|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1845
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 19:54:38 -
[1] - Quote
All sensible changes. I'm especially glad that you went with the light hand on fatigue.
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
1852
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 20:11:29 -
[2] - Quote
Reppyk wrote:We're now almost back to the "good era" of no-fatigue and sov-that-can-defend-itself. Well done CCP, one step forward, 2 steps back. Regeneration only occurs if no one bothers to show up for the timer. Have you considered committing to your attempts at sov conquest?
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
1854
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 20:15:39 -
[3] - Quote
Reppyk wrote:Querns wrote:Reppyk wrote:We're now almost back to the "good era" of no-fatigue and sov-that-can-defend-itself. Well done CCP, one step forward, 2 steps back. Regeneration only occurs if no one bothers to show up for the timer. Have you considered committing to your attempts at sov conquest? Have you considered patrolling your own space ? 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.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1854
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 20:19:33 -
[4] - Quote
159Pinky wrote:So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled Do they not have cynos or wormholes where you live?
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
1859
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 20:30:51 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote:xttz wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Reserved for FAQ Will there be a 'self-destruct' option for outposts that puts them into freeport mode? Something like a 'Abandon ownership' option? We don't have anything like that planned, but it is an interesting idea. What sort of situation would you see this being used for? Unless I've read incorrectly, it will be necessary to be able to willingly freeport an outpost/conquerable station to transfer it.
One could also want to freeport it for its own sake. Unlikely, but potentially desirable.
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
1859
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 20:32:36 -
[6] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:The reason Interceptors have dominated is because the ability to warp before a hostile lock is possible and simultaneously ignore bubbles is effctively granting yourself a no-PVP flag in what is supposedly a de-restricted PVP environment. That their ability to take sov is being written out is the removal of the cherry on the cake, but they're still dumb and broken. So your entire complaint is that gatecamps don't work against them, which meant that you couldn't dominate a constellation and prevent all entosis from taking place by holding onto the first choke point you come across with one big blob? The subsequent skirmish warfare that Entosis contests required were my favorite thing about the new sov system. Good thing the dominant ship in the meta right now can conveniently fit for interdiction nullification.
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
1859
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 20:39:08 -
[7] - Quote
Spookay wrote:Will fatigue accumulate at the same rate? Yes. All that got changed was the maximum fatigue you can get.
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
1859
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 20:56:06 -
[8] - Quote
Colman Dietmar wrote:Why apply a restriction to a single ship class when you can just set the PG requirement to something like 100? It'd have to be higher than that. Two T2 MAPCs and a T2 ancillary current router on a crusader had me easily above 100 grid, with two lows and a rig slot left over for reducing my align time to below two seconds.
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
1866
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 21:07:57 -
[9] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:I'm just going to roll my eyes into the back of my head, but you're just caving to hotdroppers who have nothing to do with their big toys, watch how dropping caps becomes an activity once again on single ships. but oh well
I would like fozzie "the man of all focus rage" to urgently look at the sov system as a whole, for I think its not fair to allow the strategic indice to go to zero when an ihub is attacked and the sov holder still has sov.. this causes a terrible waiting time to deploy jump bridges for troops to assemble and defend their space.
its not fair you're still avoiding whats the purpose of having sov and living out in null sec if the big bad evil can simply come in and hit your ihub knocking off transportation systems for up to 35 days in a matter of a few hours. I also look at the above changes as a PR attempt to regain lost players that fozziesov/ageisov has pushed into leaving the game..
but I'm sure you wouldn't discuss numbers here or in a blog since we're headed to fall now.. perhaps everyone caught the flu and stayed logged off? hmm
It may behoove you to defend your space. Additionally, it might behoove you to attack the space of those attacking you, as the same rules apply to whomever is attacking you.
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
1867
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 21:25:11 -
[10] - Quote
peaSTAR wrote:so with the jump timer changes 5 days of fatigue max. this means the uni has shrunk even more now.
does this mean fatigue timers will be adjusted ? (reduced) being as a quick response fleet will only be able to jump 3 times before hitting 1 days 7 hours 17 mins of fatigue,after that time it will be 7 days 19 hours 38 mins, unless your allowed to go over the 5 day max period this is not going to be of any use.
thanks for the stupidity ccp.sandbox game,becoming more like a matchbox game Considering that you can jump an unlimited number of times by waiting out 50 of the 60 minutes of fatigue a 5LY jump grants you, I fail to see the concern. A 5d fatigue, 5LY jump grants 1h12m of cooldown.
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
1869
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:03:20 -
[11] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:159Pinky wrote:So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled The "timer" on a bubbled stargate already exists, and is directly linked to the DPS output of the ship you're trying to get through it. That's garbage and you know it.
Again, do they not have wormholes, cynos, and nullified strategic cruisers where you live?
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
1873
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:16:02 -
[12] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Querns wrote:Again, do they not have wormholes, cynos, and nullified strategic cruisers where you live? Why would you use Tech 3s for Entosis? Any Entosis ship caught during the module cycle is basically doomed. Alone, sure. You may need to bring a support fleet, or ante up to T2 entosis links to limit your exposure.
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
1874
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:20:02 -
[13] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Querns wrote:afkalt wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:159Pinky wrote:So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled The "timer" on a bubbled stargate already exists, and is directly linked to the DPS output of the ship you're trying to get through it. That's garbage and you know it. Again, do they not have wormholes, cynos, and nullified strategic cruisers where you live? Last I checked, WH can't be spawned on demand, cynos can be nullified and a clear and stated objective was to not limit the field to certain hulls. This is why I was against the direct removal of intys but in favour of an increase in align time and a lower speed cap - these would allow active alliances to prosper but prevent passive defence. Allowing an +effectively+ passive defence of sov is too much of a swing in the other direction. Do I need to live in my space? Hell no, I need only bubble the chokes to death, a wormholer can be ignored because that hole wont be there by the time the RF rolls around and now the nodes regenerate. It is just too much in the wrong direction - close, but not there yet. Cynos can be nullified -- you can put a covert cyno on a covert, nullified strategic cruiser and sneak any number of people behind the dread bubble wall, then refit to a more combat-oriented configuration using mobile depots once you've arrived.
You can also shoot the bubbles. A large bubble costs 10m (20m for T2), so if you consistently blow them up, you can probably encourage the bubble havers to stop throwing money away. Anchored bubbles just aren't that big of a deal. Their defense of sovereignty is hardly meaningful at all -- at best, they slow down people hunting ratters. A sovereignty conquering force should have little issue destroying them.
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
1874
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:23:54 -
[14] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Querns wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:Querns wrote:Again, do they not have wormholes, cynos, and nullified strategic cruisers where you live? Why would you use Tech 3s for Entosis? Any Entosis ship caught during the module cycle is basically doomed. Alone, sure. You may need to bring a support fleet, or ante up to T2 entosis links to limit your exposure. This is a direction that is highly favorable to Goonswarm's established modus operendi; bring as big of a death ball as possible and take advantage of superior throw weight to ensure that each objective is achieved. If that's the direction Entosis is going to go, we might as well just throw the sov wands out completely and just go back to Dominion or POS Sov. If someone doesn't have that kind of mass, skirmish warfare is their only viable option. It would be a tragedy for that option to be lost. I don't follow -- how does anything you talked about limit skirmish warfare?
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
1876
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:53:20 -
[15] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Quote limit. Querns wrote: Cynos can be nullified -- you can put a covert cyno on a covert, nullified strategic cruiser and sneak any number of people behind the dread bubble wall, then refit to a more combat-oriented configuration using mobile depots once you've arrived.
You can also shoot the bubbles. A large bubble costs 10m (20m for T2), so if you consistently blow them up, you can probably encourage the bubble havers to stop throwing money away. Anchored bubbles just aren't that big of a deal. Their defense of sovereignty is hardly meaningful at all -- at best, they slow down people hunting ratters. A sovereignty conquering force should have little issue destroying them.
It is still a hilarious design goal fail. Tell me, if a minimum align time of 4s and a speed limit of 3k was enforced...what would the problem be? You should not be able to hide behind anchorables so easily, it is every bit as big a flaw as the current model - except now it is in sov holders favour, so I guess that is ok.....? I guess I am not understanding the outrage. How does having to slowboat through some bubbles meaningfully affect sov warfare?
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
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:56:36 -
[16] - Quote
Reppyk wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Have you considered Actually finishing something you started or is your group just not competent enough to hold it? Have you considered that many people are interested in the fight and not in the sov/ihubs/whatever ? Have you considered that, since the nodes will regen, a lot less fights can be expected ? Have you considered that, since the anom buff, you can park 600 pilots in the same constellation and they all have something to grind, making our current universe way too big for the low population in 00 ? Have you considered that the game does not need a better, juicer carrot, but on the contrary a lower density of the riches, that would create conflicts after ~4 years of relative peace ? So, you're only interested in generating fights, and not in actually conquering sov. Why should the system cater to you? Sovereignty warfare should be about contesting sovereignty, not creating meaningless fights with nothing on the line. Sure, the system can't deduce the intent of either the attacker or the defender, but the spirit of the mechanic should keep this in mind wherever possible.
The Imperium has a zero-tolerance policy towards attempts on our sovereignty, no matter the intentions of the attacker. I see no reason why any other sov holder should act differently. Plan accordingly.
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
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:09:55 -
[17] - Quote
afkalt wrote:It dimishes the commitment to living in space, you have a greatly reduced need for real pilots in space when a fleet can be formed based on intel alts x jumps out knowing full well you can block and hide behind anchorables- - the enemy can't move quickly.
Don't mistake me, I may be an alt, but I live in WH are we are facing far greater problems than null will with these mechanics come citadels:
You currently need needed an entosis alt/system, we will need an alt/structure and "living" out of our space is impossible by comparison as anomalies do not work the same way.
So that said, I have sympathy with the complaints - which is why I suggest align lower bounds and a lower max speed. It allows people living in places to have a (pretty trivial) odds of catching people by active piloting/living but keeps a low bar with regard to "passive" defences. I was vehemently against removing the mass penalty, for example, I wanted it pushed even higher.
I want to see active fleets rewarded, I don't want passive defences to be the one stop shop for defence. They will be, once again.
A lot of people hate nullification but it's the only decent counter to anchorable spam. The amount of time that a bubble wall delays an attacker is a scant minute or two, at most. This matters for catching ratters, but not for contesting sovereignty. Use scouts to find bubble walls. Use cynos to avoid bubble walls. Use an alternate route. Use nullified strategic cruisers. Send in a team to blow up the bubble walls before the campaign starts and/or the vulnerability timer; anchorable bubble fields take a long time to erect due to their requirement of an industrial ship to haul the largest ones. Stealth bombers are very good at catching and murdering industrials.
This is a molehill, not a mountain.
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
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:11:29 -
[18] - Quote
Also, as an aside, if you dislike bubble walls, you are going to HATE the new structures CCP is adding. CCP is talking about adding a variety of structures that can be used to detect hostiles and augment travel in sovereign space. I believe that players should be able to invest in their systems and see some benefit from it.
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
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:14:29 -
[19] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:So lemme get his straight - you want the sov, but you find it too difficult to coast the 20 seconds it would take you to clear the bubbles?
Most likely, he is trying to contort his personal vendetta towards anchored bubbles with respect to their efficacy at protecting ratters by implying that they are a relevant defense for sovereignty.
To that, anyone incensed at the existence of anchored bubbles would do well to train into a Proteus; they can be fit for warp disruptor range and to ignore bubbles, all while having superlative EHP. Use one to get initial tackle and light a cyno, or simply wait for the rest of your gang.
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
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:15:54 -
[20] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Querns wrote:peaSTAR wrote:so with the jump timer changes 5 days of fatigue max. this means the uni has shrunk even more now.
does this mean fatigue timers will be adjusted ? (reduced) being as a quick response fleet will only be able to jump 3 times before hitting 1 days 7 hours 17 mins of fatigue,after that time it will be 7 days 19 hours 38 mins, unless your allowed to go over the 5 day max period this is not going to be of any use.
thanks for the stupidity ccp.sandbox game,becoming more like a matchbox game Considering that you can jump an unlimited number of times by waiting out 50 of the 60 minutes of fatigue a 5LY jump grants you, I fail to see the concern. A 5d fatigue, 5LY jump grants 1h12m of cooldown. Based on this equation: Cooldown (minutes) = Max ( fatigue / 10, 1 + ( distance in lightyears * ( 1 - bonus ) ) ) Max Fatigue is 5 days (5*24*60) = 7200 7200/10 = 720 minutes so, 12 hours reactivation, when you jump with max Fatigue My math may be messed up, but if you were relying on a popular online calc, I think it has gone wonky on you Yeah, I was using an online calculator, and working quickly because I was at work and didn't want to commit too much time to it. That being said, the reality being worse than I thought only strengthens my initial point.
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
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:21:05 -
[21] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Querns wrote:Also, as an aside, if you dislike bubble walls, you are going to HATE the new structures CCP is adding. CCP is talking about adding a variety of structures that can be used to detect hostiles and augment travel in sovereign space. I believe that players should be able to invest in their systems and see some benefit from it. I have enough problems with planning on dealing with the hell of vulnerable structures which will not shoot wihtout an alt in there, in systems with no local and inconsistent routes home, even from a mere 2 jumps out. At least you guys can sit a few jumps out and the gates wont collapse behind you, can monitor local. We're going to have to park a toon on every structure just in case. Believe me, your problems are nothing next to mine I didn't say I had problems. I said that the stuff CCP is planning is going to be significantly more effective at "passive defense" than the 45 seconds someone loses slowboating through a bubble wall.
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
1881
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:58:33 -
[22] - Quote
The only other suggestion I've liked for Jump Fatigue was to make fatigue clear if you jump to your capital system. This benefit should only work if you install an ihub upgrade that requires a Strategic Index of 3 or more (to curb any potential use of changing your capital to a warzone.)
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
1888
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 00:26:22 -
[23] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Querns wrote:The only other suggestion I've liked for Jump Fatigue was to make fatigue clear if you jump to your capital system. This benefit should only work if you install an ihub upgrade that requires a Strategic Index of 3 or more (to curb any potential use of changing your capital to a warzone.) Since all this stuff is supposed to keep Empires in the Regions they live, why not have it Reduce the timer of the Sov holding Entities WITHIN their owned Sov. They can skip around the Region they own while Fatigue occurs but at a reduced rate. But once they leave that Region to Deploy the Wear and tear of being away from the Shipyards takes a heavier toll on the engines. This lets the Caps move around, Rorquals shift areas as needed again, and Buffs Logistics moving around in their home helping to Establish these Deepspace Markets that CCP wants Sov holding Entities to create. For Example in your own space you might have a 70-90% reduction to Fatigue, While outside of it you wind up Cringing like we tend to now. Maybe even a new iHub upgrade that installs in levels or one upgrade that reduces Fatigue in systems for those with Positive standings. Make the ihub upgrade like Sov 3-5. This gives homefield advantage to the citizens of that area while also letting them head out and fight if they need. This also would give Advantage to the Defenders using JB networks or moving their own fleets around to respond to large assets in its area. X mixed subcap and Super capital fleet invades area. Citizens are able to respond to the Subcaps while also having the ability to move around and cut off the Super capitals from fleeing due to homefield advantage not killing the response time of getting in front of the retreating Capitals. This would also give entities that are unable to throw around massive fleets to counter Capital Invasions a way to shift around them and amass a larger counter fleet while the enemies wait out the ability to Jump. Hopefully a stronger reason for everyone to get involved in saving their turf instead of just waiting on final timers or moving out assets hoping the invaders leave the sov in boredom. That'd just lead to an Eye of Terror situation where large entities hold chunks of sov along a 5LY corridor to expedite travel across the map. CCP has been pretty adamant about making that infeasible.
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
1894
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 01:11:35 -
[24] - Quote
Irya Boone wrote:Put back the fatigue to more than 7 days and put some fatigue on the bridgers too ...sick of 400+ pilots drops.
And good job for the trollceptor
Now it's time to make some stars collapse like in real universe. You did it for jove solar systems space You must shake the universe more often. People taking a titan bridge accrue fatigue. Same for blackops BS bridging, though they accrue half the amount.
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
1930
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 12:16:56 -
[25] - Quote
Kinis Deren wrote:Disappointed with the sov changes Team 5-0 have come up with. A quick glance through this very thread clearly reveals who this will benefit. I guess sov null will remain safer than low sec for the average capsuleer and we'll be back to blue donuts, renter space and wastelands by winter.
You came so close CCP to making sov null an active combat zone but now it will quickly return to ISK generation for the blobs and a meaningless once a year orchestrated 4000 man fight. I, too, make vague apocalyptic statements with no effort spent towards linking effect to cause.
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
1930
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 12:18:34 -
[26] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Terrible, poorly considered changes that only cater to the whiny minority. Why give jump fatigue immunity to people who dont even play the game, but only to log in when pinged to drop in a 100% risk free situation?
How is a reduction to the maximum accumulated jump fatigue immunity? It's still faster to wait 50 minutes after each jump over the long haul.
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
1930
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 12:24:20 -
[27] - Quote
159Pinky wrote:Casandra Elise McIntire wrote:Ravcharas wrote:159Pinky wrote:So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled interdiction nullifier subsystems m8 That would mean flying a T3, which some groups are unwilling to risk. Some groups, feel that trolling in interceptors are the only option they have to ensure positive KB stats and receive funding for said trolling. Or some groups feel, that if they bring this the other side will just drop more and more ships. Right now they already drop supers and titans on bomber and cormorrant fleet. Why on earth would I bring a T3 entosis ship? You're posting under a very strange delusion.
The Imperium doesn't scale its response to the amount of isk on the field. We bring the maximum suppressive force, every time. The idea is that you shouldn't attack our sovereignty, and we will roll up the largest newspaper we can at any given time and hit you in the nose with it until you stop moving.
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
1930
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 12:46:12 -
[28] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Querns wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Terrible, poorly considered changes that only cater to the whiny minority. Why give jump fatigue immunity to people who dont even play the game, but only to log in when pinged to drop in a 100% risk free situation?
How is a reduction to the maximum accumulated jump fatigue immunity? It's still faster to wait 50 minutes after each jump over the long haul. The people who cry most about jump aids don't play the game on a daily basis, they can afford to play dota for five days before another option to helicopter **** comes. Which means that the behaviour that caused the whole projection nerf will be possible again, while the majority of players still enjoy the full power of the nerf. Now I personally think that Phoebe had only positive effects, but even if some changes were needed, this 5-day cap was literally the worst possible way to go about it. It removes the consequence of fast travel for super blobbers, while fixing nothing. You are overreacting. On the fourth jump, you are already sucking down a 3 hour cooldown timer. Meanwhile, proper shield supercaps fit for gate travel can cover the same amount of distance in 15 minutes. Please don't make a mountain out of a molehill.
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
1930
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 12:54:28 -
[29] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Querns wrote: You are overreacting. On the fourth jump, you are already sucking down a 3 hour cooldown timer. Meanwhile, proper shield supercaps fit for gate travel can cover the same amount of distance in 15 minutes. Please don't make a mountain out of a molehill.
My dread moved like a cruiser so its far easier and faster to use gates rather than jump. Yeah, same for my Hel. I remember returning from Fountain and outrunning ishtars. It was great.
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
1930
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 13:24:08 -
[30] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Querns wrote:baltec1 wrote:Querns wrote: You are overreacting. On the fourth jump, you are already sucking down a 3 hour cooldown timer. Meanwhile, proper shield supercaps fit for gate travel can cover the same amount of distance in 15 minutes. Please don't make a mountain out of a molehill.
My dread moved like a cruiser so its far easier and faster to use gates rather than jump. Yeah, same for my Hel. I remember returning from Fountain and outrunning ishtars. It was great. This is still only a viable way for a blob to travel. It is hardly a viable way for a small corporation to move their capital ships. Only the apex fleet can afford to move the way you are advocating. There's also less need for a smaller force to move far enough for gate travel fits to be relevant.
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
1930
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 14:04:12 -
[31] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote: How are the "smaller" alliances supposed to get out to the underpopulated regions of space and bring new blood to 0.0?
Considering the relative uselessness of capitals in the new sovereignty system, I would say they do it by taking gates in the subcapital ships that are actually relevant to the task.
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
1931
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 15:36:50 -
[32] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"We are very interested in your feedback on these proposals and we hope that you'll join in a productive and civil discussion in this blog's forum feedback thread."
1. by productive we mean all your comments will benefit nullsec cartels (otherwise they will be ignored).
2. by civil we mean....well again, unless you are supporting nullsec we don't want to hear it.
corrected for accuracy. Really, I can contort most, if not all potential game changes to benefit us with enough wordplay. That being said, so can most people, but few have my ability to actually peer outside of the vignette that confines them to paint everything in a particular light.
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
1935
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 02:38:47 -
[33] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Querns wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"We are very interested in your feedback on these proposals and we hope that you'll join in a productive and civil discussion in this blog's forum feedback thread."
1. by productive we mean all your comments will benefit nullsec cartels (otherwise they will be ignored).
2. by civil we mean....well again, unless you are supporting nullsec we don't want to hear it.
corrected for accuracy. Really, I can contort most, if not all potential game changes to benefit us with enough wordplay. That being said, so can most people, but few have my ability to actually peer outside of the vignette that confines them to paint everything in a particular light. Let me ask you question, since blind self-serving brush strokes annoy you so much and how you have basically said you are the broad minded and fair for everybody guy in this discussion, how come you aren't clamoring for CCP to allow the construction of capital combat ships in space other than your front yard. It must annoy your broad-minded scope of the game to know that nobody outside nullsec can make ships that can effectively hold nullsec space, well except nullsec cartels of course, you can make them till they fly out your rear end. You can make capital ships in lowsec.
You don't need capitals to take sov or defend sov. In fact, capital ships receive a hefty penalty to cycle time of entosis links.
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
1935
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 02:40:43 -
[34] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:What contortion, what word play, you gutted Fozziesov in less than one month with your whine-naught and it seems CCP wants to make sure you get another shot because this thread reads:
"Have we gutted Fozziesov but you can post here anything else that annoys you in the slightest and we'll cut that out as well."
By month two, Fozziesov will be a nullsec wide joke, CCP will have suffered yet another loss of face as it grovels for your stamp of approval on what will ultimately be a waste of programming time. We did nothing. CCP decided the changes, not us.
These changes do not "gut" Aegis sov. They simply shift the balance of the mechanics to demand a token amount of commitment from an attacker. If you think that is unreasonable, then we have no grounds for agreement.
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
1935
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 02:46:16 -
[35] - Quote
Saisin wrote:The capability for an interceptor to travel safely in all of null space is something the established groups do not want to loose This is patently false. I want all interdiction nullification 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.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1935
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 03:55:13 -
[36] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Querns wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:What contortion, what word play, you gutted Fozziesov in less than one month with your whine-naught and it seems CCP wants to make sure you get another shot because this thread reads:
"Have we gutted Fozziesov but you can post here anything else that annoys you in the slightest and we'll cut that out as well."
By month two, Fozziesov will be a nullsec wide joke, CCP will have suffered yet another loss of face as it grovels for your stamp of approval on what will ultimately be a waste of programming time. We did nothing. CCP decided the changes, not us. These changes do not "gut" Aegis sov. They simply shift the balance of the mechanics to demand a token amount of commitment from an attacker. If you think that is unreasonable, then we have no grounds for agreement. You didnt but a fair number of your alliance threw their weight behind gutting Fozziesov i was in on the conversation. And before the gutting it required nothing more than a 'token' defense on your part. That you are unwilling to send a small handful of you masses to go and scout the perimeter of your holdings, yes that kind of lazy i find unreasonable and shouldn't be protected by game mechanics. We do patrol our perimeters. If you feel we are too inattentive at the task, go contest some of our sov. The only difference, post-Vanguard, is that you can't do the deed in an uncatchable ship class.
Also, while no one can deny that goons are fat, "throwing our weight" accomplishes absolutely nothing. We don't have some magic back-channel with CCP to bend the game to our whims. We're just fat guys on the internet.
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
1935
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 03:59:24 -
[37] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:RiP FozzieSoV Summer '15. Long life to nullsec cartels and pre-planed thousand ship fights.
Its as if countless F1 monkeys cried out in joy, but they still won't log in again. I can confirm that the sky is, indeed, falling.
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
1940
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 13:10:29 -
[38] - Quote
Saisin wrote:Querns wrote:... These changes do not "gut" Aegis sov. They simply shift the balance of the mechanics to demand a token amount of commitment from an attacker. If you think that is unreasonable, then we have no grounds for agreement. Yes they would. You can't perceive it, perched on top of your gold-plated ivory tower (do you undock from time to time, by the way?) The entosis link is already a token amount of commitment. A module that is worth around 30 to 50 Million in T1 form, or 100 to 130 Mill in T2 form is not an insignificant cost that you have to bring to the destination (in the middle of enemy territory) and use on a ship that can be easily destroyed by any competent and properly equiped reaction force. Even with an entosis fit cheap ship, this is around 50 to 150 Millions that have to be commited for each entosis action. Only the already established powers drowning in moon goo ISKs can consider it worthless value, as you do. For most of us, though, the value of the entosis modules already represent a commitment to the attack. It's not a token amount of commitment on a ship that can't be caught.
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
1940
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 13:14:29 -
[39] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Querns wrote:159Pinky wrote:So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled Do they not have cynos or wormholes where you live? Not every one has access to hundreds of titans and or wants to spend hours probing out wormholes that may or may not be there when the timers you want to create are vulnerable. CCP again didn't look for balance and instead took the easy road of a straight nerf. Why not "balance" entosis ceptors with a fuel adjustment ? Simply increase the amount of stront required per cycle to 3 for the warmup and 2 per cycle. Someone who is actually wanting to attack sov is only going to have enough fuel for 1 or 2 attempts, unless they have friends with them to supply more stront. Or making it so an active entosis ship can receive remote reps but the ship is immobile for the duration of the cycle. A solo ceptor is not going to last long if defenders turn up but a group who wants content (aside from trolling) can bring logi with them. Blackops BS can bridge ships with a much smaller investment, at superlative range. Strategic cruisers can take this bridge, and strategic cruisers are the backbone of contemporary warfare.
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
1940
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 13:15:16 -
[40] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Patrick Yaa wrote:Saisin wrote: Only the already established powers drowning in moon goo ISKs can consider it worthless value, as you do. For most of us, though, the value of the entosis modules already represent a commitment to the attack.
There are already several parts to a commitment. Ressources, be it pilots, time or ISK are just one part of it. Sov was never meant to be cheap, and shouldn't be. 130M is not a small sum, yes, but it is also not unexpendable and doctrine ships are double that price for logis and BS doctrines. ( if not more). So saying "Oh, look, I bought sov wand, where's my system" is not the right way to argue imo. I think you missed the point.. Sov is cheap - For the large well established groups living off passive income. Until CCP do something to balance moon income - sov will never be worth much. Being able to hold moons in nulsec without holding sov makes the effort of holding sov pointless. Why bother taking sov when all you need is super or capital superiority to safeguard (and increase) your passive income? Moongoo comprises a small portion of our alliance income.
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
1940
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 13:28:14 -
[41] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Querns wrote:Reppyk wrote:We're now almost back to the "good era" of no-fatigue and sov-that-can-defend-itself. Well done CCP, one step forward, 2 steps back. Regeneration only occurs if no one bothers to show up for the timer. Have you considered committing to your attempts at sov conquest? Why? What does it have to offer? If you are unwilling to meaningfully contest sov, you have no business doing it.
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
1940
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 14:08:19 -
[42] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Querns wrote:Saisin wrote:Querns wrote:... These changes do not "gut" Aegis sov. They simply shift the balance of the mechanics to demand a token amount of commitment from an attacker. If you think that is unreasonable, then we have no grounds for agreement. Yes they would. You can't perceive it, perched on top of your gold-plated ivory tower (do you undock from time to time, by the way?) The entosis link is already a token amount of commitment. A module that is worth around 30 to 50 Million in T1 form, or 100 to 130 Mill in T2 form is not an insignificant cost that you have to bring to the destination (in the middle of enemy territory) and use on a ship that can be easily destroyed by any competent and properly equiped reaction force. Even with an entosis fit cheap ship, this is around 50 to 150 Millions that have to be commited for each entosis action. Only the already established powers drowning in moon goo ISKs can consider it worthless value, as you do. For most of us, though, the value of the entosis modules already represent a commitment to the attack. It's not a token amount of commitment on a ship that can't be caught. There are no ships in this game that cannot be caught. If you cannot kill a ceptor, then you have no business holding sov. Alternatively, cry to CCP until the play the game for you. Outside of pilot error in piloting or fitting, interceptors cannot be caught.
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
1940
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 15:35:02 -
[43] - Quote
Patrick Yaa wrote:Querns wrote:[quotetree...] Outside of pilot error in piloting or fitting, interceptors cannot be caught. I thought this at first as well, but: smartbombs also, b2t That is true -- you can counter interceptors by parking five or more titans, packing officer smartbombs, on a stargate.
I rescind my earlier complaint; this is clearly the intended counter and reasonable for sov holders of all shapes and sizes.
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
1941
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 17:09:08 -
[44] - Quote
Saisin wrote:Querns wrote: It's not a token amount of commitment on a ship that can't be caught.
Isn't catching or preventing the entosis the same thing, or do you absolutely have to get to kill the entosis ship? Seems to me you are after easy kills more than true game balance. No skirmishers will engage if they are 100% sure of losing their ship (or like cynos, it will be done with the smallest possible cost to them) Skirmishers by nature are hard to catch but it can still be done, or they can be driven away easily. You simply do not want to have to deal with skirmishers in "your" game.
At what point did I say that the ship had to die? I said interceptors are uncatchable.
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
1941
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 17:10:23 -
[45] - Quote
Saisin wrote:Querns wrote: If you are unwilling to meaningfully contest sov, you have no business doing it.
you mean "if you can't fight my way, where I will squash you with my superior forces, you have no business in my sov" This is a very one sided view of game balance, and does not recognize skirmishers as a valid play style. Why should we recognize your play style then, if you don't recognize ours? Sending one man in an uncatchable ship to generate timers which no one intends to actually contest is not skirmishing.
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
1941
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 17:12:50 -
[46] - Quote
Saisin wrote:Querns wrote: Moongoo comprises a small portion of our alliance income.
Of course! It is a top down income, so it is not passed to the alliance, but kept by the toons of the players that directkly benefit from it, while alliances endoctrinated lemmings are there to provide the meat sheid and means to protect this personal income, in exchange for paying rent or taxes. Moon goo is to high level alliance leaderships like gold mines, or international help funds, or diamonds, are for nepotists dictators in the real world. This is incorrect. Between SRP that pays 150-200% of the cost of the fit ship directly to whomever lost it, the trillions of ISK we've invested into our outposts and infrastructure hubs to allow meaningful nullsec PVE in the forms of ratting, mining, and industry, and the simple act of paying the sovereignty bills due every month, we ensure that the ISK the alliance makes, overwhelmingly, makes it back into the pockets of our line members.
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
1942
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 20:41:11 -
[47] - Quote
Saisin wrote: Some groups may publicly take the stance that they do not want to take sov, unti they do when the conditions are right by their standards, and not by yours. Another possibility is that a third party decides to step in an area where the inhabitants have been already softened by skirmishers, and multiple timers can be contested. This is part of valid tactics, propaganda and interactions, and not a reason to prevent these tactics in the game.
Barring interceptors from using entosis links does not cause any of this to happen. I get your general idea, but there's just no link between the proposed changes and what you're describing.
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
1942
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 21:04:54 -
[48] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Aryth wrote:Querns wrote:Saisin wrote:The capability for an interceptor to travel safely in all of null space is something the established groups do not want to loose This is patently false. I want all interdiction nullification removed from the game. I want nullification removed from at least PVP ships. There is some value in allowing space taxis like shuttles or the yacht that cannot PVP. But T3 petes just ruined the entire wormhole content for the weekend. Nullifiers just break PVP risk/reward balance. They need to disappear from PVP. One gate camp defending hundreds of system from PvP is quite possibly the stupidest thing ever. Of course you like it cause you're a nullbear Goon. Good thing gatecamps can be avoided with the use of bridges (covert or otherwise) and wormholes.
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
1942
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 00:59:15 -
[49] - Quote
Saisin wrote:Querns wrote: Barring interceptors from using entosis links does not cause any of this to happen. I get your general idea, but there's just no link between the proposed changes and what you're describing.
if the issue was truly the speed of ships while entosising, all frigates and ships that can reach these speed while using entosis would have been banned too, not just interceptors. As this is clearly not what you are advocating, it is clear that the issue you have is about the nullification of the interceptors equiped with entosis, because they are uncatchable until they commit to entosis, and can conduct guerilla style attacks in any places. You still want to not loose the ability to travel uncatchable in null sec for your own purposes. as the main null sec alliance holder, you are the ones benefiting most from the ability to travel around uncatchable. This is why the interceptor entosis ban is one sided only, and not balanced. You do not want entosis ships to slip behind your lines uncatchable, but you are not willing to lose your own ability to travel in null sec uncatchable. One sided mind set. No, I want all nullification removed from the game. Period. Traveling is already safe enough with a covert ops frigate; we don't need to be able to ignore bubbles.
I am not sure how much more plainly I can put this.
However, since even I find it unlikely that CCP will remove nullification in TYOOL 2015, I will take the second prize of having the most abusable function of a nullified, sub-2s align ship removed. We'll get there eventually, if only through employee turnover than anything.
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
1942
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 01:00:12 -
[50] - Quote
Sentamon wrote: Good thing both aren't even a minor threat to you or CCP would have already removed them.
The delusions under which you labor are almost like a form of sustenance for my soul.
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
1942
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 02:38:41 -
[51] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Querns wrote:Saisin wrote:Querns wrote:... These changes do not "gut" Aegis sov. They simply shift the balance of the mechanics to demand a token amount of commitment from an attacker. If you think that is unreasonable, then we have no grounds for agreement. Yes they would. You can't perceive it, perched on top of your gold-plated ivory tower (do you undock from time to time, by the way?) The entosis link is already a token amount of commitment. A module that is worth around 30 to 50 Million in T1 form, or 100 to 130 Mill in T2 form is not an insignificant cost that you have to bring to the destination (in the middle of enemy territory) and use on a ship that can be easily destroyed by any competent and properly equiped reaction force. Even with an entosis fit cheap ship, this is around 50 to 150 Millions that have to be commited for each entosis action. Only the already established powers drowning in moon goo ISKs can consider it worthless value, as you do. For most of us, though, the value of the entosis modules already represent a commitment to the attack. It's not a token amount of commitment on a ship that can't be caught. Really, i need to get one of these invulnerable ships you describe that cannot be caught, btw what game are you playing, it isnt EVE because there isnt a ship in EVE that cannot be caught. Oh, you mean brainlessly caught rather than using a modicum of strategy, okay i got it. Apparently a "modicum of strategy" is multiple titans fit with officer smartbombs.
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
1942
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 04:26:46 -
[52] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:I got smartbombed taking a "shortcut", just before i landed at the gate....strange i dont recall him being in a titan.
But i have to say, if i had enough titans to give up on any kind of decent combat tactics and just toss titans at everything id do the same thing, why not ! Pilot error. Should have bounced to a celestial.
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
1945
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 12:27:19 -
[53] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Sentamon wrote:Querns wrote:Sentamon wrote:
One gate camp defending hundreds of system from PvP is quite possibly the stupidest thing ever. Of course you like it cause you're a nullbear Goon.
Good thing gatecamps can be avoided with the use of bridges (covert or otherwise) and wormholes. Good thing both aren't even a minor threat to you or CCP would have already removed them. It is funny how members of Goons presume everyone has the same ease of movement they enjoy. Just use a bridge (covert or otherwise) - In space that is red to you - Or where your likely to get stuck for hours due to fatigue. And of course, don't forget, when you jump your little blops fleet in through the covert cyno - Goons and friends will respond with a 100+ man fleet to see you off. You've never used blops BS in hostile space? Back in the day, we used to do it all the time. It's pretty safe, even in a safespot, as long as you cloak up and keep an eye on local.
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
1945
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 12:31:07 -
[54] - Quote
Manny theMiner wrote:I don't understand why you are implementing changes to TQ and then seeing what the effects will be. Isn't that why you have the test server? Quit experimenting with my game in real time, trying to make things up as you go, and use the test processes you have in place. Why do i think numbers are dropping? Well, us old guys don't like relearning a completely new set of rules every 6 weeks. The test server is really poor for testing things that affect emergent gameplay things like sovereignty. For example, testing Aegis Sov on Duality saw most groups fielding nigh-infinite numbers of highly impractical ships to contest sovereignty. It was good to work out the bugs, but didn't really inform anyone on the best way to engage in sov war.
The test server is more useful for testing the raw mechanical functionality of complicated features, e.g.: brain in a box.
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
1945
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 14:14:24 -
[55] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:baltec1 wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Reducing the fatigue from 30 days to 5 days seems crazy to me. Doesn't it bring back the power projection issue for groups with a lot of caps? Sure it's not instant power projection in the old sense but the groups with caps positioned all over the place will no long be penalized.
It should be 10 days max fatigue so that the weekend player suffers as much as the dedicated player. The goal of fatigue was to stop us from 3rd partying our entire titan swarm on fight happening across the map. This goal is still being met. Can't you still cover a long distance by jumping multiple times? And if so wasn't the long fatigue there to penalize people for doing this? (I'm generally curious as I don't live in low sec) I just don't see how making it trivial for alliances to more around the map is a good thing. Personally i think wars should be a long/drawn-out process where people have to commit for weeks/months, not just an additional activity you can do to find fights every weekend... Constantly missing move ops? join a group that is invested in their region! You can cover a maximum distance between 20-25LY before fatigue maximizes and you have to wait 12 hours between each jump.
This is about the distance from YA0 to TVN, for reference. You'd have to endure about four hours of jump fatigue cooldown to do this, get stuck with 12 hours of cooldown at the end, and be capped out for fatigue with 5 days.
Or, you could fit for gate travel and take the same trip in about 22 minutes, assuming you didn't get bubbled along the way.
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
1948
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 23:34:43 -
[56] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote: Key words "back in the day", that was before fatigue stopped your fleet moving more than once every 28 mins (X 3 or 4 to get to the target system - forget it) Yes Blops can be done pretty safely but who wants to spend a week moving a small fleet to a target area, only to find you can't do what you came for because the locals saw you coming 3 days ago and are waiting for you or just stay docked.
Fatigue didn't somehow make it less safe. It's still a perfectly valid way to conduct business. Hell, most of the scant bits of PVP that do slip through our net in Deklein consist of ratters getting dropped on by bombers.
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
1966
|
Posted - 2015.09.15 13:43:30 -
[57] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Thanks for giving me some perspective.
I still think null sec will be become better if it remains difficult for capital fleets to be deployed in different regions. I don't think making things easy for your more nomadic groups like PL, who exist for nice kill mails and have more capitals than they know what to do with, are good for the game.
By penalizing players for moving around all the time, you reward the players that invest in and develop certain regions. Is making war deployment a trivial and fun thing you can do every weekend really good for the game? The changes don't make it faster to travel. Gate travel is still the superior option.
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
1967
|
Posted - 2015.09.15 15:04:43 -
[58] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Querns wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Thanks for giving me some perspective.
I still think null sec will be become better if it remains difficult for capital fleets to be deployed in different regions. I don't think making things easy for your more nomadic groups like PL, who exist for nice kill mails and have more capitals than they know what to do with, are good for the game.
By penalizing players for moving around all the time, you reward the players that invest in and develop certain regions. Is making war deployment a trivial and fun thing you can do every weekend really good for the game? The changes don't make it faster to travel. Gate travel is still the superior option. No i didn't say it did. I said the reduction in fatigue cap will allow groups like yourself to jump around the map getting involved in a new war or 3rd partying on fights every weekend. Yes, and my point is if we wanted to do this, we would be doing it via gate travel, and not jumping. What part of "jumping is slower than gate travel for the distances we're talking about" am I failing to impress? Lowering the max fatigue cap doesn't affect our ability to wage war or third party.
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
1967
|
Posted - 2015.09.15 16:27:58 -
[59] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Querns wrote: Yes, and my point is if we wanted to do this, we would be doing it via gate travel, and not jumping. What part of "jumping is slower than gate travel for the distances we're talking about" am I failing to impress? Lowering the max fatigue cap doesn't affect our ability to wage war or third party.
You are choosing to ignore the fact that gate travel is a huge risk. I don't disagree with the fact that using gates for long range deployments would be quicker but it has nothing to do with the issue. You don't need to worry about "quickness" for a war that is planned weeks in advance... Especially if you are a super alt with nothing but time on your hands. Of course if doesn't affect your ability to wage ware but it penalizes you for using a safe means of travel to strategically position yourself. Either way i guess we'll see how it turns out but, to me, it feel like weak backpedaling by ccp. When you're a part of the group with the most supercapitals in the game, it's not a risk at all. You move in groups and fit a cyno. I bought my supercapital after Phoebe, I go on almost every supercapital op we have, and I have not as of yet needed to refuel. Jumping is just not used that much in TYOOL 2015.
You could argue that smaller groups lack this option, but since your concern is about the largest groups, that argument is invalid.
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
1967
|
Posted - 2015.09.15 18:38:07 -
[60] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote: #unsubbing
No follow-through.
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
1968
|
Posted - 2015.09.15 22:51:09 -
[61] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Querns wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: Key words "back in the day", that was before fatigue stopped your fleet moving more than once every 28 mins (X 3 or 4 to get to the target system - forget it) Yes Blops can be done pretty safely but who wants to spend a week moving a small fleet to a target area, only to find you can't do what you came for because the locals saw you coming 3 days ago and are waiting for you or just stay docked.
Fatigue didn't somehow make it less safe. It's still a perfectly valid way to conduct business. Hell, most of the scant bits of PVP that do slip through our net in Deklein consist of ratters getting dropped on by bombers. You might want to look at lossmails for you space before you go making unfounded accusations - I did. I think it was about 1 in 50 for the last 6 months or 4 ships lost to bombers. That aside, I was discussing attacking space not players,it is easy for bombers or Blops to pick off 1 player at a time. It is a very different thing again to try and use those same ships to take space. And as has been pointed out, a few well placed bubble camps makes Imperium Space all but invulnerable. Discussion was about entosing systems (viable alternative to ceptors) not ratters or miners getting ganked. Bombers are not the only ships that can catch a blops bridge. More specifically, strategic cruisers can.
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
1968
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 02:17:32 -
[62] - Quote
ergherhdfgh wrote:I still think that the jump range on non-combat ships needs to be rolled back to the old range of I believe it was 10 LY.
If you want null markets to be active and encourage combat people need to be able to get supplies moved around. I've completely stopped moving stuff since the changes. Things that used to be able to be done in one jump now take sometimes 3 or 4 jumps or even more.
That cutting in half did way more than double the amount of jumps. That much repositioning of cyno alts takes me longer than it does for the fatigue to go away. Then I have to do it all again on the way back up. I agree, non-combat ships such as the Rhea should have a 10LY jump range.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
|
|