| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ikar Kaltin
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
   |
Posted - 2008.06.06 20:21:00 -
[61]
Ok, lets put this simply. CCP put a thread in general discussion i believe it was, asking for suggestions on improving the sov system.
CCP have understood their is a problem. They have asked for an opinion. They are considering this. This thread is copletly unnecessary and if brought up in iceland ccp will say "well we have asked for player opinion, we have recognised this is a problem, we are trying to fix it....what more do you expect?"
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 20:25:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Ikar Kaltin
Ok, lets put this simply. CCP put a thread in general discussion i believe it was, asking for suggestions on improving the sov system.
CCP have understood their is a problem. They have asked for an opinion. They are considering this. This thread is copletly unnecessary and if brought up in iceland ccp will say "well we have asked for player opinion, we have recognised this is a problem, we are trying to fix it....what more do you expect?"
Yup, and this thread suggests that the CSM inquire as to where that revamp is headed so player input can continue to be a part of how it is fixed. Definitely something the playerbase should be represented on.
|
Vantras
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 20:49:00 -
[63]
PErhaps you could repost the <issue> then.
"Check with CCP to follow up on thier stated intention as outlined in a previous Dev. post to revamp Sov."
That appears to be the standard Star Fraction reply when thier agenda gets challenged. "whats wrong with just bringing it up". This of course only surfaces after thier very specific Star Fraction friendly suggestion is assaulted and picked apart.
Well why not phrase your issues as "just going to bring this general topic up". Its your specific approach that every problem must be solved with a Star Fraction play style friendly solution that is the real concern. Add to it that Jade gives blanket approval to such ideas and we have ourselves a problem.
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 22:47:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Vantras
PErhaps you could repost the <issue> then.
"Check with CCP to follow up on thier stated intention as outlined in a previous Dev. post to revamp Sov."
I'd be happy to update the OP to clarify this point.
However I think the only biases you're revealing are your own. I'm very happy to have a vigorous discussion about the positives and negatives of the current Sov system and how they might be improved upon, especially in light of what we've seen from the Devs so far about what they're thinking. But you have to get past your ingame political views to really have it be productive.
|
Vantras
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 23:53:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Vantras on 06/06/2008 23:54:25
MY in game views? The only changes i see Star Fraction and Jade actively championing directly benefit Star Fraction gameplay.
I am perfectly happy to see change that makes life tougher on the CVA. We do what we do and will adapt-always have.
I do think bad ideas are just that-bad ideas. Changes to SOV are fine with me-but I disagree with your changes.
Destructible outposts-while not my first choice of things for the CSM chair to become zealous about are fine with me-as long as the changes balance both the investment in constructing and maintaining the outpost vs. taking it. (ie. make it tough to blow it up, cost isk, cost 30-60 days) time. If you can take it and you can hold it against counter attack for 1-2 months-blow it up! I think its an awful idea and will erode 0.0 settlement but if the majority of the populace supports..que sera sera.
..and I am glad you will update the OP. I look forward to the clarification.
Now lets see Star Fraction get behind something that works counter to Star Fractions playstyle....
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 00:11:00 -
[66]
Vantras, the thing is it is you who are choosing to view every proposal and action on these forums through the lens of ingame corp.
All this thread is saying is that:
1) The balance of shiptype used to engage in Sov warfare is too far towards Capital ships and should be shifted toward the use of subcaps.
2) Blob warfare on a single grid is annoying and lag inducing and it would be a great solution to introduce split objectives so that multiple small gangs take the place of single large fleets.
3) POS logistics are a grind and constructing infrastructure has little to do with military dominance of territory.
You can't seem to resist bringing ingame politics into something like that, which is puzzling because these are completely apolitical points.
|
Farrqua
Turbo Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 01:15:00 -
[67]
Ok what stops 150 man PL, RA, GOON gangs hitting the same system at once. Each taking a gate. Another words each gang has 150 dudes in it and the Responding force is 200?
|
Vantras
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 04:41:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Kelsin
Vantras, the thing is it is you who are choosing to view every proposal and action on these forums through the lens of ingame corp.
All this thread is saying is that:
1) The balance of shiptype used to engage in Sov warfare is too far towards Capital ships and should be shifted toward the use of subcaps.
2) Blob warfare on a single grid is annoying and lag inducing and it would be a great solution to introduce split objectives so that multiple small gangs take the place of single large fleets.
3) POS logistics are a grind and constructing infrastructure has little to do with military dominance of territory.
You can't seem to resist bringing ingame politics into something like that, which is puzzling because these are completely apolitical points.
Id be happy to leave in game politics out if I felt for a moment that Star Fraction and specifically Jade was leaving in game politics out. His entire platform is based on his in game failures and frustrations. He is on record over and over and over indicating frustration at being unable to take out an Alliance or its assets. He is frustrated by this because after many attempts he has failed. So now we have this CSM program and noisy/posting Jade turns into Chairman Jade. We have the same noise, the same posts only this time he actually has an "official" role. The issues are the same, Jade is the same, its the format that concerns me.
If I saw Star Fraction or Jade supporting with vigor issues that were not directly in its own self interest perhaps I would feel differently. The fact that Jade is willing to expend so much of his credibility to ramrod through the outpost destruction thing (by every measure a minor point compared to the general "broken-ness" of huge portions of EVe-says much about in game vs. general state of the game motives.
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 15:04:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Vantras
Id be happy to leave in game politics out if I felt
And that is the long and short of it. I can't control your feelings and perspective, and it's up to you not to bring your personal biases to the table if you feel personal biases don't belong. There's not much more to it than that. You will always see ingame politics where it doesn't exist as long as you choose to keep feeling that way.
|
Spoon Thumb
Paladin Imperium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 16:33:00 -
[70]
Yes to the title of your thread. No thanks to what you actually propose in it
|
|
|
Farrqua
Turbo Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 16:33:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Farrqua
Ok what stops 150 man PL, RA, GOON gangs hitting the same system at once. Each taking a gate. Another words each gang has 150 dudes in it and the Responding force is 200?
Freindly bump.
Kelsin, I don't care what your motivations are, if any. I just had a question.
|
Stahlregen
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 21:35:00 -
[72]
Your proposal is ill-concieved and targeted towards appeasing a minority (A minority which Star Fraction is well known for championing, nonetheless) that would rather mope around forums *****ing about how hard it is to get a foot-hold in nullsec rather than doing what every other successful alliance has done in the past and actually go out and take it.
This proposal is as transparent as the rest of Star Fraction's agenda. Funny that, I could have sworn it was going to be the Goons that would try to subvert the CSM process to their own ends.
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:42:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Farrqua
Originally by: Farrqua
Ok what stops 150 man PL, RA, GOON gangs hitting the same system at once. Each taking a gate. Another words each gang has 150 dudes in it and the Responding force is 200?
Freindly bump.
Kelsin, I don't care what your motivations are, if any. I just had a question.
Hey sorry Farrqua, missed that. I'm not sure what you mean by "what stops" 3 big alliances from attacking the same system. In the example system I linked (which I'll reiterate is not what the CSM is taking to CCP, it's just there as an example) alliances lay claim to stargates in areas they frequent and when those claims are contested they have a certain amount of time to respond and re-assert their claim. If they don't return to re-assert the claim the stargate falls back to a neutral state.
So to answer your question it more depends on the long term presence of these forces - a single encounter in a single system isn't going to swing things one way or another, it's more the cumulative effect of an alliance's presence in an area. Nothing stops the scenario you're asking about from happening, but the long term effect is based on the presence of those alliances in the system over the long term.
|
Goumindong
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 14:57:00 -
[74]
I.E. Its ping pong.
"Guys, the owners of the station just depend on the long term occupancy! Its totally fine!"
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |