These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#281 - 2015-08-19 10:04:19 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
yogizh wrote:
Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?

This change solves nothing.



What is a cerberus, bob? They will one or two shot them.

Or, you know, just get a faster ship and tackle it. Seems the easier way.



but seriously - mass change NEEDS to stay. It was the ONLY thing which invalidated the interdiction nulli complaints.
yogizh
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#282 - 2015-08-19 10:08:16 UTC  |  Edited by: yogizh
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:
yogizh wrote:
Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?

This change solves nothing.


Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples.


Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank.
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike
Northern Coalition.
#283 - 2015-08-19 10:15:04 UTC
yogizh wrote:
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:
yogizh wrote:
Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?

This change solves nothing.


Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples.


Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank.


Oh c'mon....what kind of comment is that? Just bring more ships than they have, how hard can it be! We live nearby TNT, you have Jabber, just ping for us and we'll come help you if you have problems getting nano-ships past enemies on your own Lol

Ex ex-CEO of Svea Rike [.S.R.]

bear mcgreedy
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#284 - 2015-08-19 10:21:27 UTC
i made it easy for you devs listening to the community... maybe this might be an aide for you ????

http://strawpoll.me/5252730

For those that don't read the first pages after 17 pages of text
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#285 - 2015-08-19 10:26:02 UTC
Marcus Covinus wrote:
A swing and a miss indeed!

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

***

Iteration 1: Tower Sov

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

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

Value at Risk: Billions

***

Iteration 2: Dominion Sov

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

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

***

Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov

Implementation: TCU anchored and online in the system.

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

***

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

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

Quote:
You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie

You are quoting the wrong fozzie.
Quote:
Drastically reduced time of uncontested sov capture - CCP Fozzie

Now go and contest it. If you have ANYTHING AT ALL on the grid, trollceptor is teeth-less. If you can't put stuff on the grid, stop crying, it's not fozziesov's problem.
Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
Pandemic Horde
#286 - 2015-08-19 10:26:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Speedkermit Damo
RatKnight1 wrote:
So, we can still fly trollceptors?

Yeah.

A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.

Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game.


Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday.

Interceptors online needs to go away.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#287 - 2015-08-19 10:29:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Orca Platypus
yogizh wrote:
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:
yogizh wrote:
Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?

This change solves nothing.


Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples.


Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank.


Because when you gewn, you gewn hard - I mean, jump bridges ceased to exist... when again?
Really, trust it to gewns to be afraid of rolling in their own region...

Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday.

Interceptors online needs to go away.

Delicious gewn tears. Keep it coming!
ED: In case someone misunderstands, the post above states "qqqq I can't kill a paper plane ship, nerf pls".
Marian Devers
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
#288 - 2015-08-19 10:31:12 UTC
> CCP introduces new mechanics
> Players adapt to new mechanics with unique fits
> CCP "No, don't use -those- fits, we didn't account for it"
> CCP bans new fits

Right, let's just skip the next 6 months of patches and fixes straight to the part where you give us a prefitted ship to entosis with. Because apparently, players have the gall to react to your introduced mechanics in unexpected ways.

P.S. if mechanics encourage certain fits, you don't ban the fits. You change the mechanics!
Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
Pandemic Horde
#289 - 2015-08-19 10:31:39 UTC
I also like the irony of the architects of burn Jita and hulkageddon whining the most about trolling.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Koebmand
Silverflames
#290 - 2015-08-19 10:36:54 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
The only thing proven about Dominion is that it's been slowly but surely killing EVE's fun and subscriber count since launch.


Correct me if wrong but ..

Dominion was released in 2009.

Eve subscriber count grows steadily until 2013.

Does not look like Dominion caused fading numbers.
Andre Lvov
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#291 - 2015-08-19 10:42:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. With vacation season winding down here in Iceland, we're fast approaching the first release since the Aegis Sovereignty deployment: Galatea on August 25th.

Galatea will contain the first (and definitely not the last) set of updates to the sov capture system released in Aegis, thanks in large part to your excellent feedback and observations we've made of the first few weeks of the new system on Tranquility. This first set of adjustments is focused on the capture times and maximum number of Command Nodes, as well as some tweaks to the Entosis Link penalties itself.

The first and most significant change in this release is that we are reducing the base capture time of Structure Command Nodes from 10 minutes to 4 minutes, and Station Services from 5 minutes to 4 minutes. This means the capture times for these structures will range from a minimum of 4 minutes (for defenders and when the multiplier is at its base of 1) to a maximum of 24 minutes (for attackers against a 6x multiplier structure). This change only applies to Command Nodes and Station Services, NOT to the initial reinforcement of a sov structure (which keep their current base capture time of 10 minutes).

To help ensure that defenders maintain a robust but fair advantage, we are also starting the defending alliance off with 60% control in the overall event tug of war when nodes start spawning. This means that an uncontested defense will now require capture of 8 nodes at 4 minutes (plus warmup) a piece, down from 10x10 before. In total, the fastest possible defense would require 4 players and 12 minutes post-Galatea, compared to 5 players and 24 minutes pre-Galatea.

To help reduce the clutter that builds up in lower value systems when capture events are left for extended periods of time uncontested, we are also reducing the cap on total nodes that can spawn per structure from 20 to 10. We are also reducing the spawn rate of randomly appearing extra nodes by approximately 50% (this second part only applies to the randomly spawning extra nodes, not the the nodes that spawn instantly when old ones are completed).

We are also making an adjustment to the penalties on the Entosis Link module itself. The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s. This means that the normal subwarp engines of a ship with an Entosis Link fitted will never accelerate it past 4000m/s. This limit was chosen to have the smallest possible impact on ships fit for engagement and combat while having a larger impact on the escapability of evasion fits than the mass penalty.

We are also releasing the first batch of Sov UI little things, which CCP Punkturis and CCP Sharq sourced from your feedback in this thread. These changes include an overview of sov data in the constellation show-info window, direct access to the default vulnerability timer and a new region column in the sov dashboard and improved tooltips in the infrastructure hub UI. Punkturis is continuing to work on improving the sov UI and we encourage people to keep posting their requests in the little things thread.

Finally this release also contains a number of bug fixes, some of which are quite visible (Alliance logos once again appearing in space on the TCU) and others which improve handling of rare edge cases (such as alliances disbanding mid-fight) and back-end code.

The Galatea is just the beginning of our commitment to iterating and improving nullsec and sov. We are hard at work on the changing coming in future releases, including formal methods for dropping sov, the ability to turn IHub upgrades on and off, updates to the formula for calculating activity defense multipliers, new PVE experiences for sov nullsec and much more. Nullsec and Sov remain our focus here at Team Five 0 and we'll be continuing to update you on progress as we go forward. We are listening to your feedback and continuing to observe the results of our changes as we make them.

These Galatea changes will also obviously not be the final changes to the capture mechanics themselves. We have some changes we know we want to make (like partially captured structures returning to defender control at a slow constant regeneration pace to reduce the need for "maintenance linking") and others that we don't want to rule out but that also need more investigation and internal/external discussion before making final decisions (such as ship restrictions on Entosis Links). Thanks to everyone who's been providing constructive feedback so far, we hope you'll continue.

Thanks everyone, and good hunting!


CCP Fozzie - ASSASSIN EVE ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

FOZZISOV -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHcXlyhgzHM LOOOOOOOOOOLLL

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437423

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
Pandemic Horde
#292 - 2015-08-19 10:52:01 UTC
Alphaomega21 wrote:
If you want to truly fix the sovereignty system once and for all remove it completely and base who's name is on the map by the alliance who has the greatest number of pilots out in space. Then you can start working on the problem of making 0.0 worth fighting over. Maybe by buffing moons so alliances can have an income source that is worth taking.


Best post of the month

+1

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Wolfensrevenge
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#293 - 2015-08-19 10:57:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Wolfensrevenge
Suitonia wrote:
Allawa Phantom wrote:
like what the **** kind of fix is this? 4K isnt a limit most ships you cant even get to 4K. Even with an over-sized propmod.

What CCP has done here is made Torll Ceptors More Trolly. The 4M limit will INCREASE the amount of Troll Hacking Which is the UNDER LYING PROBLEM with this sov system.


An Atron with a single overdrive can break 4km/s, and catch troll ceptors now.



Not when the troll ceptor is already 300 km off the node by the time you land and his cycle is about to end and then he cloaks lofl.....Have you played eve???


You can just burn away as soon as someone comes in local to defend. No risk for attacker at all


BTW i found a way to stop troll T3's that are interdiction nullified and cloaky...But I was warned that i would be banned if i continued....Thanks CCP fun times.

Here is a good pic of the drone sphere around the gate that worked very well at (Controlling our space ) but I guess im only allowed to control who comes in and out of my space as long as it does not include PvP immune ships that are trolling my stations and stealing my sites.
I recommend this for fun. Drone sphere
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#294 - 2015-08-19 10:58:54 UTC



Stop trying to claim more space than you can defend, you bunch of bads.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#295 - 2015-08-19 11:00:26 UTC
Wolfensrevenge wrote:
You can just burn away as soon as someone comes in local to defend. No risk for attacker at all


I wasn't aware you LIVED in a system whilst NOT being there. That's some impressive shitposting right there.

There is no risk for an attacker if no-one is there. WORKING AS INTENDED.
Atum' Ra
Nomen-illis-Legio
#296 - 2015-08-19 11:02:34 UTC
Fozzie is that a joke?
Where the real changes?
The creation of alliance cost 1 billion
One system cost 1 ceptor (about 50 millions)
Where is logic?

Speed of ceptors was 4000-5400 m/s
You are doing just 4000
O_o
WTF?
Entosis must be only at capitall class even BS is not good for that!

Claim is a serious business! Enterance which SHOULD COST TWICE as expensive than the low-sec pvp and POS wars.
High-sec 1.0 (base)
Low-sec x2.0
Nul-sec x4.0
WH x8.0

Everything else too: the war, the yield, the taxes etc.
Where the stages of evolution?
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#297 - 2015-08-19 11:09:00 UTC
Gessiel wrote:
but I've scoured 25 systems and not red/neut to be found.


But how many blues?
Atum' Ra
Nomen-illis-Legio
#298 - 2015-08-19 11:09:22 UTC
afkalt wrote:

Stop trying to claim more space than you can defend, you bunch of bads.


Stop atack the space which you can't claim. Only trololo ceptor you can and nothig more!
Create an alliance, gather the fleet, build carriers in low-sec and attack!
Wolfensrevenge
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#299 - 2015-08-19 11:10:31 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Wolfensrevenge wrote:
You can just burn away as soon as someone comes in local to defend. No risk for attacker at all


I wasn't aware you LIVED in a system whilst NOT being there. That's some impressive shitposting right there.

There is no risk for an attacker if no-one is there. WORKING AS INTENDED.



If the system has no stations can you live there ??? Is that the new meta just staying in the same ship in a pos or cloaked all day in a system that is not suitable for CTA formups I guess we should have people AFK cloaked in every system we have any pos in. EVE do you Play it ???? You are the cancer killing this game.
Warmeister
Tactically Challenged
Tactical Supremacy
#300 - 2015-08-19 11:10:59 UTC
Sjugar02 wrote:

Would you like to explain to the uninformed masses why PL doesn't have or want sov and how this relates to you defending the new sov system?

what makes you think i'm speaking on behalf of PL? also what makes you think that me defending new sov has anything to do with me being in PL or with PL allegedly not having and not wanting sov?