These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Please reduce the number of SOV timers

First post
Author
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#61 - 2016-03-18 15:15:16 UTC
RIP SMA o7

Noone will miss you.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#62 - 2016-03-18 15:19:38 UTC
Karishnikov wrote:
Too lazy to link quote, but you say there needs to be a level of commitment on the attackers. So prove me wrong on this, but in the last few weeks a full scale deployment has been going on, hangers shifted, markets stocked, logistical routes planned, Intel gathered, targets prepped, Reddit's spinned, and finally people given the keys to burn the sky. What you are experiencing is not a troll weekend entosis brigade. More effort goes into this than the entire state of your alliance, given how this war is going.

But I digress, you say there is a lack of commitment, then that may well be the case, but it is not from the opposition. BUT, you also use commitment as in actually wanting the space; now shocker, I want your space, not so I can mine in it or rat in it, but so you can cease to exist as an entity there. This is my commitment towards sov.
According to you we aren't defending our space, therefore if the people attacking it were actually committed to taking it from us we would not have it. Defenders have to respond to an attack because when they lose they lose their space, while if an attacker loses he loses whatever ships he chose to send in, which can be as low as a single frigate. It's for this exact reason CCP have scrapped entosis for citadels in favour of damage mitigation that forces a minimum force and likely will move sov into the same system once it's ironed out.

And yes, what we are seeing is just an entosis troll brigade, which is why the timers are only being taken if completely uncontested. Just because there's people reddit posting like their lives depended on it doesn't mean anything's actually being committed. If you were suddenly forced to abandon, the committed costs are zero and you would just walk away losing nothing.

It's amusing to me that you can't see that the reason you like these sov mechanics are they make it easy and practically risk free for you to force other people to react constantly. The thing is in the long run it would be better all round if you guys looked honestly at it and gave objective feedback and ideas, because at the end of the day CCP are going to deal with it eventually and they'll probably do it the way the usually do by completely trashing it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Kryptik Kai
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#63 - 2016-03-18 15:21:24 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Could the problem be else where and those no commitment attack just be a symptom? Is there any of those group actually interested in taking SOV? If they are not, what are the reasons? While attacking something just for the hell of it is totally a valid EVE gameplay, is it what this really is about? Villages not worth taking but we'll throw a flaming torch at the wall every night for the hell of it?

Something something "We're not here to ruin the game, we're here to ruin YOUR game"

Seriously tho, while wandsov isn't particularly inspired, its still better than the bs that came before it.

You (SMA) chose systems to claim. You chose the vulnerability windows. You're part of the largest coalition in the game. Get your shtako together.

"Shiny.  Lets be bad guys." -Jayne Cobb

Rob Kaichin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2016-03-18 15:27:31 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:


I figure the time difference is accounted for by an artist at CCP taking that first day to model the CCP character after the new CCP person. Because there's no way each and every CCP is so skilled at making their character in their likeness.

Going down my list of birth dates I see that there is, in fact, a CCP born date that falls within my criteria.

What are the odds?


Posting in a "Hunt the CCP" thread, get in here GSF, RIOT TIME!

/s

You should at least tell us which CCP it is so we can see if you get banned :).

As for 'nerf timers', you chose to live in an alliance that's shed it's PVPers for PVEers. Your alliance aimed for the situation you're in now.

You have to be in it to Winet, is all I'm saying.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#65 - 2016-03-18 15:27:40 UTC
Kryptik Kai wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Could the problem be else where and those no commitment attack just be a symptom? Is there any of those group actually interested in taking SOV? If they are not, what are the reasons? While attacking something just for the hell of it is totally a valid EVE gameplay, is it what this really is about? Villages not worth taking but we'll throw a flaming torch at the wall every night for the hell of it?

Something something "We're not here to ruin the game, we're here to ruin YOUR game"

Seriously tho, while wandsov isn't particularly inspired, its still better than the bs that came before it.

You (SMA) chose systems to claim. You chose the vulnerability windows. You're part of the largest coalition in the game. Get your shtako together.


Those comments coming from PH who didn't even defend 1 systems and moonwalked out BEFORE the announcement of our attack was made is pure gold. Can't you see the system at least have issue when your alliance decided to pack up and leave instead of even trying to defend it's systems? Why was reddit so proud of this? Was that move OP what you call "getting your shtako togethers"? I really want to know if you think that's how it's supposed to be done.
Cumbus Kanjus
Liga Freier Terraner
Northern Coalition.
#66 - 2016-03-18 15:28:16 UTC
Gloom skull Dethahal wrote:
......... Please, please reduce the number of sov vulnerability timers.

Thanks


isn't the number of sov vulnerability timers up to you?
and please dont forget there was a time when the mighty CFC created 50+ timers with SBUs. u could never save all of those timers. so how is that different now? only that now for the first time you are fighting a defence war and you cannot simply steamrol your enemy.
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#67 - 2016-03-18 15:29:30 UTC
Gloom skull Dethahal wrote:
I will add my voice to the many. Please, please reduce the number of sov vulnerability timers. Every day we log in, that's all we do is defend space. There's no time for anything else. I work and have a family life to enjoy.

At least with a paying job you get two days off. Take these vulnerability timers down to 3 days a week.

You'd developers must think there are hundreds of thousands of people playing this game. That or that we're all unemployed with nothing better to do. Reduce the timers for goodness sake.

Thanks


Have you ever come across the proverb "You can't have your cake and eat it"? I think this applies to SMA.
Bubba Phet
Perkone
Caldari State
#68 - 2016-03-18 15:32:51 UTC
Ah poor goons. Someone is playing the way they enjoy and it happens to **** you off at the same time? That sounds really familiar. Just remember you reap what you sow.

P.S. Yea I know op is in sma, but anyone in cfc is goons.
Kryptik Kai
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#69 - 2016-03-18 15:36:01 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Kryptik Kai wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Could the problem be else where and those no commitment attack just be a symptom? Is there any of those group actually interested in taking SOV? If they are not, what are the reasons? While attacking something just for the hell of it is totally a valid EVE gameplay, is it what this really is about? Villages not worth taking but we'll throw a flaming torch at the wall every night for the hell of it?

Something something "We're not here to ruin the game, we're here to ruin YOUR game"

Seriously tho, while wandsov isn't particularly inspired, its still better than the bs that came before it.

You (SMA) chose systems to claim. You chose the vulnerability windows. You're part of the largest coalition in the game. Get your shtako together.


Those comments coming from PH who didn't even defend 1 systems and moonwalked out BEFORE the announcement of our attack was made is pure gold. Can't you see the system at least have issue when your alliance decided to pack up and leave instead of even trying to defend it's systems? Why was reddit so proud of this? Was that move OP what you call "getting your shtako togethers"? I really want to know if you think that's how it's supposed to be done.


You're talking about the bastard children of a nomadic alliance... in less than a year we've moved several times. What gives you the impression sov for us is more than just a place to hang our hats?

Also, not sure why its "gold" as I don't recall us complaining about sov mechanics. If we had whined and were now making fun of SMA for whining then sure... but... nope.

"Shiny.  Lets be bad guys." -Jayne Cobb

5pitf1re
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2016-03-18 15:36:03 UTC
Gloom skull Dethahal wrote:
I will add my voice to the many. Please, please reduce the number of sov vulnerability timers. Every day we log in, that's all we do is defend space. There's no time for anything else. I work and have a family life to enjoy.

At least with a paying job you get two days off. Take these vulnerability timers down to 3 days a week.

You'd developers must think there are hundreds of thousands of people playing this game. That or that we're all unemployed with nothing better to do. Reduce the timers for goodness sake.

Thanks


Genuine answer here. Trim down your sov to one constellation and hold one constellation. Sadly you'd have to convince people like winet and mittens.
Brutus Utama
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#71 - 2016-03-18 15:39:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Brutus Utama
Sorry OP but your in the second largest alliance in game and the largest coalition stop moaning about defending your ****...if you dont want to defend it then move back to highsec.... its far easier to defend than attack the nodes regenerate on their own so if they truely dont want sov like you say then whats the issue the nodes will regen themselves?

if you are unable to pull a small group together out of 3000+ people in alliance and 20k+ in coalition then you dont deserve the space just because you had the space before the new mechanics doesnt mean its your stop bitching about having to defend your space and do something about it.... if its only a small group then you shouldnt have an issue defending should you.

if you want to mine in peace go to highsec, if you want to rat in peace go back to highsec... you should understand this when you moved out here this isnt highsec go defend your own **** or go home.

your one of the largest groups about and your complaining about having to defend you dont see the smaller groups complaining they just deal with it or move on...

this is a sandbox game you have to adapt to whats happening at any time...If you want to play exactly how you want there is games like farmville you can play...
Nigerian Banker Prince
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#72 - 2016-03-18 15:47:03 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
A glaring symptom of this new sov system seems to be the opposite of the HP grind system. By limiting attackers to 1, you've also reduced the response to near 1.

I can show up and jam the attacker, damp them, or shoot them. What I've found after several quick response fleets is the attackers are mostly Exodus small gangs ringing a doorbell. That type of gameplay does nothing for me, but I can appreciate their good fortune through game design.

Compare this to at least 50 duders required in the past, and entosis looks a lot like pure harassment.

Now. I think it's clear this thread was started out of frustration and there's no way to spin that. It does prove my point, however, that entosis is probably not the type of thing customers enjoy.

I think capture should look like a pool of 500 or 1000 entosis minutes, with a cap on simultaneous entosis modules based on ADM.

The logic behind it is to swap capitals needed in the past with subcapitals, each with an entosis link. This breaks up the capital requirement of HP grinds, and also solves the small gang harassment.

I am posting this as one of Asher's children who enjoyed 50-man Ishtar HP grinds in Querious and other parts of Sov space.


I hear a lot of complaining from someone in a group that literally coined the term weaponized boredom. Your arguments are essentially moot because you have used similar tactics to dictate the engagement against your enemies in the past.

Also, because this type of gameplay does nothing for you doesn't mean it is not enjoyable to others. Sure, having daily timers that you need to respond to is exhausting but that is sov warfare. HTFU and deal with it.

Even your solutions are pretty cringeworthy. You essentially bringing back the N+1 formula that CCP worked on taking away.

tldr; stop whining, HTFU, and do what everyone else in Eve has to do (figure this **** out).
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#73 - 2016-03-18 15:48:46 UTC
Kryptik Kai wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Kryptik Kai wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Could the problem be else where and those no commitment attack just be a symptom? Is there any of those group actually interested in taking SOV? If they are not, what are the reasons? While attacking something just for the hell of it is totally a valid EVE gameplay, is it what this really is about? Villages not worth taking but we'll throw a flaming torch at the wall every night for the hell of it?

Something something "We're not here to ruin the game, we're here to ruin YOUR game"

Seriously tho, while wandsov isn't particularly inspired, its still better than the bs that came before it.

You (SMA) chose systems to claim. You chose the vulnerability windows. You're part of the largest coalition in the game. Get your shtako together.


Those comments coming from PH who didn't even defend 1 systems and moonwalked out BEFORE the announcement of our attack was made is pure gold. Can't you see the system at least have issue when your alliance decided to pack up and leave instead of even trying to defend it's systems? Why was reddit so proud of this? Was that move OP what you call "getting your shtako togethers"? I really want to know if you think that's how it's supposed to be done.


You're talking about the bastard children of a nomadic alliance... in less than a year we've moved several times. What gives you the impression sov for us is more than just a place to hang our hats?

Also, not sure why its "gold" as I don't recall us complaining about sov mechanics. If we had whined and were now making fun of SMA for whining then sure... but... nope.



Of course you didn't complain since you didn't even try it. I think both side of the system are bad. Running to every boor bell in defense is stupid and being able to burn down an entire region in a week sound just as stupid to me. The entire thing right now has 2 way doing it. You completely overwhelm your opponent and burn his **** to the ground in one relatively quick way or you play ding dong ditch often enough to make their patience burn away. The system was supposed to prevent weaponized boredom but it's still a strategy people can employ.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#74 - 2016-03-18 15:54:28 UTC
Kryptik Kai wrote:
Seriously tho, while wandsov isn't particularly inspired, its still better than the bs that came before it.
Better for you because you're not interest in holding sov and it allows you to force a reaction for little risk and no real commitment. For people actually wanting to hold sov it just makes the process uninteresting and reduces deployments because it's basically impossible to travel to an enemy without leaving your space wide open. The only way is to have even more blues and resign yourself to the fact that some of them will be stuck on home defense while others are off having fun. The old system at least required a committed attack force and allowed deployments. Plus it generated international news which is a plus. I don't see any of the major news outlets doing an article about us lot waving our wands.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Exdios Jar'go
Lunar Industrial Symmetry
Warped Intentions
#75 - 2016-03-18 15:55:15 UTC
It makes me laugh when I read the comments here, its so easy to see ego and smite coming out in some of the replies rather than actual meaningful discussion.

Having been on both sides of the Entosis Mechanic with several alliances, I hate the bloody thing. I used to enjoy getting involved in the system bash, where proper fleets engaged over system timers. This "Hacking" of Timers just isn't Sov Warfare. Yes systems have become easier to attack, yes Defenders now have a reason to actually use the system, All good points, however we are seeing more and more harassment than actual warfare.

The mechanic has gone from one of large scale alliance warfare where fleets were put head to head against each other and both attackers and defenders each had to commit forces to the field to force the objective, to one where defenders have everything to loose and attackers have nothing and the game mechanic has switched from warfare to Trolling and Tear farming.

No matter what Alliance is defending, Campers, multiple single attackers, and Entosis saturation will wear down ANY Alliance, It will drive down ADM's, it will increase the vulnerability windows and eventually lead to the system being threatened, that is a given. However as the OP originally in a round about way pointed out, it also leads to burnout and frustration.

Half the time now when these situations start, I just log off, not because I'm lazy or incompetent, but because I honestly have better things to do than sit here spending my limited hours of the day on Eve doing nothing but chasing single attackers away every 5 minutes. This system lends its support to the small gang attacker whos sole interest is to feed internet trolls and has no interest in Sov, no reason to use it, but to create harassment and feed the Reddit war because they get Tears. More immaturity than actual game play.

What I want to see is proper warfare over systems again, Yes the old system favored the Big alliances and Coalitions, and ideally wasn't the best thing, but atleast it was fun and enjoyable and gave a reason to log in!, The current system while having good points, equals nothing but frustration, boredom and eventually leads to people logging off, or ignoring the timers until the point comes where they MUST show up to the timer to save the system, hence throwing overwhelming numbers just to saturate the system.

I welcomed the new Sov mechanic when it arrived, because it was different and it offered an interesting change, however after fighting it from both sides for months I gave up on it, and stopped involving myself in it. I'm a Nullsec pilot, I have zero interest in highsec and Lowsec, I enjoy the Null environment however I'm finding myself logging into comms and ignoring the game more and more.

My 2 cents.

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#76 - 2016-03-18 15:56:25 UTC
Nigerian Banker Prince wrote:

I hear a lot of complaining from someone in a group that literally coined the term weaponized boredom. Your arguments are essentially moot because you have used similar tactics to dictate the engagement against your enemies in the past.

Also, because this type of gameplay does nothing for you doesn't mean it is not enjoyable to others. Sure, having daily timers that you need to respond to is exhausting but that is sov warfare. HTFU and deal with it.

Even your solutions are pretty cringeworthy. You essentially bringing back the N+1 formula that CCP worked on taking away.

tldr; stop whining, HTFU, and do what everyone else in Eve has to do (figure this **** out).


You do realize the current offensive strategy being used is just another N+! right? Instead of bringing N+1 ships, N+1 timers will be created and one side will decide it's not worth all the time burnt on it. The fact that generating a stupid amount of timer was used before does not mean it was not wrong back then and now. Just that nothing was made correctly to prevent this behavior from being effective.
Kryptik Kai
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#77 - 2016-03-18 16:06:40 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:


Of course you didn't complain since you didn't even try it. I think both side of the system are bad. Running to every boor bell in defense is stupid and being able to burn down an entire region in a week sound just as stupid to me. The entire thing right now has 2 way doing it. You completely overwhelm your opponent and burn his **** to the ground in one relatively quick way or you play ding dong ditch often enough to make their patience burn away. The system was supposed to prevent weaponized boredom but it's still a strategy people can employ.


It doesn't really matter what sov system is in place, 40k coalition vs 2k (at that time) newbro group was never going to be defended. Unless you wanted to us to hang around perma docked or just show newbros what its like to welp over and over again I'm not sure what you expected.

As for the current system, yes, there are several ways for it to be played. Not sure why thats supposed to be a bad thing.

"Shiny.  Lets be bad guys." -Jayne Cobb

Terminal Insanity
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#78 - 2016-03-18 16:10:53 UTC
thats content! isnt it fun forming up 10 - 20 fleets every day to sit around and jump gates?! I certainly love it.
thanks fozzie

3 day old titan pilots, and endgame sov fought in intercepters. thats the eve i remember!

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP

Nigerian Banker Prince
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#79 - 2016-03-18 16:10:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Karishnikov wrote:
Too lazy to link quote, but you say there needs to be a level of commitment on the attackers. So prove me wrong on this, but in the last few weeks a full scale deployment has been going on, hangers shifted, markets stocked, logistical routes planned, Intel gathered, targets prepped, Reddit's spinned, and finally people given the keys to burn the sky. What you are experiencing is not a troll weekend entosis brigade. More effort goes into this than the entire state of your alliance, given how this war is going.

But I digress, you say there is a lack of commitment, then that may well be the case, but it is not from the opposition. BUT, you also use commitment as in actually wanting the space; now shocker, I want your space, not so I can mine in it or rat in it, but so you can cease to exist as an entity there. This is my commitment towards sov.


According to you we aren't defending our space, therefore if the people attacking it were actually committed to taking it from us we would not have it. Defenders have to respond to an attack because when they lose they lose their space, while if an attacker loses he loses whatever ships he chose to send in, which can be as low as a single frigate. It's for this exact reason CCP have scrapped entosis for citadels in favour of damage mitigation that forces a minimum force and likely will move sov into the same system once it's ironed out.

And yes, what we are seeing is just an entosis troll brigade, which is why the timers are only being taken if completely uncontested. Just because there's people reddit posting like their lives depended on it doesn't mean anything's actually being committed. If you were suddenly forced to abandon, the committed costs are zero and you would just walk away losing nothing.

It's amusing to me that you can't see that the reason you like these sov mechanics are they make it easy and practically risk free for you to force other people to react constantly. The thing is in the long run it would be better all round if you guys looked honestly at it and gave objective feedback and ideas, because at the end of the day CCP are going to deal with it eventually and they'll probably do it the way the usually do by completely trashing it.



Have you stopped and considered that your coalition literally developed the prototype of this kind of warfare? Weaponized boredom and all that? You are complaining about multiple harassing attacks that are designed to weaken and exhaust the enemy.....a tactic the CFC has used itself?

You say that the attackers won't lose much more than the ship they are flying but what about their time? Oh heaven forbid you have to spend your time defending but you never really put much thought into the time the attackers have put into attacking.

If you cannot handle the amount of timers you currently have, then reduce your sov. Become smaller/more manageable. If you cannot handle the attacks that are happening, then leave sov and regroup. You are not some special butterfly where you get to have the mechanics changed because you don't like them. TEST, IRON, D2, BoB, LV, BRUCE, and countless others got removed from Null over even worse mechanics then what we have now. Seriously....quit your b******** and deal with it.

Terminal Insanity
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2016-03-18 16:15:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Terminal Insanity
Kryptik Kai wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Could the problem be else where and those no commitment attack just be a symptom? Is there any of those group actually interested in taking SOV? If they are not, what are the reasons? While attacking something just for the hell of it is totally a valid EVE gameplay, is it what this really is about? Villages not worth taking but we'll throw a flaming torch at the wall every night for the hell of it?

Something something "We're not here to ruin the game, we're here to ruin YOUR game"

Seriously tho, while wandsov isn't particularly inspired, its still better than the bs that came before it.

You (SMA) chose systems to claim. You chose the vulnerability windows. You're part of the largest coalition in the game. Get your shtako together.



You only think its better than what came before, because you hold no sov and have no intention of holding sov. CCP created a gimmick for shitbrains to harass sov holders and force them to form 20 fleets a day to maintain sov from people who dont even want sov. That might be fun for the people who have NO INTENTION of taking the sov, but all it does is cause hundreds of other players to chug caffine to try and stay awake for the most boring fleets since highsec mining.

Its rather absurd that a bunch of noobs in tech1 frigates can cause so many boring defense fleets from the biggest coalition in the game. You (horde) shouldnt be able to challenge sov unless you have some remote possibility to actually take it. But you dont. All you do is generate timers that other people have to go and babysit for an hour.

I dont even blame horde, its probably fun from their perspective. But what CCP has created is literally more boring than highsec mining, for the defenders.

This game has turned into a job, and its not fun.

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP