Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
![Laendra Laendra](https://images.evetech.net/characters/604963579/portrait?size=64)
Laendra
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 18:43:00 -
[31]
Excellent first blog. Here's hoping that we can get a workable solution to POS spam that doesn't involve arbitrary placement limits.
Oh, and btw, since you have Constellation Sov in the entire constellation, does the Alliance get Alliance mails to the effect of someone placing a POS somewhere in the constellation, even if that system has no POSes in it from the alliance that claimed Constellation Sov? ------------------- Brainstorm ideas to make EVE better:->http://eve.stormingbrains.org/index.php
|
![Notleh Notleh](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1680896061/portrait?size=64)
Notleh
RABBLE-RABBLE
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 19:02:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Notleh on 13/06/2007 19:07:41 game on!
My main concern is that the only way to take down a Capital is to go in with a HUGE fleet of non cap ships, old school style. However, with the defenders being able to deploy Dreads/MS/Carriers (in Triage Mode) the attacking fleet will have to have an vast numerical advantage and the lag is going to be insane on these sieges.
I predict a capital siege = instant node poppage.
|
![Mashie Saldana Mashie Saldana](https://images.evetech.net/characters/747574303/portrait?size=64)
Mashie Saldana
Hooligans Of War
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 20:03:00 -
[33]
Excellent blog, sounds like fun times ahead for the 0.0 alliances.
It will be very interesting to see the tactics spawned by this.
We're sorry, something happened.
|
![Zrevak Ashek Zrevak Ashek](https://images.evetech.net/characters/723075331/portrait?size=64)
Zrevak Ashek
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 20:06:00 -
[34]
Originally by: ForceM
I can imagine this being a good option to build all your capital ships in the Capital .. This being said means that if you find out there is an Alliance building a Titan (or any other good Mothership) it takes WAY more then a mere OMGWTFBBQPWN fleet to whipe out the Capital Shipyard building it.
A very good point. I'd guess alliances from now on will wait until they have capsov and then build all their capyards in the cap system, and only fortify the surrounding systems.
This will make an attack like the coalition performed against LV and BOB impossible in the future.
Surrounding systems have to be sieged for some time before any attempt on cap system is to be made.
In other words? NO SURPRISE ATTACKS. An invasion will need to be planned properly before going throuh with it.
Personally, I love the idea, and props for an amazing blog. Me guess the designer have played Twilight Imperium somewhat![Razz](/images/icon_razz.gif)
|
![SauronTheMage SauronTheMage](https://images.evetech.net/characters/396225904/portrait?size=64)
SauronTheMage
Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 20:09:00 -
[35]
Rev 2 is really sounding great. One concern I have though is the small bonus you get for fuel usage once you finally attain sov 4. Instead of raising it only 5% from 25% to 30%, wouldn't it be better to boost it to 40%-50% since it does take alot of work to get from Sov lvl 1 to sov lvl 4. This way the alliance can focus less on having to keep gathering fuel for their poses and focus more on pvp / production.
|
![Cailais Cailais](https://images.evetech.net/characters/822875380/portrait?size=64)
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 20:43:00 -
[36]
Looks very good indeed.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail |
![Fon Revedhort Fon Revedhort](https://images.evetech.net/characters/725614640/portrait?size=64)
Fon Revedhort
Aeria Gloris Inc United Legion
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 21:01:00 -
[37]
I like those pics ![Razz](/images/icon_razz.gif) ![Embarassed](/images/icon_redface.gif) ---
|
![Pepperami Pepperami](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1081265908/portrait?size=64)
Pepperami
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 21:03:00 -
[38]
First off, thanks for this, been waiting for this info great figures, they explain it really well. But I do have a couple of questions;
1) What happens if green tried to put pos up in pink's capital while it was invulnerable? Is that impossible? (ie, might it be good to set capital systems as the one with most moons?)
2) Also, what would happen if a corp who controls most/all pos in pink alliances capital system(only), but not the station itself, left and joined green alliance? Depending on the answer to 1 would the pos be destroyed or immediately unanchored, or would pink lose the system?
|
![stoats stoats](https://images.evetech.net/characters/806257594/portrait?size=64)
stoats
The Aftermath
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 21:14:00 -
[39]
So we're going to see capital systems (sov 4) with 10 capital assembly arrays a piece that are completely invulnerable pumping out supercaps. Fantastic.
|
![Vincent S Vincent S](https://images.evetech.net/characters/131253903/portrait?size=64)
Vincent S
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 21:26:00 -
[40]
Jesus christ just remove supercaps before the game is destroyed entirely, this will only make the supercap problem infinitely worse by making it possible to produce them essentially risk-free!
|
|
![Kazuo Ishiguro Kazuo Ishiguro](https://images.evetech.net/characters/903230203/portrait?size=64)
Kazuo Ishiguro
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 21:36:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Vincent S Jesus christ just remove supercaps before the game is destroyed entirely, this will only make the supercap problem infinitely worse by making it possible to produce them essentially risk-free!
Although this will make it easier to produce supercapitals, those same monsters will be able to bolster major offensives to take down constellation capitals. In that respect it's somewhat self-balancing. ------ Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant tanking |
![John McCreedy John McCreedy](https://images.evetech.net/characters/367184947/portrait?size=64)
John McCreedy
Caldari Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 22:01:00 -
[42]
Great changes and an excellently written blog but it still does not address the most fundemental reason for all the evils of the current soverignty system. POS Spammage. You still need 51% of the moons covered and this means exorbitant costs in terms of both outlay for the infrastructure and fuel costs.
Please don't misunderstand me here because I do like these changes but until POS spammage becomes a thing of the past, Soverignty wars will not change. Roll in with a large BS fleet and a Freighter or two, POS spam a system and bingo, you're back to square one and no amount of cyno inhibitors will stop an enemy Cap Fleet jumping in and then we're back to POS ping pong. At the very least, remove a Freighters ability to launch a POS, forcing people to use Haulers to drop them.
But I realy think you need to re-examine the entire way soverignty is worked. Prehaps a Soverignty tower? Like I say, good first step but it needs to go further.
Make a Difference
|
![NovaPod NovaPod](https://images.evetech.net/characters/928058277/portrait?size=64)
NovaPod
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 22:14:00 -
[43]
lol now its already a isk and timeintensive thing to even get one system when your enemy is dedicated with posspamming and what not..and now we are supposed to pos spam/attack several systems at once to break constellation while they have their goodies in a capital during all the time..then 7 grace days? I nstead of taking a look into a more fluid situation in 0.0 we get to play team fortress or something in every constellation without any results..the current powerhouses get some tools to put themself into the situation to be able to hold with a quite low number of people (titan jumpbridges posgates) their space against better/more enemies. 0.0 should be king of the hill and its right now with titan usage a coldwar for certain alliances and nerfs to titan (which are now possible cause the big war is over with the right victor right?) we get WordWar I type of action with this comingchanges with the right alliance waiting in the trenches.
|
![Holy Cheater Holy Cheater](https://images.evetech.net/characters/901566876/portrait?size=64)
Holy Cheater
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 22:27:00 -
[44]
Looks like EVE will fall into POS wars ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif)
|
![Bruno Bonner Bruno Bonner](https://images.evetech.net/characters/692151794/portrait?size=64)
Bruno Bonner
Gallente Lutin Group
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 22:43:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Seleene I just wanna have a bigger gas tank on the towers!!! ![Crying or Very sad](/images/icon_cry.gif) ![Crying or Very sad](/images/icon_cry.gif) ![Crying or Very sad](/images/icon_cry.gif)
/signed
This will be the only problem with the new sovereignity system....fuel bays on the towers are not big enough to the new timeframes you are required to achieve in order for each sov-upgrade to become effective.
Either double the fuel bay size, or effectively cut all the fuel requirements by half (which would be much more welcomed given the fact fueling POS is one of the most boring activities in EvE).
regards Bruno ------ aka BinderAJ |
![Tipz NexAstrum Tipz NexAstrum](https://images.evetech.net/characters/615734854/portrait?size=64)
Tipz NexAstrum
Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 23:05:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Tipz NexAstrum on 13/06/2007 23:10:28
Originally by: ForceM This apparently means that you can save on fuel cost for the starbases in the capital system right? .. as you do not need any guns there. And as soon as your constellation gets contested you have more then enough time to online a few guns.
Excellent point.
Two things I'm wondering about are 1) It's a good amount of stuff to keep track of, is there anything planned to let an alliance check it's claims and current sovereignty level? Like a new tab in the alliance that lists constellations you hold sovereignty in and a breakdown from there listing the individual systems and their sovereignty levels? It'd be nice to have a count down timer in there to help keep track of when the next sovereignty level hits considering this could play out over the course of months. 2) When this is implemented, will the timers start at zero or take into account the existing days of sovereignty?
(edit)
Originally by: Bruno Bonner
Originally by: Seleene I just wanna have a bigger gas tank on the towers!!!
Either double the fuel bay size, or effectively cut all the fuel requirements by half
Isn't that what those faction towers are for? Granted you need to be rolling in isk for it to be an option...
-------------------------------------------
|
![SauronTheMage SauronTheMage](https://images.evetech.net/characters/396225904/portrait?size=64)
SauronTheMage
Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.06.13 23:36:00 -
[47]
From what I've been told, although it could change.... every system that has sov in it will get sov lvl 1 when rev 2 hits. There is a possibility that the systems could start as high as sov lvl 2, saving 3 weeks of upgrade time.
|
![Exco Executor Exco Executor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/416956503/portrait?size=64)
Exco Executor
Occam's Razor Combine R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 00:08:00 -
[48]
Quote: we are looking into putting limits to the claiming mechanics, which have been touched upon by TomB, but this would be the subject of another blog
Now this is something what could change everything, and I hope CCP uses their imagination well on this. Why not to have distance limits on sove as well number limits?
www.occam-razor.com
|
![Exco Executor Exco Executor](https://images.evetech.net/characters/416956503/portrait?size=64)
Exco Executor
Occam's Razor Combine R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 00:20:00 -
[49]
Originally by: ForceM
I can imagine this being a good option to build all your capital ships in the Capital
Systems with Gallente outposts will most likely be new Capital ship construction locations, as you can get upgrade to Gallente version what speeds up your Capital component production up to 60%...
www.occam-razor.com
|
![insolace insolace](https://images.evetech.net/characters/960066624/portrait?size=64)
insolace
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 00:37:00 -
[50]
Does CCP intend to continue it's policy of only documenting these features in informal dev-blogs and patch notes? It would be nice to actually have a reference for players to go to rather than having to dig through blogs and hope you haven't missed a more recent revision of how the game mechanics work.
One of the most frustrating things about this game is not knowing what the game mechanics are, not having them available to us, and then having them used against you by someone who has figured it out years before you started playing.
Remember back when creating a cyno field made you invulnerable until one day this "bug" was "fixed"? Where would I go now to learn the mechanics of dropping a cyno field? Shouldn't there be a cross index in the item database that explains how things work?
|
|
![Tyrrax Thorrk Tyrrax Thorrk](https://images.evetech.net/characters/144870255/portrait?size=64)
Tyrrax Thorrk
Amarr Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 00:37:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Tyrrax Thorrk on 14/06/2007 00:36:39
Quote: Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked
Does this include modules that are outside the shields, f.i. cyno jammers or can guns/ecm/cyno jammers still be destroyed in capital systems ?
Quote: Sovereignty in the Capital system cannot be lost (or contested) while Sovereignty 4 is in effect
Nice so you can use an 80 moon system as your capital and only have 1 POS claiming sov ![Very Happy](/images/icon_biggrin.gif)
|
![Max Teranous Max Teranous](https://images.evetech.net/characters/765566256/portrait?size=64)
Max Teranous
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 00:57:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk Nice so you can use an 80 moon system as your capital and only have 1 POS claiming sov ![Very Happy](/images/icon_biggrin.gif)
And really, really hope that someone doesn't forget to fuel it ! ![Laughing](/images/icon_lol.gif)
Max ![Cool](/images/icon_cool.gif)
--------------------
|
![Omber Zombie Omber Zombie](https://images.evetech.net/characters/156565803/portrait?size=64)
Omber Zombie
Gallente Frontier Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 01:02:00 -
[53]
great blog ---------------------- sig out of order, returning soon FTEK | Production ~ Research ~ Sales ~ Election Fixing |
![Cringeley Cringeley](https://images.evetech.net/characters/958865748/portrait?size=64)
Cringeley
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 02:43:00 -
[54]
I know you're not used to hearing nice things from goons, but I think you have some really, really nice, interesting new features here, that will hopefully bring fascinating new subtlety to an aspect of the game that had become a bit of a capital sledgehammering contest.
Well done.
|
![Erotic Irony Erotic Irony](https://images.evetech.net/characters/281011440/portrait?size=64)
Erotic Irony
RONA Deepspace
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 03:47:00 -
[55]
Originally by: insolace Does CCP intend to continue it's policy of only documenting these features in informal dev-blogs and patch notes? It would be nice to actually have a reference for players to go to rather than having to dig through blogs and hope you haven't missed a more recent revision of how the game mechanics work.
Nothing consequential will ever change on the documentation front. It's a nonpolicy really and the number one reason why Eve remains a niche game.
On the topic of the devblog, we need some more information on any other changes to the POS mechanics; is reinforced mode being tweaked or tower bonuses being enhanced? ___ Junkie Beverage: i use your tears to cyno in my laughter
|
![Solbright altaltalt Solbright altaltalt](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1107683257/portrait?size=64)
Solbright altaltalt
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 04:40:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Erotic Irony Nothing consequential will ever change on the documentation front. It's a nonpolicy really and the number one reason why Eve remains a niche game.
The lack of docs are so not a problem. Sure it would make life easier but is no where near a game breaker. Being able to play at all is the real killer.
Btw: This blog was very clear in it's details. Top notch documenting. LeMousse is a keeper! :)
|
![gordon cain gordon cain](https://images.evetech.net/characters/879819883/portrait?size=64)
gordon cain
Minmatar x13 Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 05:10:00 -
[57]
How on earth will this prevent POS spamming and server from overloading. I am not much into this POS thing, but the way I see it, Tower will be going up everywhere.
Gordon Cain "Allways remember. Never argue with idiots, they will just drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience"
|
![Ralitge boyter Ralitge boyter](https://images.evetech.net/characters/1766106585/portrait?size=64)
Ralitge boyter
Minmatar Mordus Angels
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 07:44:00 -
[58]
I have the feeling this will only make it easier for the main alliances to claim and hold systems.
If one can have multiple capitol systems (one in every constilation) We will soon enough see 0.0 claimed by one or two alliances. The reason for this is that the need to defend systems is only getting smaller and smaller, with twined jump systems one will see tactical highways between regions and critical systems.
I predict that within a month or 4 all of the 0.0 systems will be officialy owned by an alliance. In about a year and a half 0.0 will be owned by one or two alliances. Though I like the ideas I fear that CCP is just providing more options to the current power houses and making it harder for starting corps and alliances to take hold of their corner of the universe.
------------------------------------------- Should you disagree with me, well I guess that is because I disagree with you. If you have a problem with that please feel free not to tell me. |
![Artean Artean](https://images.evetech.net/characters/151469318/portrait?size=64)
Artean
Minmatar North Star Networks Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 07:53:00 -
[59]
Oh, this makes me wanna play EVE again. ........ There's a thin line between professional gate camping and just standing by a gate looking like an idiot... |
![Malachon Draco Malachon Draco](https://images.evetech.net/characters/638410534/portrait?size=64)
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.06.14 08:57:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Ralitge boyter I have the feeling this will only make it easier for the main alliances to claim and hold systems.
If one can have multiple capitol systems (one in every constilation) We will soon enough see 0.0 claimed by one or two alliances. The reason for this is that the need to defend systems is only getting smaller and smaller, with twined jump systems one will see tactical highways between regions and critical systems.
I predict that within a month or 4 all of the 0.0 systems will be officialy owned by an alliance. In about a year and a half 0.0 will be owned by one or two alliances. Though I like the ideas I fear that CCP is just providing more options to the current power houses and making it harder for starting corps and alliances to take hold of their corner of the universe.
Well, it depends on a few things.
1. How many systems can have level 4 sovereignty for 1 alliance? If its just 1, the capital, then its less of a problem.
2. Another downside will be that you need a LOT of POSses, and keep them all fueled. Even the best corps/alliances out there in terms of logistics will screw up every once and again. I remember even a BoB system in Delve I think losing sov a few weeks back I think. There is a limit to where you can push POS-managers, and if you increase the number to reduce the workload, you greatly increase the possibility of spies.
3. I agree with Seleene, please increase the fueltanks on POSses, or reduce the amount of fuel it uses.
4. And I would still advocate moving all sovereignty claiming POSses to planets instead of moons. That way you help the determined defender (easier to cover all sov positions with towers to protect themselves) and the determined attacker (defender can no longer spam 50 moons and force attacker to sit in dreads for a week solid to clear them all).
------------------------------------------------ Murphy's Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold, makes the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |