These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Galatea] First batch of sov capture iterations

First post First post
Author
Kaal Redrum
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#201 - 2015-08-19 04:12:26 UTC
Pancocco wrote:
On a serious matter this kinda removes legit speed doctrines from being a thing in entosis fights


Please show me your 'doctrine' that does over 4kms. You meant a swarm of **** fit trollcepters/other frigs, didn't you? :D
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#202 - 2015-08-19 04:17:39 UTC
OldWolf69 wrote:
Orca Platypus wrote:
OldWolf69 wrote:
Fozzie.
What if ppl STILL won't come to TAKE the Sov effectively? Because they won't. WHY in the blue hell would you expose yourself to trolling, and spend a LOT of isk too, if you can be the troll, and this for peanuts?
http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
This speaks for itself.
You still think your game is kept alive by 2 trolling small gang runners? Or 2-3 forum yellers? or they are just a convenable way to justify bad decisions/total lack of imagination?
....saw a lot of imbecility in corporate ranks. A great lot. But this batch beats them all. I suppose this is because they had ENOUGH things to destroy. And the corporation owners do not give a **** about it.
Once again: there is absolutely no real reasons to fight except the economical ones. Or trolling ones. EVERYBODY knows Sov is work, and will be actually worser after all this ****. THIS is a GAME, not a JOB.
WE all know you CCP boyz are out of ideeas. Presuming you had some back in time. Ok, HIRE someone able to fix the sandbox. It does cost? Stupidity does cost a lot. CCP lost already more than a good team of Devs does cost. It's already REALLY close to a point of no return, for this game. Every change is fun for exactly 3 days here, like the orthodox wonders. Hallelujah!
LolLolLol

This is really bad posting, but I have to say it: Delicious subgewn tears.
Less bot/multicast accs being bad? No, except if you're gewn, then yes.
If holding sov makes you cry, you should not hold sov. Fairly obvious, unless your density is in "gewn or worse" range.
If you think the troll has it so nice, why aren't you trolling yet?
If a gewn/subgewn quits, good riddance.
Can I have your stuff?

Actually, i don't ratt or bot. Or PvE. And yes, maybe you can BUY my stuff.
Ooooops, can't afford it? See, there's where the real tears are.
LolLolLol

Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaase. You're SMA, you do nothing but ratting, botting or PvE, because when you try to PvP it inevitably turns into entertainment for everyone seeing the battle reports.
And it is indeed hilarious knowing I can afford both your stuff and probably your butt.
Keep the tears coming please, chef! Delicious!
Hendrink Collie
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#203 - 2015-08-19 04:18:55 UTC
OldWolf69 wrote:
Hendrink Collie wrote:

Words

Reasonable.


Thanks, I was trying to come across reasonable and not too grr gewn, hat gewn. At the end of the day, I want what any reasonable person wants... an active, healthy null environment. We just have different opinions on how to get there. Smile
OldWolf69
Militaris Industries
Northern Coalition.
#204 - 2015-08-19 04:20:45 UTC  |  Edited by: OldWolf69
[/quote]
Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaase. You're SMA, you do nothing but ratting, botting or PvE, because when you try to PvP it inevitably turns into entertainment for everyone seeing the battle reports.
And it is indeed hilarious knowing I can afford both your stuff and probably your butt.
Keep the tears coming please, chef! Delicious![/quote]
...why so loud then, dude? Send me the cash.LolLolLol
Wilhelm Knicklicht
Nasty-Boyz
Templis CALSF
#205 - 2015-08-19 04:24:43 UTC
OldWolf69 wrote:
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:
Amy Garzan wrote:


News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?

Think that over.


the bills will be picked up by the next generation of new players who will actually keep playing the game because there's actually fun to be had even without owning titans. next question.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
...this can be seen by the enormous number of new accounts created, isn't it? (presuming i won't consider that there's a 8/2 ratio of alts/new players in that statistic ;) )


of course it would be nice to see player numbers quadruple over night. but that would not be a realistic expectation. dominion sov has been in place for six years. aegis not even six weeks. give it some time...
twit brent
Never Not AFK
#206 - 2015-08-19 04:36:50 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:
Reagalan wrote:
Won't do jack **** to a system that is fundamentally and critically flawed and unsalvageable.

Until you get off of this "small gang" and "local conflict" soapbox the decline of Eve will continue. We didn't sign up for small gang impermanent bullshit and we detest your attempts to force this playstyle upon us.



More goon BLOB ...

just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now
Y-C3EQ
7RM-N0
GA-P6C

the biggest advantage we have SPEED is taken away.... so they can just roll BLOBS onto the grid. BLOB BLOB BLOB.... back to n+1 fighting


Instead of MOA whining ...we are going to ADAPT (like the big blocs should do) and try our best.


IMO however this is a mistake , only a few weeks of this system has been in place and its already being changed to suit the power bloc whiners.



So you are saying that someone who responds to attack then controls the grid shouldn't be able to defend their space? Maybe you are whats wrong with eve.
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
#207 - 2015-08-19 04:41:01 UTC
Troll-ceptor argument (generally) vindicated = Check

Also, very awesome idea for eliminating Defender Entosis maintenance.

Concerned about reference to ship limitations on Entosis Link, sounds like Capital Ship discrimination in the making :tinfoil:

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf

Marcus Covinus
The Blood Ankhs
#208 - 2015-08-19 04:46:12 UTC
A swing and a miss indeed!

Sov requires that you put some skin in the game. Let's review what it took to take sov away from someone through the ages of eve.

***

Iteration 1: Tower Sov

Implementation: You had to have a higher percentage of moons towered in the system than anyone else to hold sov.

What did it take to capture: A fleet of battleships or dreads to go through each moon to strip/reinforce each tower. You couldn't do it with frigates as the tower would shred you.

Value at Risk: Billions

***

Iteration 2: Dominion Sov

Implementation: You need a TCU anchored and online in the system.

What did it take to capture: 51% of the gates in had to have a Sovereignty Blockade Units on them in order to make the system vulnerable and then you had to field enough DPS to take the structures down..

***

Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov

Implementation: TCU anchored and online in the system.

What does it take to capture: An interceptor with an entosis link.

***

Now do we see a problem here? You've gone the route of World Of Warcraft by slowly pandering to the lowest common denominator. You see smug bullsh*t like https://eveskunk.com/e/353067497 where the sole goal is to troll sov and create nodes with no intention of capture. (Yes I am calling MOA lowest common denominator)

Recommendation: Entosis Link fits on Cruiser or larger hull only. Like a cyno, it restricts your movement. You've stated yourself.

Quote:
You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie
Kystraz
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#209 - 2015-08-19 04:48:56 UTC
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:
OldWolf69 wrote:
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:
Amy Garzan wrote:


News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?

Think that over.


the bills will be picked up by the next generation of new players who will actually keep playing the game because there's actually fun to be had even without owning titans. next question.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
...this can be seen by the enormous number of new accounts created, isn't it? (presuming i won't consider that there's a 8/2 ratio of alts/new players in that statistic ;) )


of course it would be nice to see player numbers quadruple over night. but that would not be a realistic expectation. dominion sov has been in place for six years. aegis not even six weeks. give it some time...


With the way player subscription numbers are dropping, we're more likely to see 1/4 of the old player base before we see 4x the old player base.

But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.
Desaude
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#210 - 2015-08-19 04:54:34 UTC
Kystraz wrote:
[quote=Wilhelm Knicklicht][quote=OldWolf69][quote=Wilhelm Knicklicht][quote=Amy Garzan]

But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.


The best part of this is that no matter how many times we talk at the walls, we still expect a response...
Cyonsiaros StrawHat
Distributed Denial of Service
#211 - 2015-08-19 04:57:54 UTC
Can you make it so big fat ships capture nodes more quickly and small ships capture at a slower pace? ; Could that be the balance implemented so a quick cap has inheriently more risk and a cap by non-threatening small ships takes longer?


Maybe let ships be supported while entosising and allow select escalations. Even small entities have access to fat ships, even if they don't have bodies to fill hundreds. my concern is escalating loses its rhyme and reason; but if one attack had fat ships and was higher priority it might allow eve to retain that property.

At its root; the current state of the system implemented in theory would break up large fleets into smaller wings requiring many fc's or many chickens running around without heads. But that to me does not translate into the small gang conflicts and pvp that most players enjoy. The infrastructure alliances and corps small and large have built over the years typically supports large fleets with a hand full of individuals pulling the strings and using many ships as an extension of their mind as to be a general at war.

I understand that in theory smaller entities are supposed to claim a single plot in null and have odds of keeping it - but I don't know how much that will actually happen. For instance in my alliance there is many many fresh bodies who can act and react to the stimulous of an attack - as part of a numbers game. it is also well divded into various land parcels by corp which can make things easier and the SIG structure allows many operations to occur simultaneously throughout eve with enough bodies in the corporation home systems to react to stimulous.

Rather I don't see entosis as a threat; the preparation months prior and continued direction of my alliance makes any sov a non issue. On the other hand I could imagine the less than recent provi-bloc conflicts would have eneded very differently under entosis based gameplay in favor of Brave - which is interesting to think about in that fight on the other end of EVE.

I also think; someone with an idea; a method, an ambition who can rouse troops can start an entitity and make an impact under entosis. A large upstart could turn into an empire now more than ever; but they won't rest on their laurels; they will fight tooth and nail to keep it.. ( That is an interesting Idea and why sov changes can be healthy for the game )

But who wants to hire Black legion or Pandemic Legion frigates?

I am looking forward to a balance in the game and hope ccp can find one where escalations exist, new upstarts have a chance to fulfill their dreams and EVE players, who are all susceptible to burnout (due to the most inherently passive game ever) will be able to continue playing without growing disdain.

I don't claim my ideas or feelings reflect anyone elses thoughts other than my own theories. People dislike the current state of affairs for differing reasons; people have different observations and visions of where the game should be. My observations come from a series of changes over the summer and not just from the most recent implementation.

Gessiel
The Graduates
The Initiative.
#212 - 2015-08-19 04:58:15 UTC
There are rare battles, but only for people looking for good fights. Putting a patch on this worthless FozzieSov is like putting a bandage on a migrane. Worthless.
Have you noticed all prices are escalatinng downwards? Why even mine? When there were great battles, great ship loss, the hi sec people kept busy mining and manufacturing to replace them. But now........pffft.

I'm not a dev, but can't you see you are driving people away from the game with this? People want fights, people in null sec want to use big ships, we've been training them for ever. We want to go on deployments, but NO, keep those indexes up. We want to roam and get into battles, sov or no sov......but I've scoured 25 systems and not red/neut to be found.

Sad day.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#213 - 2015-08-19 05:04:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Sentamon
Kystraz wrote:

But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.


From a sound business standpoint you'd want new people paying subs and having fun, not old, mostly offline players, drowning in ISK and in their own tears.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Kystraz
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#214 - 2015-08-19 05:10:39 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Kystraz wrote:

But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.


From a sound business standpoint you'd want new people paying subs and having fun, not old, mostly offline players, drowning in ISK and in their own tears.


Games that are being abandoned en mass by the old players who were told they were playing the game wrong are totally the first ones new players are attracted to.
Alphaomega21
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2015-08-19 05:15:21 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Kystraz wrote:

But I guess Fozzie wants a smaller player base for his smaller fights.


From a sound business standpoint you'd want new people paying subs and having fun, not old, mostly offline players, drowning in ISK and in their own tears.


I don't think you realize that every sub is money in CCP's pockets be it $15 a month or buying a plex on the market since someone had to pay CCP for that plex.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#216 - 2015-08-19 05:29:03 UTC
Quote:
You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie
Clearly someone hasn't been paying attention as to how Entosis links are being used.

Your little speed nerf is just that - Little.
Entosis link drawback - Unable to active prop mods, speed limited to 100 m/s (A bit harsh? Sure but so is what Entosis links can do)

The only way Entosis link use can be balanced is to actually balance it, you don't do that by pandering to the existing meta. As long as bubble immune speedster ceptors can fit Entosis links without any real drawback, sov will be nothing more than troll central.
You stated you listened to feedback, you omitted to add you also chose to ignore it.
-- - -- - -- - -- - -- - --
Entosis links SHOULD have ship restrictions.
They are without doubt the strongest command link in the game and so should be restricted to ships that can by design fit command links. Battle cruisers (T1 entosis link), Command ships (T2 Entosis link).

This would actually serve 2 outcomes, 1 would be making Battle cruisers a valid ship class to use, 2 force those who want to grief/troll sov to commit more than a solo ceptor.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#217 - 2015-08-19 05:31:21 UTC
Marcus Covinus wrote:

Iteration 1: Tower Sov

***

Iteration 2: Dominion Sov

***

Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov

I think what you've missed is that in each iteration, there were two bars to pass.

One was the mechanical. As you stated, you couldn't take down a tower with an Interceptor.

The other though, was the defence. You also needed enough ships to take down the sov holder.

Sov has just lowered the mechanical bar - it hasn't touched the defence. For all the whining about absentee attackers, it doesn't get pointed out enough that Aegis has removed the opposite: absentee defenders no longer require a Dread fleet investment to take down some arbitrary millions of HP.
TrickyBlackSteel
Iron Mining and Industy Fleet
#218 - 2015-08-19 05:51:48 UTC
**** you all and your patch!
Warmeister
Tactically Challenged
Tactical Supremacy
#219 - 2015-08-19 05:57:27 UTC
troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.

if each system the alliance owns actually had someone there for the duration of the vuln. window, then nobody would try and troll in a ceptor.

not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.

TrickyBlackSteel
Iron Mining and Industy Fleet
#220 - 2015-08-19 05:58:57 UTC
ccp mode troll online