE, mining, etc all done by the same alliance will increase that alliances "points" towards system ownership, with points decreasing constantly. TCUs go in the bin, holding the ihub and the indices increase the number of points gained per activity for your group and decrease their speed of natural decay, Whoever's got the most points at any given time owns the system. This would mean that:
1. Taking a system would require you to fight, rat or mine in a system, not just sneak in a laser and block the gates.
2. Having a coalition involved in that system would actually decrease your ability to take the system as only the individual alliance activity counts. Having your friends blow up the current owners would give you lees targets and them more points.
3. Unused systems would remain easy to take.
4. All styles of play would assist towards the capture of the system, whereas now PvE only assists with increasing indices once a system is taken.
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
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 11:07:48 -
[1268] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:So BL just gave up on fountain stating that chasing interceptors around is no fun as one of the primary reasons. Wow, I've now read all of the stuff coming out of that (of which there is a lot). GJ Fozzie, clearly all is well with this system.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
2097
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 13:21:47 -
[1269] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:So BL just gave up on fountain stating that chasing interceptors around is no fun as one of the primary reasons.
Fozzie should as a stop gap measure just BAN entosis on frigates. Then with time they think how to solve the issue of mass limit sin wormholes.
But frigate bound entosis are not a good idea for the game.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
711
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 13:25:43 -
[1270] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Actually Lucas you are wrong, it very much has to do with numbers.
Sure entosis links as a mechanic suck, it has nothing to do with pvp, it is by design a troll mechanic and needs to be seriously overhauled BUT it could create content for you if it weren't for the huge barrier to creating content involving members of the largest coalition in the game - NUMBERS vs numbers.
Simply removing troll ceptors is not going to create content for the large unassailable groups, fear cannot be removed by changing a game mechanic. Only they can do that by reducing their reliance on numbers for protection and showing they can fight for what they have.
Fear of losing is the only thing keeping coalitions together;
Answer 1 question - Can we as an alliance hold our space without the need for thousands of allies
Yes (we can keep it)
No (we should not have it)
Don't know (leave the coalition and find out)
Could a 3,000 man alliance beat a 10,000 man alliance without 3rd party help - In Eve, We will never know.
Large dominating groups are their own worst enemy - by being too afraid to risk anything.
Change all the game mechanics you like, as long as fear of loss is the primary driver, eve will never be more than a huge primarily stagnant gank fest. Except of course that throughout the whole provi fights I wasn't in a single fleet about 200 members. Just because a group has lots of friends, doesn't mean they are all deployed at the same time. We were outnumbered a few times. But you're right, whatever mechanic get put in the game, it will eventually come down to numbers. But since there's no way that groups like the Imperium are going to cripple themselves by plitting up just to make whiners happy, CCP need to work on mechanics that are fun for all sizes. Fozziesov isn't fun for any size, since it's mining a structure. It's a prime example of a badly designed mechanic. At first I thought "get rid of trollceptors", but quite honestly I now see that the problem is the core mechanic. I think that swapping to a raw occupancy model would be the best idea. So something like: ships killed, PI, PvE, mining, etc all done by the same alliance will increase that alliances "points" towards system ownership, with points decreasing constantly. TCUs go in the bin, holding the ihub and the indices increase the number of points gained per activity for your group and decrease their speed of natural decay, Whoever's got the most points at any given time owns the system. This would mean that: 1. Taking a system would require you to fight, rat or mine in a system, not just sneak in a laser and block the gates. 2. Having a coalition involved in that system would actually decrease your ability to take the system as only the individual alliance activity counts. Having your friends blow up the current owners would give you lees targets and them more points. 3. Unused systems would remain easy to take. 4. All styles of play would assist towards the capture of the system, whereas now PvE only assists with increasing indices once a system is taken.
First off, you might want to read what I wrote. I never mentioned anything about being deployed. (unless your referring to my previous post, which still applies)
Yes you were on many occasions outnumbered and weren't able to achieve your objectives, which of course contradicts your whole (public at least) reason for deploying. Provi showed troll ceptors to be somewhat inadequate for the task.
The really sad thing though is that the members of the Imperium have no choice but to go out and find small targets so they can deploy to get any content other than the odd troll ceptor forcing them to stop ratting in Imperium home space for as long as it takes to drive them off, which has led to an inconceivable amount of "whining" from the Imperium.
It seems The Imperium has nothing to offer its members, except a lack of local content.
Insistence that The Imperium must survive and couldn't "cripple" itself is really quite sad, you have to feel sorry for members of the largest group in any game too afraid to actually adapt and play the game.
What do you class as an unused sytem? There are all but empty systems with 4+ ADMs, they are not lived in, they are not occupied by more than 1 guy and his alts a day or 2 a week. Should those systems be easily flipped, or should thousands of nearby allies be able to keep them safe?
All your 4 point suggestion would come to is alliances growing ever fatter - and still not fighting.
Eve content is driven by its players not contrived game mechanics - While such a large % of nulsec choose not to adapt and give up the proven to be bad play styles, nothing Devs do can change anything.
Sorry but you can't have it both ways - If you want content, wars and meaningful, fun times - Coalitions need to at least reduce in size. Every sov holding group needs to be vulnerable or there can be no meaningful content. It just stays, news at one "big guy bashes little guy". While in the rest of the universe, things are stable.
NB; Look at your 4 point proposal, then come back and tell me how many ways a coalition could game occupancy based sov. I can see 4 or 5 ways in which your proposal could be gamed and that was after only having read it once.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
|
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1659
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 13:46:34 -
[1271] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:So BL just gave up on fountain stating that chasing interceptors around is no fun as one of the primary reasons.
BL has never been that committed to holding sovereignty.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 13:52:25 -
[1272] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Yes you were on many occasions outnumbered and weren't able to achieve your objectives, which of course contradicts your whole (public at least) reason for deploying. Provi showed troll ceptors to be somewhat inadequate for the task. What was it you thought was the public reason? Our deployment had nothing to do with trollceptors if that's what you're suggesting. It was about generating content and testing out what we could do with the new system against the only sizable sov holders remaining.
The really sad thing though is that the members of the Imperium have no choice but to go out and find small targets so they can deploy to get any content other than the odd troll ceptor forcing them to stop ratting in Imperium home space for as long as it takes to drive them off, which has led to an inconceivable amount of "whining" from the Imperium.
Sgt Ocker wrote:It seems The Imperium has nothing to offer its members, except a lack of local content. Insistence that The Imperium must survive and couldn't "cripple" itself is really quite sad, you have to feel sorry for members of the largest group in any game too afraid to actually adapt and play the game. [quote]It's not the imperium, nullsec has nothing to offer. That's why groups are leaving null, that's why there's so many gaps in the sov and uncontested nodes floating in space. And it's not that woe couldn't cripple ourselves, it's that we won't. Just like if I were to suggest you abandon your playstyle in favour of something you don;t like you'd probably tell me where to stick it. Sgt Ocker wrote:What do you class as an unused sytem? There are all but empty systems with 4+ ADMs, they are not lived in, they are not occupied by more than 1 guy and his alts a day or 2 a week. Should those systems be easily flipped, or should thousands of nearby allies be able to keep them safe?
All your 4 point suggestion would come to is alliances growing ever fatter - and still not fighting. That's obvious isn't it? An unused system is a system nobody uses. And my suggestion there was how to keep occupancy being the driving force, remove the whack-a-mole sov laser and make coalitions less able to assist each other. The system as it stands supports much fatter alliances and certainly and avoidance of fighting. All fighting that does occur is forced into a small window of vulnerability making it even easier to defend your space. [quote=Sgt Ocker]Eve content is driven by its players not contrived game mechanics - While such a large % of nulsec choose not to adapt and give up the proven to be bad play styles, nothing Devs do can change anything. At least a part of all game content is mechanics. If those are shockingly boring (see lazoring a structure for an hour) then people will simply not take part wherever they can avoid it.
And lol, we're back to "the only way is for coalitions to dissolve". This will not happen. If CCPs game plan is "wait for coalitions tot optionally split into small groups" then they may as well throw in the towel and stick all their dev teams onto Valkyrie.
Every system can be gamed, for example the current system. The difference is that some systems are entertaining, while others are ship spinning while you fire a mining laser at a structure for an hour. A pure occupancy system would require people to actuality live in a system, not just pop a fleet in, guard heir sov laser then move on. Because that's what we want right? For people to live in the space they own?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 15:32:39 -
[1273] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:So BL just gave up on fountain stating that chasing interceptors around is no fun as one of the primary reasons. Wow, I've now read all of the stuff coming out of that (of which there is a lot). GJ Fozzie, clearly all is well with this system.
LOL - You guys are seriously lamenting BL, poster child for non-sov holding harassing nomads leaving their overstretched sov because it is not fun to maintain...yeah...real statement there.
Provi proved toaster ceptors were not a problem, which translates to troll ceptors not being a problem with a defender present. Think of the troll ceptor as a goat herder, herding over stretched alliances back into their core systems, and then you might understand why the toasting ship doesn't matter, it's holding...hell, just being on grid that matters.
BL leaving sov is more about BL than it is about anything else. In fact, them holding and then abandoning sov (certainly the sheer amount they held) during a known and widely broadcasted change in mechanics specifically designed to shrink over stretched empires seems more like a parody, than anything like a convincing example of "bad design". |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16598
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 15:34:15 -
[1274] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:So BL just gave up on fountain stating that chasing interceptors around is no fun as one of the primary reasons. Wow, I've now read all of the stuff coming out of that (of which there is a lot). GJ Fozzie, clearly all is well with this system. LOL - You guys are seriously lamenting BL, poster child for non-sov holding harassing nomads leaving their overstretched sov because it is not fun to maintain...yeah...real statement there. Provi proved toaster ceptors were not a problem, which translates to troll ceptors not being a problem with a defender present. Think of the troll ceptor as a goat herder, herding over stretched alliances back into their core systems, and then you might understand why the toasting ship doesn't matter, it's holding...hell, just being on grid that matters. BL leaving sov is more about BL than it is about anything else. In fact, them holding and then abandoning sov (certainly the sheer amount they held) during a known and widely broadcasted change in mechanics specifically designed to shrink over stretched empires seems more like a parody, than anything like a convincing example of "bad design".
Provi has been saying openly ceptors suck balls to fight all week.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 15:40:21 -
[1275] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Harry Saq wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:So BL just gave up on fountain stating that chasing interceptors around is no fun as one of the primary reasons. Wow, I've now read all of the stuff coming out of that (of which there is a lot). GJ Fozzie, clearly all is well with this system. LOL - You guys are seriously lamenting BL, poster child for non-sov holding harassing nomads leaving their overstretched sov because it is not fun to maintain...yeah...real statement there. Provi proved toaster ceptors were not a problem, which translates to troll ceptors not being a problem with a defender present. Think of the troll ceptor as a goat herder, herding over stretched alliances back into their core systems, and then you might understand why the toasting ship doesn't matter, it's holding...hell, just being on grid that matters. BL leaving sov is more about BL than it is about anything else. In fact, them holding and then abandoning sov (certainly the sheer amount they held) during a known and widely broadcasted change in mechanics specifically designed to shrink over stretched empires seems more like a parody, than anything like a convincing example of "bad design". Provi has been saying openly ceptors suck balls to fight all week.
They died and were abandoned for better tanked ships when a defender was present to do something about them. Fighting ceptors sucked for both the attacker and defender....hence the reason they were abandoned in defended systems.
Once again:
This has some great feedback and perspective: https://kaskenkronicles.wordpress.com/2015/08/28/burning-providence-lessons-learned-while-fcing-in-a-smaller-alliance/
As does this (but more so when combined with the comments): http://targetcaller.blogspot.com/2015/08/goon-providence-war.html |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16599
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 16:03:56 -
[1276] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:
They died and were abandoned for better tanked ships when a defender was present to do something about them.
Um, no they weren't. The bulk of the entosising was done by ceptors must to everyones lament.
You are failing to grasp the issue still, its not the capture its the trolling thats the problem. Null is full of evasion style fleets that run when something shows up and has resulted in the vast bulk of ships becoming pointless to fly. Having to chase around ceptors for hours on end is no fun.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Arla Sarain
629
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 16:52:03 -
[1277] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Harry Saq wrote:
They died and were abandoned for better tanked ships when a defender was present to do something about them.
Um, no they weren't. The bulk of the entosising was done by ceptors much to everyones lament. You are failing to grasp the issue still, its not the capture its the trolling thats the problem. Null is full of evasion style fleets that run when something shows up and has resulted in the vast bulk of ships becoming pointless to fly. Having to chase around ceptors for hours on end is no fun.
Now force entosis link on BCs and no new corp will try to capture sov. It will become a space coffin and a beacon for pinging 50 dudes to kill off a BC hull whilst the rest of the offenders escape.
In FW we have to chase farmers and it's irritating to do, just as with trollceptors. Sure it's not glamorous, but someone has to do. Though it's not a worthwhile argument to say that somebody should take one for the team to let everyone else have a peaceful state of mind about their sov. Ergo the real problem is that it pays nothing and detracts from the main purpose of sov - to monopolise it.
Maybe SOV should have some passive income. It's hardly cancerous like PoSs seeing as Sov is at a much higher risk of being contested than having your PoS be reinforced in half an hour by a random dude (which wouldn't happen). |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 17:07:41 -
[1278] - Quote
Dude, literally nobody stated that trollceptors were good at taking sov. What they are good at is avoiding fights which is why they suck so bad, because they are a way to avoid content. How many times do you need to be told the same thing before you can actually comprehend the issues being presented here? Ballpark figure.
Arla Sarain wrote:In FW we have to chase farmers and it's irritating to do, just as with trollceptors. Sure it's not glamorous, but someone has to do. And everyone knows and accepts that FW is broken as ****. Why is it so surprising that taking a broken mechanic and applying it to sov (minus the rewards) makes for a bad system?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Kystraz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 20:03:21 -
[1279] - Quote
Everything would be better if jump freighters had a 5 LY range cap so people that lived in their space and produced locally had a logistical advantage.
CCP please go through with this much needed change, like you originally wanted to. Stop the power projection enabled by 10 LY jump freighters! |
Arla Sarain
629
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 21:39:13 -
[1280] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:In FW we have to chase farmers and it's irritating to do, just as with trollceptors. Sure it's not glamorous, but someone has to do. And everyone knows and accepts that FW is broken as ****. Why is it so surprising that taking a broken mechanic and applying it to sov (minus the rewards) makes for a bad system?
Read further. |
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 22:27:53 -
[1281] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:In FW we have to chase farmers and it's irritating to do, just as with trollceptors. Sure it's not glamorous, but someone has to do. And everyone knows and accepts that FW is broken as ****. Why is it so surprising that taking a broken mechanic and applying it to sov (minus the rewards) makes for a bad system? Read further. I did. Adding passive income so it's even more like the broken FW system doesn't make it good. Basically that's a way of saying "we know the gameplay is ****, so have some isk until you shut up about it". The instant reward of interacting with the sov system should be enjoying the actual mechanic itself.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Arla Sarain
629
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 23:10:14 -
[1282] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:In FW we have to chase farmers and it's irritating to do, just as with trollceptors. Sure it's not glamorous, but someone has to do. And everyone knows and accepts that FW is broken as ****. Why is it so surprising that taking a broken mechanic and applying it to sov (minus the rewards) makes for a bad system? Read further. I did. Adding passive income so it's even more like the broken FW system doesn't make it good. Basically that's a way of saying "we know the gameplay is ****, so have some isk until you shut up about it". The instant reward of interacting with the sov system should be enjoying the actual mechanic itself.
WTF are you talking about.
What passive income is there in FW and how does it make it broken?
Jeebus
So much knee jerking.
Passive rewards are there to allow sov owners autonomy - something no other gameplay apart from POSs and PI allow. The luxury of not having to worry about rewards and hence concentrate on other everyday activities would make chasing trollceptors like a casual trip to the fridge to get a snack. It's not enjoyable, but if nothing else is going on and I don't need to crab, might as well make an elaborate trap for the guy who keeps sending the notifications my way... meanwhile my wallet fattens.
But you'd obviously rather **** and whine and draw parallels previously unheard of, because well, they are a product of herd mentality, sourced by those who are the loudest |
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 05:45:29 -
[1283] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:...something dumb WTF are you talking about. Lucas can't read, yet posts.....alot, you'll get used to it.
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1837
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 05:54:14 -
[1284] - Quote
Kystraz wrote:Everything would be better if jump freighters had a 5 LY range cap so people that lived in their space and produced locally had a logistical advantage.
CCP please go through with this much needed change, like you originally wanted to. Stop the power projection enabled by 10 LY jump freighters!
And how do you want to get necessary T2 moon minerals that you cannot grab from local moons into your remote area, such as deep Drone Lands, Esoteria, Stain, Tenal, Fountain, Omist? Via 5LY jumps in your JF? Via wormholes? People can't even be asked to protect miners in Null sec or to rat to get indexes up or patrol their space with nothing happening, many people can't even be asked to scan systems for sites/WHs regularly without any compensation or report WHs finds. And you expect them to produce locally?
In my opinion, a lot more things need to change than just cutting JF range to 5 LY. This useless clusterwide war over minerals needs to turn into a regional war over minerals. Further reads in my thread to the topic. I, however, also agree with linked post from a Nulli Secunda guy in my thread about the problems of local production and logistics, in particular for smaller entities.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1660
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 06:32:44 -
[1285] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Kystraz wrote:Everything would be better if jump freighters had a 5 LY range cap so people that lived in their space and produced locally had a logistical advantage.
CCP please go through with this much needed change, like you originally wanted to. Stop the power projection enabled by 10 LY jump freighters! And how do you want to get necessary T2 moon minerals that you cannot grab from local moons into your remote area, such as deep Drone Lands, Esoteria, Stain, Tenal, Fountain, Omist?
With Stepping Stones of course!
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16603
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 07:22:28 -
[1286] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:
WTF are you talking about.
What passive income is there in FW and how does it make it broken?
Jeebus
So much knee jerking.
Passive rewards are there to allow sov owners autonomy - something no other gameplay apart from POSs and PI allow. The luxury of not having to worry about rewards and hence concentrate on other everyday activities would make chasing trollceptors like a casual trip to the fridge to get a snack. It's not enjoyable, but if nothing else is going on and I don't need to crab, might as well make an elaborate trap for the guy who keeps sending the notifications my way... meanwhile my wallet fattens.
But you'd obviously rather **** and whine and draw parallels previously unheard of, because well, they are a product of herd mentality, sourced by those who are the loudest but with the least clue.
The problem is that it doesn't solve the issue which is that chasing around evasion fitted ships for hours on end is not fun.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
3266
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 07:30:19 -
[1287] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:
WTF are you talking about.
What passive income is there in FW and how does it make it broken?
Jeebus
So much knee jerking.
Passive rewards are there to allow sov owners autonomy - something no other gameplay apart from POSs and PI allow. The luxury of not having to worry about rewards and hence concentrate on other everyday activities would make chasing trollceptors like a casual trip to the fridge to get a snack. It's not enjoyable, but if nothing else is going on and I don't need to crab, might as well make an elaborate trap for the guy who keeps sending the notifications my way... meanwhile my wallet fattens.
But you'd obviously rather **** and whine and draw parallels previously unheard of, because well, they are a product of herd mentality, sourced by those who are the loudest but with the least clue.
The problem is that it doesn't solve the issue which is that chasing around evasion fitted ships for hours on end is not fun.
Give me a big slug fest instead please...heck even with tidi.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1837
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 07:47:02 -
[1288] - Quote
Even with stepping stones, you cannot get into the very deep areas. Unless you make it a trail like in these Japanese gardens.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 10:07:57 -
[1289] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:WTF are you talking about.
What passive income is there in FW and how does it make it broken? FW earn you LP, like you pointed out. And it's broken because FW is also incredibly boring and based heavily around orbiting a node and running away. The only people that don't think FW is broken are the people that farm the **** out of it for huge amounts of income.
Edit: And honestly, I'm not sure how you've managed to confuse yourself here. You drew a the parallel to FW, then you suggested the issue was that while both are boring FW earns income while sov lasers do not. You have to be pretty bad at comprehension to be confused by your own posts.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Arla Sarain
630
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 11:07:47 -
[1290] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:WTF are you talking about.
What passive income is there in FW and how does it make it broken? FW earn you LP, like you pointed out. And it's broken because FW is also incredibly boring and based heavily around orbiting a node and running away. The only people that don't think FW is broken are the people that farm the **** out of it for huge amounts of income. Edit: And honestly, I'm not sure how you've managed to confuse yourself here. You drew a the parallel to FW, then you suggested the issue was that while both are boring FW earns income while sov lasers do not. You have to be pretty bad at comprehension to be confused by your own posts.
You are generalising and misinterpreting.
I drew a parallel from trollceptors to farmers, not to "FW". I chase farmers and it used to be painful until I figured out how to do it.
FW has no passive income. Grinding buttons is not passive. It doesn't require much attention or interaction, but you don't wake up the next morning and find that your wallet is bigger.
There is nothing to be confused about. The principle is simple - if I required to commit less time towards making financial capital, I would commit it to something else. If FW had a form of passive income, I'd chase farmers all day. Except it wouldn't work in FW, but not because it's inherently broken. FW access is public, so random people would monopolise on other people's effort.
It can work in SOV, because contrast to FW, Corps and Alliances determine who becomes a member and therefore who gets to enjoy the passive source of wealth. |
|
|
KenFlorian
Jednota Inc
34
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 15:04:49 -
[1291] - Quote
How do I sort this thread on a; number of years in game and b; number of hours played?
I haven't got time to do anything more or less than that. |
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
We are not bad. Just unlucky
The Bastion
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 15:17:51 -
[1292] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:The problem is that it doesn't solve the issue which is that chasing around evasion fitted ships for hours on end is not fun.
I still don't understand why people chase ceptors. You just undock an alt when they have been capturing for 50 minutes and ECM them.
No chasing implied.
|
Arla Sarain
631
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 15:57:51 -
[1293] - Quote
Philip Ogtaulmolfi wrote:baltec1 wrote:The problem is that it doesn't solve the issue which is that chasing around evasion fitted ships for hours on end is not fun. I still don't understand why people chase ceptors. You just undock an alt when they have been capturing for 50 minutes and ECM them. No chasing implied.
Apparently entosis capture does not decay same way FW plex timers don't rollback.
Also persistence. It causes people to babysit anything entosisable. Entosis mechanics whilst solid in principle, detract from the primary sov gameplay. Monetising sov requires that players engage activities completely unrelated to its defense and protection, which requires that someone takes one for the team and makes sure the trollceptors don't ninja the occupants sov. |
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
We are not bad. Just unlucky
The Bastion
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 17:36:06 -
[1294] - Quote
After testing the new timers to capture nodes I think that this solution is not good enough.
24 minutes is a short time for the effort to raise a system to ADM 6, if you are willing to defend it.
At the same time, is a lot of time to sit idle as attacker if nobody shows up to defend.
I think that the best system would be one where each cycle is faster than the precedent, so if you are hacking a node unmolested it shouldn't take more than 10 minutes to cap a node, for an ADM 6 system, as attacker. And the same for the defender. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 19:33:56 -
[1295] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:There is nothing to be confused about. Then why are you confused?
Arla Sarain wrote:But it can work in SOV, because contrast to FW, Corps and Alliances determine who becomes a member and therefore who gets to enjoy the passive source of wealth. Again, adding passive income doesn;t fix the crappy mechanic, it just gives you a reason to put up with it. Like I said earlier, it's a way of saying "we know the gameplay is ****, so have some isk until you shut up about it". The fix is to make sov capture mechanics fun in themselves, not to just blindly add passive income until people are earning too much to want any changes.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Arla Sarain
631
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 23:28:23 -
[1296] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:There is nothing to be confused about. Then why are you confused?
We playing THAT game?
Maybe your confusion is causing a loop that breeds your falsehood about me being confused.
Stop being confused bro. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 23:56:34 -
[1297] - Quote
Uhh, OK. If you say so.
I'm playing no game though. As far as I can see you legitimately confused yourself. I note your selective quoting has missed out the actual point though so conclude that you are in fact a troll, so I think I'll just ignore you and move on.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16613
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 07:35:52 -
[1298] - Quote
Philip Ogtaulmolfi wrote:
I still don't understand why people chase ceptors. You just undock an alt when they have been capturing for 50 minutes and ECM them.
No chasing implied.
We already went over ECM and its at best just a boring at worst useless.
We want more fights, more roaming gangs, more content. Your solution is just as boring as chasing off the ceptor.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
2327
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 09:23:42 -
[1299] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
We want more fights, more roaming gangs, more content.
No ... you don't. You want impenetrable Fortress Goon where you can nullbear your lives away.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
We are not bad. Just unlucky
The Bastion
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 09:28:51 -
[1300] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Philip Ogtaulmolfi wrote:
I still don't understand why people chase ceptors. You just undock an alt when they have been capturing for 50 minutes and ECM them.
No chasing implied.
We already went over ECM and its at best just a boring at worst useless. We want more fights, more roaming gangs, more content. Your solution is just as boring as chasing off the ceptor.
If you troll the trollceptors, they will stop coming. And that's what you will get if in ten minutes you destroy more than an hour investment in the part of the trollceptor. Weaponizing of boredom, I know, but time is in the part of the defender, not the attacker, so I don't see the need to nerf the ceptors. Let the children something to play with.
The enemy coming in force to create some content is a completely different matter. And that's really the problem. It seems there is a lot of people in EVE that doesn't wont to fight.
And, as the strongest group in EVE, it is unprovable that somebody comes to invade, so the way to go is the Provi way. |
|
|
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
We are not bad. Just unlucky
The Bastion
18
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 09:44:46 -
[1301] - Quote
Talking about another thing, I thought that destroying the iHub would reset the ADM and looking at Providence it doesn't seem so.
Another reason not to fight, if the fleet that you risk to defend the iHub is several times more expensive than the 300Misk of the iHub and your ADM is not seriously affected. |
Ozz Burtus
Stryker Industries
9
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 10:11:17 -
[1302] - Quote
These changes are great for J-space; bored, feckless null-bears are moving in. Stryker is having great fun providing lessons in the associated "learning process" :). |
Arla Sarain
631
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 10:20:20 -
[1303] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: I note your selective quoting has missed out the actual point though so conclude that you are in fact a troll, so I think I'll just ignore you and move on.
The selective quoting didn't miss out on anything. It filtered out the "the actual point" you already presented 2 posts back.
I sympathise with sov holders who believe that chasing ceptors detracts from the current intended exploitation and monetisation of sov and propose an explicit shift in priorities to allow more time to troll the trollceptors back.
I don't sympathise with owners that believe they should smite anyone who would question their claim for some backwater systems by piling on a space coffin BC, which ironically will not incite big and fun fights you so impatiently try to fabricate by forcing people into a 60mill hull, as opposed to a 20mill. Keep telling yourselves that you want people to commit assets - the reality is you just want a killmail to follow the notifications.
In a sandbox you make your own fun with the selection of abstract tools you are given. To demand that sov wanding gets fun is like asking for PvP arenas to spawn whenever you press F1. Sov wanding is a formal declaration of wanting your space, but nobody owes you a fight for it. The growing exhaustion of PvP is seen throughout all walks of the game. It's just how it is. Trap your enemy like everyone else does.
To address the concern of ceptors moving out of range by the time a defense gang lands - inverse POS shields around entosisable objects, entosis-active ships can get in but not out until the cycle ends. This at least isolates the location of the aggressor, whilst still giving him the opportunity to outmaneuver and escape. |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
972
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 12:22:07 -
[1304] - Quote
I was suprised the system works as well as it did and I had fun playing it.
However jump fatigue is still f*cked and my supers is now even more useless, who would have figured that would be possible.
Not today spaghetti.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16614
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 13:08:06 -
[1305] - Quote
Philip Ogtaulmolfi wrote:Talking about another thing, I thought that destroying the iHub would reset the ADM and looking at Providence it doesn't seem so.
Another reason not to fight, if the fleet that you risk to defend the iHub is several times more expensive than the 300Misk of the iHub and your ADM is not seriously affected.
Dotlan is having issues with that
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter
Absolute Zero.
1045
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 13:51:54 -
[1306] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:I don't sympathise with owners that believe they should smite anyone who would question their claim for some backwater systems by piling on a space coffin BC, which ironically will not incite big and fun fights you so impatiently try to fabricate by forcing people into a 60mill hull, as opposed to a 20mill. Keep telling yourselves that you want people to commit assets - the reality is you just want a killmail to follow the notifications.
Well, he proposes basically NPC null mechanics with player structures instead of NPC stations and numbers system to determine "flag on the map" as opposed to any form of sov wanding, so I don't see how is that "forcing people into space coffins".
Meanwhile I cannot find a good argument against an idea that if entosis is here to stay (it most likely is), then initiating the process of sov transfer / structure destruction should only make sense if you are intending to go through it entirely.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 14:44:14 -
[1307] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote:We want more fights, more roaming gangs, more content. No ... you don't. You want impenetrable Fortress Goon where you can nullbear your lives away. If theat were the case, we'd support he new system fully.
Arla Sarain wrote:I sympathise with sov holders who believe that chasing ceptors detracts from the current intended exploitation and monetisation of sov and propose an explicit shift in priorities to allow more time to troll the trollceptors back. It's nto taht it detracts from anything. It takes moments of time to deal with. The issue is that it's a based around broing mechanics. The gameplay isn;t fun for anyone. Aggressors do it because they feel rewarded by making the defender respond and defenders respond to keep their space. The actual gameplay behind it is crap. As the novelty wears off, less and less people will
Arla Sarain wrote:I don't sympathise with owners that believe they should smite anyone who would question their claim for some backwater systems by piling on a space coffin BC, which ironically will not incite big and fun fights you so impatiently try to fabricate by forcing people into a 60mill hull, as opposed to a 20mill. Keep telling yourselves that you want people to commit assets - the reality is you just want a killmail to follow the notifications. Don't be ridiculous. BCs already make it into our space and do fine, and "backwater systems" won't have defenders, so ship type is irrelevant. The only reason to support frigates is so they can run away with ease when engaged. Bigger ships will be worth defending, so aggressors would be encouraged to actually engage in a fight.
[quote=Arla Sarain]Sov wanding is a formal declaration of wanting your space, but nobody owes you a fight for it./quote]Except of course that most people doing it don't want the space. Sov wanding is a dull mecanic. The only difference between it and the old structure shoot is that aggressors need to commit next to nothing to do it.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 15:46:11 -
[1308] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Sov wanding is a formal declaration of wanting your space, but nobody owes you a fight for it. The growing exhaustion of PvP is seen throughout all walks of the game. It's just how it is. Trap your enemy like everyone else does.
The ship doing the sov wanding is already tackled by the mere act of doing what it's doing (activating entosis on a thing), so you don't even have to work as hard as has been implied to "trap" them, especially now with the 4k speed limit.
Ceptor Toasters are the great goat herders of sov. Only when you have gone too far is it actually effective. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise
Pandemic Legion
74
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 02:32:37 -
[1309] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
We want more fights, more roaming gangs, more content..
if that was the case you would unblue your whole coalition. |
Cati
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 04:33:30 -
[1310] - Quote
http://i11.pixs.ru/storage/9/4/2/fozzijpg_8859910_18628942.jpg
CCP Fozzie & FOZZISOV---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHcXlyhgzHM
C¦¦C¦¦P¦¦ ¦¦F¦¦o¦¦z¦¦z¦¦i¦¦e¦¦ & ¦¦F¦¦O¦¦Z¦¦Z¦¦I¦¦S¦¦O¦¦V¦¦---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvB2nRGMl2c |
|
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1843
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 09:44:48 -
[1311] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:baltec1 wrote:
We want more fights, more roaming gangs, more content..
if that was the case you would unblue your whole coalition.
No, not that much fight. Besides, most of the alliances in CFC would crumble on their own, and an exodus of unprecedented magnitudes to CONDI would take place in order to keep the safety and security big numbers provide.
To be quite frank: Before the great financial crisis in the USA and Europe, I could have seen CFC crumble under its own weigh. Some signs were there with several alliances getting kicked out or merge with others. But since this crisis, people are first and foremost interested in safety and stability, even at the expenses of less fun and excitement (just look at the closure of -FA- and where most of its corps went afterwards, the big ones in particular). CFC provides these things, which makes them self-preserving under these new circumstances. I think that the majority there would rather unsub than leave CFC for more uncertain entities.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 10:46:50 -
[1312] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:No, not that much fight. Besides, most of the alliances in CFC would crumble on their own, and an exodus of unprecedented magnitudes to CONDI would take place in order to keep the safety and security big numbers provide. To be quite frank: Before the great financial crisis in the USA and Europe, I could have seen CFC crumble under its own weigh. Some signs were there with several alliances getting kicked out or merge with others. But since this crisis, people are first and foremost interested in safety and stability, even at the expenses of less fun and excitement (just look at the closure of -FA- and where most of its corps went afterwards, the big ones in particular). CFC provides these things, which makes them self-preserving under these new circumstances. I think that the majority there would rather unsub than leave CFC for more uncertain entities. It's got nothing to do with real world financial stability, nor does in have anything to do with safety. If we wanted to be safe and make loads of isk, we'd just move to highsec and smash high income PvE.
We are part of these big groups because we like being part of these big groups. That is what entertains us. For many people, that was what EVE had over other games. Of course people would rather unsub than be forced to play a game in a way they don't like. For years EVE has had supporting mechanics and areas for big groups, small groups, singleboxers, multiboxers, PvE players, PvP players, socials, anti-socials, etc. Now it seems that certain parts of the community want everything stripped down to prioritise small groups everywhere.
If CCP goes too far down that road, then the can expect the players who enjoy playing in big groups to leave. No sane person would continue playing a game that they no longer enjoy. The problem with that is that the biggest draw to EVE for many years has been that it's a single shard where you play with thousands of other players allowing for these monolithic battles. You might be thinking "yeah, quit , can I haz stuff" and so on, but I think you underestimate the number of players that would mean are leaving. The PCU already looks terrible and goons haven't even quit yet.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1844
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 13:28:47 -
[1313] - Quote
I am not arguing against that people want be part of big groups. DARK is a big group, Solar, Stainwaggon are big groups. What the aforementioned groups have in common is that they have no way whatsoever to obliterate the entire Null sec at will. 1 other group, on the other hand, due to its size and organization, can provide a level or stability and safety that functions as such a strong magnet for more and more people join them to seek that safety and easy gameplay instead of seeking a more risky and adventurous gameplay. People "enjoy" this safe gameplay, yet you still argue for more conflict and argue that you do not avoid risk. Fights take place in Providence or Querious, Immensea or in Uedama, not at their door steps. What irks me is that hypocrisy of the players expecting safety and stability on the one hand and fun and excitement on the other at the same time. If you need to deploy 2 large alliances to Curse from Branch to stir some air, in my opinion something is really wrong.
And in my opinion, the crisis we experience for years now is very much one big factor that drives this development. Big groups of the sizes of DARK or even Stainwaggon are one thing, they can influence a limited area of the cluster effectively anc cause much trouble there. What they cannot do is just go to the other side of the universe in large force, stir a lot of air there, while having their assets at home safe and secure, and return completely unscathed and unopposed. Big groups are fine. But CFC is beyond big. And it is an unhealthy huge. Accept that or not, I do not care, but this problem is not solvable with any kind of mechanic sans really drastic measures -- and that would lead to your suggested unsubbing of people who "enjoy" this safe gameplay style.
Besides: You already do go to High sec to make ISK. That's a moot point on your end. I currently watch parts of one of EXE's mining corps sit around in Domain, see CFC Rattlesnakes in Tash-Murkon fly around for missions, among other things. If I flew around Forge, Citadel and Lonetrek more, I would probably see an even worse image. And this is only the people that are in CFC itself doing this stuff.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16617
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 13:31:52 -
[1314] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:baltec1 wrote:
We want more fights, more roaming gangs, more content..
if that was the case you would unblue your whole coalition.
We have 90% of eve set as hostile.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 13:54:51 -
[1315] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:I am not arguing against that people want be part of big groups. DARK is a big group, Solar, Stainwaggon are big groups. What the aforementioned groups have in common is that they have no way whatsoever to obliterate the entire Null sec at will. So your problem is that a group is bigger and better than the other big groups? You realise this will always be the case right? Someone will always be the winning group.
Rivr Luzade wrote:1 other group, on the other hand, due to its size and organization, can provide a level or stability and safety that functions as such a strong magnet for more and more people join them to seek that safety and easy gameplay instead of seeking a more risky and adventurous gameplay. People "enjoy" this safe gameplay, yet you still argue for more conflict and argue that you do not avoid risk. Fights take place in Providence or Querious, Immensea or in Uedama, not at their door steps. What irks me is that hypocrisy of the players expecting safety and stability on the one hand and fun and excitement on the other at the same time. If you need to deploy 2 large alliances to Curse from Branch to stir some air, in my opinion something is really wrong. Except of course that being in a group where the majority of the rest of EVE wants you dead is nowhere near as safe as staying in highsec. Hell, it's not even as safe as living in NPC null. People can show up and take away a station with billions and billions of isk worth of my stuff in it. That's mechanically impossible to do in NPC null.
Rivr Luzade wrote:And in my opinion, the crisis we experience for years now is very much one big factor that drives this development. Big groups of the sizes of DARK or even Stainwaggon are one thing, they can influence a limited area of the cluster effectively anc cause much trouble there. What they cannot do is just go to the other side of the universe in large force, stir a lot of air there, while having their assets at home safe and secure, and return completely unscathed and unopposed. Big groups are fine. But CFC is beyond big. And it is an unhealthy huge. Accept that or not, I do not care, but this problem is not solvable with any kind of mechanic sans really drastic measures -- and that would lead to your suggested unsubbing of people who "enjoy" this safe gameplay style. And in my opinion the game has different areas for different activities and what you're after is the ability to take our area away from us by having the mechanics unbalanced in your favour. I don't believe there is a "crisis" beyond EVE having too many players unwilling to put in the effort to achieve what they want.
Rivr Luzade wrote:Besides: You already do go to High sec to make ISK. That's a moot point on your end. I currently watch parts of one of EXE's mining corps sit around in Domain, see CFC Rattlesnakes in Tash-Murkon fly around for missions, among other things. If I flew around Forge, Citadel and Lonetrek more, I would probably see an even worse image. And this is only the people that are in CFC itself doing this stuff. I make my isk in highsec, yes, as do most people who are remotely sane. Nullsec income is terrible. Surely if i wanted safety I would live in highsec too though, not fly around in nullsec where I can be shot at any moment.
And lol, it's definitely not safe in highsec if you're watching people in CFC corps flying around highsec. You know how many wardecs we get?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1844
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 14:04:05 -
[1316] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:And lol, it's definitely not safe in highsec if you're watching people in CFC corps flying around highsec. You know how many wardecs we get?
At the moment? Unfortunately not nearly enough. High sec was a much better place when Marmite was deccing CFC's alliances indefinitely.
With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
712
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 14:04:44 -
[1317] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:No, not that much fight. Besides, most of the alliances in CFC would crumble on their own, and an exodus of unprecedented magnitudes to CONDI would take place in order to keep the safety and security big numbers provide. To be quite frank: Before the great financial crisis in the USA and Europe, I could have seen CFC crumble under its own weigh. Some signs were there with several alliances getting kicked out or merge with others. But since this crisis, people are first and foremost interested in safety and stability, even at the expenses of less fun and excitement (just look at the closure of -FA- and where most of its corps went afterwards, the big ones in particular). CFC provides these things, which makes them self-preserving under these new circumstances. I think that the majority there would rather unsub than leave CFC for more uncertain entities. It's got nothing to do with real world financial stability, nor does in have anything to do with safety. If we wanted to be safe and make loads of isk, we'd just move to highsec and smash high income PvE. We are part of these big groups because we like being part of these big groups. That is what entertains us. For many people, that was what EVE had over other games. Of course people would rather unsub than be forced to play a game in a way they don't like. For years EVE has had supporting mechanics and areas for big groups, small groups, singleboxers, multiboxers, PvE players, PvP players, socials, anti-socials, etc. Now it seems that certain parts of the community want everything stripped down to prioritise small groups everywhere. If CCP goes too far down that road, then the can expect the players who enjoy playing in big groups to leave. No sane person would continue playing a game that they no longer enjoy. The problem with that is that the biggest draw to EVE for many years has been that it's a single shard where you play with thousands of other players allowing for these monolithic battles. You might be thinking "yeah, quit , can I haz stuff" and so on, but I think you underestimate the number of players that would mean are leaving. The PCU already looks terrible and goons haven't even quit yet.
Please, even you honestly can't believe that clap trap.
The Imperium is all about safety in numbers.
Quit don't quit, just don't try to say The Imperium is anything more than the jurassic park of new eden, dinosaurs grimly hanging on to life in a universe that is not suited to them .
Your threat "If CCP go to far down that road" that many of those who choose to hide in mega groups will quit - Good - No-one really wants your stuff, biomass it along with your characters.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 14:15:28 -
[1318] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:At the moment? Unfortunately not nearly enough. High sec was a much better place when Marmite was deccing CFC's alliances indefinitely. If you truly believe that, feel free to pay them. Personally I think they were a bit weak as they only patrol around hubs.
Rivr Luzade wrote:With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running. lol? You should seriously look into high end higsec income. Not only can you earn more than nullsec, but it's easier to scale with alts as you don't have PvP concerns.
I make isk in highsec because the only way to reliably make the largest volumes of isk is through trading. It's not risk aversion to strive for the most you can get. Again, why would I cripple myself by limiting how I make isk to only nullsec activities, when I can make significantly more elsewhere passively on an alt to support my main?
Sgt Ocker wrote:Please, even you honestly can't believe that clap trap.
The Imperium is all about safety in numbers. If I wanted safety I'd be in highsec, not in a group that is universally hated and living outside of concord.
Sgt Ocker wrote:Quit don't quit, just don't try to say The Imperium is anything more than the jurassic park of new eden, dinosaurs grimly hanging on to life in a universe that is not suited to them .
Your threat "If CCP go to far down that road" that many of those who choose to hide in mega groups will quit - Good - No-one really wants your stuff, biomass it along with your characters. Grr.
I take it you don't like EVE then? I'm fairly sure that if all the people you hate in the "mega-groups" quit, they'd discontinue EVE.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1844
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 14:27:33 -
[1319] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running. lol? You should seriously look into high end higsec income. Not only can you earn more than nullsec, but it's easier to scale with alts as you don't have PvP concerns.
Wow, that last part is fantastic. I wholeheartedly thank you for that line.
I, too, make ISK in a lot of different places. However, I do not complain about High sec. CFC, on the other hand, regularly grabs pitch forks and torches and tirades about how risk-averse High sec people are and how the remove themselves from PVP, among other things. I would have a lot less problems with CFC being in High sec if they were not so hypocritical.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6726
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 14:30:48 -
[1320] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running. lol? You should seriously look into high end higsec income. Not only can you earn more than nullsec, but it's easier to scale with alts as you don't have PvP concerns. Wow, that last part is fantastic. I wholeheartedly thank you for that line. I, too, make ISK in a lot of different places. However, I do not complain about High sec. CFC, on the other hand, regularly grabs pitch forks and torches and tirades about how risk-averse High sec people are and how the remove themselves from PVP, among other things. I would have a lot less problems with CFC being in High sec if they were not so hypocritical. No problem.
Surely these things go hand in hand though. The reason we are in highsec is because the rewards are better compared with the risk than in nullsec. That tells us that there's either too little reward/too much risk in nullsec, or too high reward/too little risk in highsec. If these were all in balance there would be no reason to choose highsec. Surely the fact that most null groups do their high end income earning in highsec shows that there's a serious balance issue there.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16617
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 15:57:41 -
[1321] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:
At the moment? Unfortunately not nearly enough. High sec was a much better place when Marmite was deccing CFC's alliances indefinitely.
It came as a shock on Friday when I went through highsec with no wardecs
Rivr Luzade wrote:
With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running.
Highec isk making is better than in null for a fraction of the risk and downtime.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1745
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 17:49:17 -
[1322] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Surely these things go hand in hand though. The reason we are in highsec is because the rewards are better compared with the risk than in nullsec. That tells us that there's either too little reward/too much risk in nullsec, or too high reward/too little risk in highsec. If these were all in balance there would be no reason to choose highsec. Surely the fact that most null groups do their high end income earning in highsec shows that there's a serious balance issue there.
Since you make money trading in high sec, your actual problem is that high sec is where the economy is.
Now, why would that be?
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6728
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 18:33:17 -
[1323] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Surely these things go hand in hand though. The reason we are in highsec is because the rewards are better compared with the risk than in nullsec. That tells us that there's either too little reward/too much risk in nullsec, or too high reward/too little risk in highsec. If these were all in balance there would be no reason to choose highsec. Surely the fact that most null groups do their high end income earning in highsec shows that there's a serious balance issue there. Since you make money trading in high sec, your actual problem is that high sec is where the economy is. Now, why would that be? Because most people live there because it's ludicrously safe and rewarding, while groups from null ship stuff out of there because industry in null is dead.
About right?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
712
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 23:41:27 -
[1324] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:At the moment? Unfortunately not nearly enough. High sec was a much better place when Marmite was deccing CFC's alliances indefinitely. If you truly believe that, feel free to pay them. Personally I think they were a bit weak as they only patrol around hubs. Rivr Luzade wrote:With regards of ISK making, I do not see how 200M ISK earned in 2-2.5 hours is bad ISK making. But we obviously have different standards here. Also, thank you again for proving that you like to avoid risk. It is not sane to say that sane people make ISK in High sec when they have Null sec holdings running. lol? You should seriously look into high end higsec income. Not only can you earn more than nullsec, but it's easier to scale with alts as you don't have PvP concerns. I make isk in highsec because the only way to reliably make the largest volumes of isk is through trading. It's not risk aversion to strive for the most you can get. Again, why would I cripple myself by limiting how I make isk to only nullsec activities, when I can make significantly more elsewhere passively on an alt to support my main? Sgt Ocker wrote:Please, even you honestly can't believe that clap trap.
The Imperium is all about safety in numbers. If I wanted safety I'd be in highsec, not in a group that is universally hated and living outside of concord. Sgt Ocker wrote:Quit don't quit, just don't try to say The Imperium is anything more than the jurassic park of new eden, dinosaurs grimly hanging on to life in a universe that is not suited to them .
Your threat "If CCP go to far down that road" that many of those who choose to hide in mega groups will quit - Good - No-one really wants your stuff, biomass it along with your characters. Grr. I take it you don't like EVE then? I'm fairly sure that if all the people you hate in the "mega-groups" quit, they'd discontinue EVE.
You would be at far more risk of getting killed than you are hiding in your sov space if you went live in in highsec.
Your alliance is a protected species, made up of alts and carebears. (like many imperium member alliances)
I like Eve, a lot. What I don't like is people who pretend to know what is going on in the game but are too scared to actually participate in the game. Not everyone in mega groups feels as you do, a lot remain because the alternative is to get shat on by their previous "friends" - Fear of having to fight for what you have is what keeps the imperium together.
PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)
-- - -- - -- - -- - --
If your right and the imperium quitting eve did "discontinue the game" - ccp really have fuked up.
Note to CCP Development teams - Goons and pets are paying your wages - Better change eve to better suit their outdated game play.
-- - -- - -- - -- - --
I don't "hate" large groups (I belong to a fairly large group) - Just the one group who refuses to change / adapt and play the game.
-- - -- - -- - --
Fountain, is a clear indication of how inept and outdated The Imperium really is - Black Legion moved in and took it. The Imperium's counter, was to bore them into leaving. (or did they secretly get paid off as often happens with such threats)
I was part of the CFC, for many years - I know just how boring it becomes, I also know first hand how inept some member groups are. There are some groups within The Imperium who can and do play the game very well - It is just a shame they are the ones keeping everyone else safe.
Any group who may become a threat to The Imperium, is crushed quickly, set to blue or paid off.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16617
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 06:38:46 -
[1325] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:
PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
Anyone who utters this tripe is talking out of their arse.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6730
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 06:54:39 -
[1326] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:You would be at far more risk of getting killed than you are hiding in your sov space if you went live in in highsec. Just wrong, in every way. This is some next level grr right here.
Sgt Ocker wrote:I like Eve, a lot. What I don't like is people who pretend to know what is going on in the game but are too scared to actually participate in the game. Not everyone in mega groups feels as you do, a lot remain because the alternative is to get shat on by their previous "friends" - Fear of having to fight for what you have is what keeps the imperium together. And what I don;t like is little nobodies that presume to sit around telling people they are playing the game wrong because they are angry and jealous. But I guess we both have to put up with each other, don't we?
Sgt Ocker wrote:If your right and the imperium quitting eve did "discontinue the game" - ccp really have fuked up. Not really, we're simply a large part of the playerbase, most of use long time vets. The ACU is already dwindling, and forcing us out of the game would be a significant blow to that
Sgt Ocker wrote:I don't "hate" large groups (I belong to a fairly large group) - Just the one group who refuses to change / adapt and play the game. Lol? We're the only big group thta has adapted. That's what you're all mad about, that we've adapted to the new mechanics and are unstoppable.
Sgt Ocker wrote:I was part of the CFC, for many years - I know just how boring it becomes, I also know first hand how inept some member groups are. There are some groups within The Imperium who can and do play the game very well - It is just a shame they are the ones keeping everyone else safe.
Any group who may become a threat to The Imperium, is crushed quickly, set to blue or paid off. Good for you. It's a shame you appear to have learned nothing while you were there.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Media freak
His Majesty's Privateers
Warden.
2
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 07:39:13 -
[1327] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:
PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)
I would like to see a null sec pve ignore entire dessy gangs that land on him, cause thats what you do in high sec. |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16617
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 08:56:43 -
[1328] - Quote
Media freak wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:
PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)
I would like to see a null sec pve ignore entire dessy gangs that land on him, cause thats what you do in high sec.
Aside from the fact that it rarely ever happens you ignore several key facts, the biggest being concords very existence.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Media freak
His Majesty's Privateers
Warden.
2
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 16:51:56 -
[1329] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Media freak wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:
PS; Your insistence highsec is safer than your protected little pocket of sov, is just such a clear indication - We aren't playing the same game.
(although, if you were to go to highsec right now, you would be safe - there are more Goons in highsec ganking than there are in nul)
I would like to see a null sec pve ignore entire dessy gangs that land on him, cause thats what you do in high sec. Aside from the fact that it rarely ever happens you ignore several key facts, the biggest being concords very existence.
High sec has concord to slap around anyone that engages you, you just have to survive till they show up. You can ignore them in high sec if you aren't stupid where as null no one is coming to save you.
High sec is by far the safest place in the game. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
714
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 22:07:27 -
[1330] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address.
I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in
"Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are.
I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you .
I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts.
Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions.
Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended.
What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6736
|
Posted - 2015.09.02 22:52:11 -
[1331] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address. I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in "Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are. I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you . I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts. Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions. Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended. What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game. Good lord man. What the hell did the Imperium do to you to make you so incredibly butthurt? I mean seriously, reread this from a neutral standpoint (if you are able) and see how insanely grr it is.
Long story short though mate, there's all types in this game, and you sitting around crying that we exist won't change that.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
714
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 12:27:06 -
[1332] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address. I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in "Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are. I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you . I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts. Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions. Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended. What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game. Good lord man. What the hell did the Imperium do to you to make you so incredibly butthurt? I mean seriously, reread this from a neutral standpoint (if you are able) and see how insanely grr it is. Long story short though mate, there's all types in this game, and you sitting around crying that we exist won't change that.
Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to.
The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad.
Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint.
You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved..
From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything about the game - Is that group good for the game?
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6737
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 12:45:50 -
[1333] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to. Of course you are, but it's still coming across as crying.
Sgt Ocker wrote:The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad. Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us.
Sgt Ocker wrote:Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint.
You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved..
From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything about the game - Is that group good for the game? But that's not neutral, since you're claiming multiple things that are false. Game mechanics aren't being exploited and the group isn't even close to invulnerable. Effectively what is happening is a group of paying customers are working together (as is actively encouraged) to achieve more than other groups, to be winning so to speak. In all MMOs, there are groups and players who outperform all others. The only thing that makes EVE different is that this portion of the game is highly competitive.
Imagine it's a team deathmatch. Our team is working together, while your team is split into little groups and trying to do your own thing. It's neither our fault nor the games that you refuse to do what you need to win. You want to compete, but you refuse to work with others and instead think the mechanics should force us to split up. It's not going to happen. If you can't handle that, move on.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1850
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 13:48:06 -
[1334] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us.
Objectively right if there were many of that size. There are not. In the middle of last year, 2014, this opinion could have counted as right as there were still people capable of opposing CFC (kind of), as numbers were not as important. Now however, raw numbers are more important than a couple of good players in order to obliterate sov or hold sov.
That these changes make anything more difficult for you is more than questionable. I go so far as to call this opinion rubbish. The changes introduced, in particular Aegis Sov, are tailor-made for entities with large numbers of players. No ceptor ban from ELing, no limitation to BC or similar things can change that fact.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16618
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 14:32:34 -
[1335] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Again multi quoted to make his bad arguments difficult to address. I can assure you.. SMA leave The Imperium and move to highsec - They would fail cascade within months. (they won't ever risk actually playing the game - regardless of where in "Little nobodies" - Presuming to know more than you do, once again shows just how inept you really are. I suppose you are "a somebody" - oh wait, your a Goon pet - Of course I'm wrong and jealous of you . I need to walk away for 5 mins, laughing this much hurts. Adapt - become adjusted to new conditions. Yes that is exactly what the imperium did, they got bigger to ensure less chance of actually engaging in game mechanics as intended. What I learnt from my time in the CFC - IS exactly how bad groups like it are for the game. Good lord man. What the hell did the Imperium do to you to make you so incredibly butthurt? I mean seriously, reread this from a neutral standpoint (if you are able) and see how insanely grr it is. Long story short though mate, there's all types in this game, and you sitting around crying that we exist won't change that. Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to. The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad. Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint. You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved.. From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything else about the game - Is that group good for the game? There is a huge difference to pushing game mechanics to win fights and exploiting them so as to not engage in normal game play.
This is just coming across as grr gons. Your irrational hatred for an organisation is why your opinion should be ignored simply because you can't give honest feedback. We are trying to tell CCP where the problems are with the new Sov mechanics so they can make the system as fun as possible while also being "goon proof". No matter what we say you will be against it simply because of the alliance ticker.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16618
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 14:38:44 -
[1336] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us. Objectively right if there were many of that size. There are not. In the middle of last year, 2014, this opinion could have counted as right as there were still people capable of opposing CFC (kind of), as numbers were not as important. Now however, raw numbers are more important than a couple of good players in order to obliterate sov or hold sov. That these changes make anything more difficult for you is more than questionable. I go so far as to call this opinion rubbish. The changes introduced, in particular Aegis Sov, are tailor-made for entities with large numbers of players. No ceptor ban from ELing, no limitation to BC or similar things can change that fact.
Fact is that over 90% of eve is either neutral to us or hostile. That you cannot organise yourselves or figure out how to use this new Sov to your advantage is not our fault.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards
FUBAR.
714
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 14:50:53 -
[1337] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Not crying at all. Just voicing my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to. Of course you are, but it's still coming across as crying. Sgt Ocker wrote:The Imperium is bad for the game. Any large dominating group who exploits game mechanics to remain all but invulnerable would be just as bad. Objectively wrong. Large groups such as ours are a good part of the reason that EVE is as widely known as it is. No game mechanics are being exploited, and we're certainly nowhere close to invulnerable. In addition, most of the changes that have made things more difficult for us have been driven by us. Sgt Ocker wrote:Neutral standpoint - Ok lets look at it from a neutral standpoint.
You have a multi player online game; One large dominating group who exploit game mechanics to ensure its members are all but invulnerable to normal game play has evolved..
From a neutral standpoint - Not knowing anything about the game - Is that group good for the game? But that's not neutral, since you're claiming multiple things that are false. Game mechanics aren't being exploited and the group isn't even close to invulnerable. Effectively what is happening is a group of paying customers are working together (as is actively encouraged) to achieve more than other groups, to be winning so to speak. In all MMOs, there are groups and players who outperform all others. The only thing that makes EVE different is that this portion of the game is highly competitive. Imagine it's a team deathmatch. Our team is working together, while your team is split into little groups and trying to do your own thing. It's neither our fault nor the games that you refuse to do what you need to win. You want to compete, but you refuse to work with others and instead think the mechanics should force us to split up. It's not going to happen. If you can't handle that, move on.
Ok, you see it how you like.
You obviously know my intentions and what I mean far better than I do.
LOL team deathmatch - You really are off with the pixies aren't you. TDM's have rules, limits on group sizes etc - Your group would not be able to enter as a whole. It would need to reduce in size to compete. I for years played a game where TDM was part of daily game play, team sizes were limited to 100 and they were a lot of fun. Developers removed the ability for groups to form into large alliances (alliance sizes were capped at 500 or 5 clans with a maximum of 100 members in each) because they found large dominating groups hindered normal game play. When they removed large alliances they lost a lot of players but as word spread that the large groups had been disbanded, player numbers grew even higher. When I left the server was averaging 50k players online per day. There are something like 30 servers all over the world and the one I played was one of the smallest population wise. (before you ask, I no longer play because they moved to a full on pay to win model)(which was nearly as bad as when the server had 2 large dominating groups, who didn't fight "each other")
And the "you vs the rest" attitude you presume is exactly why such a large group is bad for Eve. One mega group lording it over all others (most of whom chose not to be "just another one" in the blob) is not playing the game.
Look up what exploit means - It is EXACTLY what your group does. And for the record, nothing I said was false, your group is "all but invulnerable" (which is what I said) you push mechanics to their limit (exploiting them to their fullest).
By your logic, I won Eve for four years (the time I was part of the CFC) - Then realized - I wanted to play eve and moved on.
There are groups within the CFC many would like to fight but can't because they have so many allies - Everyone loses out on content because the dinosaur is too big for the average group to tackle.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6741
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 14:55:18 -
[1338] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Objectively right if there were many of that size. There are not. In the middle of last year, 2014, this opinion could have counted as right as there were still people capable of opposing CFC (kind of), as numbers were not as important. Now however, raw numbers are more important than a couple of good players in order to obliterate sov or hold sov. There are still plenty of people who can oppose us, they just won;t work together to do it. That's not our problem.
Rivr Luzade wrote:That these changes make anything more difficult for you is more than questionable. I go so far as to call this opinion rubbish. The changes introduced, in particular Aegis Sov, are tailor-made for entities with large numbers of players. No ceptor ban from ELing, no limitation to BC or similar things can change that fact. These changes don't, but then we didn't push for these. We are actively against these changes. The new sov system makes it easier to defend and less appealing to generate content for others.
The types of changes I was talking about are changes such as the nerf to drone assist, and the power projection reduction, both of which negatively impacted us.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1850
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 15:05:16 -
[1339] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Fact is that over 90% of eve is either neutral to us or hostile. That you cannot organise yourselves or figure out how to use this new Sov to your advantage is not our fault.
You include the wrong numbers in your argument. Not High sec people are who matter, it is people living in Null sec. People who live in High sec, as you very well know and as it has been confirmed by you and Lucas Kell are not interested in risk for one part, and for the other part not in Null sec in the first place. People who live in Null sec already are who can oppose you, and there are certainly not 90% of people able to oppose you. Including people who have no interest in Null sec life or politics in the calculation is a cheap trick.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6741
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 15:05:46 -
[1340] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:LOL team deathmatch - You really are off with the pixies aren't you. TDM's have rules, limits on group sizes etc - Your group would not be able to enter as a whole. It would need to reduce in size to compete. Except of course than in EVE, there is no player cap. And if you consider the whole game to be a TDM, then the anti-Imperium side is FAR bigger than the Imperium side. You're simply not organising yourselves in such a way that you can win. That's the point you are missing here. The problem isn't that CCP aren;t artificially limiting group sizes, the problem is that people like yourself would rather whine for CCP to step in and change the game rather than getting your allies together and breaking us up yourselves.
Sgt Ocker wrote:And the "you vs the rest" attitude you presume is exactly why such a large group is bad for Eve. One mega group lording it over all others (most of whom chose not to be "just another one" in the blob) is not playing the game. I beg to differ. I enjoy the game the way I play it, so do thousands of others. Even our enemies tend to enjoy what they are doing. We're no worse for EVE than players like yourself who want to win but refuse to put in the effort to do so.
Sgt Ocker wrote:Look up what exploit means - It is EXACTLY what your group does. And for the record, nothing I said was false, your group is "all but invulnerable" (which is what I said) you push mechanics to their limit (exploiting them to their fullest). In the context of games, exploit has negative connotations which is what you were gunning for with your post. Had you truly been objective you'd had said "using mechanics to their maximum benefit". But you didn't. And no, again, we're not invulnerable. You're simply not doing what you need to to defeat us.
Sgt Ocker wrote:By your logic, I won Eve for four years (the time I was part of the CFC) - Then realized - I wanted to play eve and moved on. Good for you. When is the rest of that moving on coming or are you going to sit and cry about the blobs until the end of time?
Sgt Ocker wrote:There are groups within the CFC many would like to fight but can't because they have so many allies - Everyone loses out on content because the dinosaur is too big for the average group to tackle. If they don't like what the Imperium offers, they can leave, noone is stopping them. I have no problem getting fights when I want them.
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
6741
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 15:10:06 -
[1341] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:Fact is that over 90% of eve is either neutral to us or hostile. That you cannot organise yourselves or figure out how to use this new Sov to your advantage is not our fault. You include the wrong numbers in your argument. Not High sec people are who matter, it is people living in Null sec. People who live in High sec, as you very well know and as it has been confirmed by you and Lucas Kell are not interested in risk for one part, and for the other part not in Null sec in the first place. People who live in Null sec already are who can oppose you, and there are certainly not 90% of people able to oppose you. Including people who have no interest in Null sec life or politics in the calculation is a cheap trick. Please sound up Imperium members vs nullsec players who aren't a part of the Imperium. I think you'd be surprised at how many non-imperium null players there are. In addition, our numbers tend to suffer from enormous amounts of bloat compared to other alliances. Quite honestly, if our enemies weren't led by enormous sperg lords and were remotely organised and strategically minded, we'd be in for a world of hurt. But they aren't.
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
1746
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 16:45:22 -
[1342] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Because most people live there because it's ludicrously safe and rewarding, while groups from null ship stuff out of there because industry in null is dead.
About right?
The closest you get to the point is "safe and rewarding."
The backbone of a thriving economy is logistics. The economy will necessarily be centered where the logistics are (relatively) safe and easy.
Jita is what it is because everyone can get to it reliably.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6741
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 17:04:50 -
[1343] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Because most people live there because it's ludicrously safe and rewarding, while groups from null ship stuff out of there because industry in null is dead.
About right?
The closest you get to the point is "safe and rewarding." The backbone of a thriving economy is logistics. The economy will necessarily be centered where the logistics are (relatively) safe and easy. Jita is what it is because everyone can get to it reliably. True enough, but it wouldn't be what it is if industry in null didn't suck. Logistically, getting to Jita is a hell of a lot harder than producing in null, but rewards for mining in null are low enough that most people don't bother (hell, sometimes when we grind up indices and we don't have a hauler available we just abandon the cans in space because it's so worthless). If industry in null wasn't dead, then there would be a lot less of a reason to go to highsec for everything. I still think they should bump the highsec trading taxes and broker fees up quite a bit too, based on sec status. That would go a long way to promoting sales elsewhere.
Until they do though, highsec trading is where the money is.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16619
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 17:22:38 -
[1344] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:Fact is that over 90% of eve is either neutral to us or hostile. That you cannot organise yourselves or figure out how to use this new Sov to your advantage is not our fault. You include the wrong numbers in your argument. Not High sec people are who matter, it is people living in Null sec. People who live in High sec, as you very well know and as it has been confirmed by you and Lucas Kell are not interested in risk for one part, and for the other part not in Null sec in the first place. People who live in Null sec already are who can oppose you, and there are certainly not 90% of people able to oppose you. Including people who have no interest in Null sec life or politics in the calculation is a cheap trick.
Where do you think each and every member of the imperium came from? We all came from highsec.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel
The Kadeshi
1850
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 18:33:52 -
[1345] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Where do you think each and every member of the imperium came from? We all came from highsec.
Ignoring that the majority of players in High sec have no intention to go to Null sec, so even if you went on a PR spree, you could not motivate them properly to leave the area of space they are content with. Or the thing called alts of Null sec entities or otherwise organizations, like market alts, hauler alts, Incursion alts, mission alts, production alts, etc., who also do not have any intention to join Null sec for obvious reasons. Calling it "90% neutral or hostile to us" is grossly simplifying the reality, and by subtracting all the groups mentioned above, among many others, the 90% of "available players" shrinks significantly. Not to mention that many other organizations are not interested in creating what you have: an entire sector of space pacified, requiring you to complain in forums about lack of content and requiring you to move far away from your home to find "sustainable" activity.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1746
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 18:38:36 -
[1346] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:True enough, but it wouldn't be what it is if industry in null didn't suck. Logistically, getting to Jita is a hell of a lot harder than producing in null
If and only if you're starting in (deep) null. But null sec players aren't the only consideration. Jita is what it is because everyone in high sec can get to it easily, and everyone can get to high sec. Once you do, you can stuff everything in freighters (yours or hired) and send it off to one convenient, central location, confident that the freighters have a very high chance of arriving. And it's the convenient, central location that makes it worth the trip even from out in Cobalt Edge.
You can't separate the success of Jita from the fact that it's surrounded by well-populated, station-rich space that makes logistics easy.
(The only minor exception I can think of is a bias by wormholers toward Amarr, just because the Amarr Empire is so big that WHs are statistically more likely to spawn there. But then, it too is surrounded by space that makes logistics easy.)
Lucas Kell wrote:rewards for mining in null are low enough that most people don't bother (hell, sometimes when we grind up indices and we don't have a hauler available we just abandon the cans in space because it's so worthless).
Probably because a lot of people in high sec don't mine for the rewards. Maybe there's something there. Hmmm.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16619
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 19:23:55 -
[1347] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:Where do you think each and every member of the imperium came from? We all came from highsec. Ignoring that the majority of players in High sec have no intention to go to Null sec, so even if you went on a PR spree, you could not motivate them properly to leave the area of space they are content with. Or the thing called alts of Null sec entities or otherwise organizations, like market alts, hauler alts, Incursion alts, mission alts, production alts, etc., who also do not have any intention to join Null sec for obvious reasons. Calling it "90% neutral or hostile to us" is grossly simplifying the reality, and by subtracting all the groups mentioned above, among many others, the 90% of "available players" shrinks significantly. Not to mention that many other organizations are not interested in creating what you have: an entire sector of space pacified, requiring you to complain in forums about lack of content and requiring you to move far away from your home to find "sustainable" activity.
Because nobody else is complaining about the lack of content in null.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6742
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 20:24:12 -
[1348] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:If and only if you're starting in (deep) null. But null sec players aren't the only consideration. Jita is what it is because everyone in high sec can get to it easily, and everyone can get to high sec. Once you do, you can stuff everything in freighters (yours or hired) and send it off to one convenient, central location, confident that the freighters have a very high chance of arriving. And it's the convenient, central location that makes it worth the trip even from out in Cobalt Edge.
You can't separate the success of Jita from the fact that it's surrounded by well-populated, station-rich space that makes logistics easy. Of course, but a big portion of it is that other areas of space are simply not viable for industry, so that all gets done in highsec. Jita is the central point for that too. If industry were viable (and profitable) in other areas of space (not just null) it owuld go a long way to easing the bottleneck in highsec.
Plus, like I say, highsec should be taxed to hell. Slap on 5-10% minimum sales taxes in Jita and you'd see people shifting.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
120
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 20:27:23 -
[1349] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Dersen Lowery wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Because most people live there because it's ludicrously safe and rewarding, while groups from null ship stuff out of there because industry in null is dead.
About right?
The closest you get to the point is "safe and rewarding." The backbone of a thriving economy is logistics. The economy will necessarily be centered where the logistics are (relatively) safe and easy. Jita is what it is because everyone can get to it reliably. True enough, but it wouldn't be what it is if industry in null didn't suck. Logistically, getting to Jita is a hell of a lot harder than producing in null, but rewards for mining in null are low enough that most people don't bother (hell, sometimes when we grind up indices and we don't have a hauler available we just abandon the cans in space because it's so worthless). If industry in null wasn't dead, then there would be a lot less of a reason to go to highsec for everything. I still think they should bump the highsec trading taxes and broker fees up quite a bit too, based on sec status. That would go a long way to promoting sales elsewhere. Until they do though, highsec trading is where the money is.
Did you play before jump freighters out of curiosity? Frankly, those should never have existed and completely destroyed any possibility of local economies, get rid of those and suddenly things look alot different. This game got nasty spoiled with space shrinkage, and you would be amazed how liberating it would be to rip the logistics security band-aid off, and just full on strip the jump fatigue reduction from them. Might as well finish what they started. I remember a time when we did live off the land, unfortunately we were stuck with warp to 15, but that's no longer a problem ;) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6742
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 21:57:53 -
[1350] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:Did you play before jump freighters out of curiosity? Frankly, those should never have existed and completely destroyed any possibility of local economies, get rid of those and suddenly things look alot different. This game got nasty spoiled with space shrinkage, and you would be amazed how liberating it would be to rip the logistics security band-aid off, and just full on strip the jump fatigue reduction from them. Might as well finish what they started. I remember a time when we did live off the land, unfortunately we were stuck with warp to 15, but that's no longer a problem ;) Yeah, I did. Logistics still existed and we still mainly shipped form highsec. I've been on many a freighter guard run
The thing is there's never really been enough volume in null to keep up with demand. Until they fix that, highsec shipping is a necessity, no matter how tough the logistics.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
|
Eternity Mistseeker
Renegades of Eve
Aureus Alae
9
|
Posted - 2015.09.04 15:25:16 -
[1351] - Quote
Philip Ogtaulmolfi wrote:Talking about another thing, I thought that destroying the iHub would reset the ADM and looking at Providence it doesn't seem so.
Another reason not to fight, if the fleet that you risk to defend the iHub is several times more expensive than the 300Misk of the iHub and your ADM is not seriously affected.
It does not reset it, you lose the strategic component, and the loss of the iHubs upgrades makes maintaining any significant military or industrial component a lot harder unless they are replaced.
If anything i do wonder if iHubs should have two timers!
The hub itself with any reasonable number of upgrades becomes quite an expensive piece of kit with a lot of strategic value to the system (explicitly the strategic index, and implicitly via its upgrades the military and industrial indices).
It also makes me wonder whether the owner of an iHub should be able to tax the system activities related to it.
Mild disclaimer: provi resident, non-sov holder...
|
Dersen Lowery
Scanners Live in Vain
1747
|
Posted - 2015.09.04 17:26:10 -
[1352] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Of course, but a big portion of it is that other areas of space are simply not viable for industry, so that all gets done in highsec. Jita is the central point for that too. If industry were viable (and profitable) in other areas of space (not just null) it owuld go a long way to easing the bottleneck in highsec.
Plus, like I say, highsec should be taxed to hell. Slap on 5-10% minimum sales taxes in Jita and you'd see people shifting.
But shifting where? You can't simultaneously say that nullsec isn't worth living in and that all we have to do is make the other place intolerable to fix that. All you'd have at the end is an entire game that's not worth living in. (Well, except maybe low sec. Keep your bloody mitts off low sec.) Everything I've seen of the sov ~metagame~ disinclines me to ever try it, so if you succeed in nerfing empire space I'll just have to take the nerf on the chin. There's no ISK/hr amount that can convince me to put up with something I don't want to put up with in a game.
And you're still dodging the problem that what makes null sec suck is logistics, which is rooted in why it's called "null sec." The remainder is built on player decisions that are rooted in first assuring maximum defense. As anyone who's ever looked at a fortress knows, defense always comes at the price of convenience, and logistics are a convenience. There's a reason why Black Frog only delivers to NPC stations.
Here's a wild thought: what if you actually looked beyond ISK/hr sometimes?
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6754
|
Posted - 2015.09.04 18:02:05 -
[1353] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:But shifting where? You can't simultaneously say that nullsec isn't worth living in and that all we have to do is make the other place intolerable to fix that. All you'd have at the end is an entire game that's not worth living in. (Well, except maybe low sec. Keep your bloody mitts off low sec.) Everything I've seen of the sov ~metagame~ disinclines me to ever try it, so if you succeed in nerfing empire space I'll just have to take the nerf on the chin. There's no ISK/hr amount that can convince me to put up with something I don't want to put up with in a game.
And you're still dodging the problem that what makes null sec suck is logistics, which is rooted in why it's called "null sec." The remainder is built on player decisions that are rooted in first assuring maximum defense. As anyone who's ever looked at a fortress knows, defense always comes at the price of convenience, and logistics are a convenience. There's a reason why Black Frog only delivers to NPC stations.
Here's a wild thought: what if you actually looked beyond ISK/hr sometimes? Anywhere. Out of highsec, lower sec stations, yes, your precious lowsec. The problem I see is that it's much easier, safer and more rewarding to do everything in highsec. Industry in null is pretty much dead, because the margins on items in highsec hubs are small enough that the additional effort and cost of securing enough materials to do the builds in nullsec make you worse off than just shipping the finished product from Jita. Further, because industry in null is so weak the market for materials there is small and so mining isn't very good beyond ice. So you've bascially got two entire portions of gameplay that just won't grow in ull.
I'm not all about isk/hour, but I am about efficiency. It's simply not efficient to perform these activities in nullsec over highsec. It's not just about nerfing though. Sure, it needs to be made more expensive to do these things in highsec, but it also needs to be made more appealing to do them in null. I'd love to see a day that nullsec is significantly more self sufficient than it is.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Yun Kuai
Justified Chaos
Spaceship Bebop
267
|
Posted - 2015.09.05 07:39:11 -
[1354] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:Where do you think each and every member of the imperium came from? We all came from highsec. Ignoring that the majority of players in High sec have no intention to go to Null sec, so even if you went on a PR spree, you could not motivate them properly to leave the area of space they are content with. Or the thing called alts of Null sec entities or otherwise organizations, like market alts, hauler alts, Incursion alts, mission alts, production alts, etc., who also do not have any intention to join Null sec for obvious reasons. Calling it "90% neutral or hostile to us" is grossly simplifying the reality, and by subtracting all the groups mentioned above, among many others, the 90% of "available players" shrinks significantly. Not to mention that many other organizations are not interested in creating what you have: an entire sector of space pacified, requiring you to complain in forums about lack of content and requiring you to move far away from your home to find "sustainable" activity. Because nobody else is complaining about the lack of content in null.
I mean you're right....other people are complaining about the lack of content, but I'd say it's about 90% Imperium members whining on the foums about how they have nothing to do and no one will fight them. Unblue even half of your coalition and you'd still be traveling 15+ jumps to find fights.
That's difference between the "nullsec blocs" vs the other members of the game. We choose to openly have a small number of blues so that we constantly have different people to shoot. Also, we poke the bear so to speak pretty much every day in order to keep getting content, which I know is another "crazy man on the corner preaching..." idea since you know, content is worth logging in for even it's not strategic. It's also one of the reaons a lot of groups, unsurprisingly who aren't blue with each other, have all decided to move to Black Rise/Placid for the content that the FW guys and local priates create.
--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
|
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16619
|
Posted - 2015.09.05 12:33:20 -
[1355] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:
I mean you're right....other people are complaining about the lack of content, but I'd say it's about 90% Imperium members whining on the foums about how they have nothing to do and no one will fight them. Unblue even half of your coalition and you'd still be traveling 15+ jumps to find fights.
That's difference between the "nullsec blocs" vs the other members of the game. We choose to openly have a small number of blues so that we constantly have different people to shoot. Also, we poke the bear so to speak pretty much every day in order to keep getting content, which I know is another "crazy man on the corner preaching..." idea since you know, content is worth logging in for even it's not strategic. It's also one of the reaons a lot of groups, unsurprisingly who aren't blue with each other, have all decided to move to Black Rise/Placid for the content that the FW guys and local priates create.
If we are not the big boys someone else would take our place. Big groups will always happen, right now we are in a time where there is just one superpower. Telling us to disband does not solve the problem, the only way to solve it is to keep organisations like ours in mind when designing sov mechanics. We have been calling for nerfs to our own power for years now and we are continuing to do so because telling people to not abuse bad mechanics does not work.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6831
|
Posted - 2015.09.05 19:44:27 -
[1356] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:If we are not the big boys someone else would take our place.
It should've been Vince Draken's renters: Northern Associates.
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
PupserDerNebelhafte
Suicidal Decisions
Forkoff
0
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:40:48 -
[1357] - Quote
are you working on an option to transfer structures too?
or if it cant be transfered directly maybe it would be possible to transfer it back to the npc corp.
like when it just got dropped so anyone else can reclaime it |
baltec1
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
16621
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 11:54:41 -
[1358] - Quote
Told you so.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: [one page] |