These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Xeno Szenn
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#101 - 2016-03-18 17:20:24 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Xeno Szenn wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Xeno Szenn wrote:
CCP should never limit people working together. I don't fly with the imperium but ccp should not break it apart just becuse it exsist. That would be a death sentance for the game.
That's what people are leaning toward though. They like these mechanics because it allows even single players to pose a realistic threat to big groups because they hate the idea of a big group. Nothing any big group does really has an impact on other players, before I rented then joined the Imperium big groups existed but had absolutely no bearing on my day to day gameplay, but some people just can't handle the fact that these groups exist and it's those people these mechanics cater to. Thankfully I think CCP knows it's bad play and entosis has a limited shelf life.



Entosising is deffernt then an artifical reduction of a groups ablity to work togther. entosising something dosn't mean sma cant work with the imperium anymore. If everyone can plau in sov then entosising is the best system we have right now. If not everyone can play with sov brinig back needing suppercaps. either way i'm fine with it. I'm currious though how many people do you think it should take to attack sov at a minimum?


I always though you should need a few cruiser or something like that personally since not being able to mount up a fleet like that essentially mean there is no way you could keep a system anyway so there is no point in letting you take one.


A few cruisers could be a good requiremnt. Still low sp enofgh that everyone can play and cost a bit more then frigates
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#102 - 2016-03-18 17:21:55 UTC
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:
"It's funny when we do it to other people, but now that they're doing it to us it's becoming old hat and nobody should do it anymore."
It's actually more like "It was dumb when we used it, which is why it was expected for CCP to remove it, not base a game mechanic on it". Kinda like when everyone went nuts with drone assist, if CCP came out with a mechanic specifically based around that, everyone would have been like Shocked

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#103 - 2016-03-18 17:24:43 UTC
Xeno Szenn wrote:
That system would be intresting actually and let other styles of gameplay hotdops and afk cloaking do a lot to fight a group while giving some counterplay options for the defenders. What would cause the fights though without timers I know form experiance i have to hit something to get a fight no one seems to just want to fight so got to force it.
Well as a defender you would have to still use your system, so you'd have to at least put yourself at risk. Attackers would need to actually be somewhat active in the system to take it too. Both sides would need to be active in the same space to progress, so hopefully fights would be generated pretty organically.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
WarFireV
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#104 - 2016-03-18 17:25:07 UTC
Oh my sweet young ones. You have some much to experience to know what contesting sov is truly about.

Why don't you go and take the dronelands, twice. Then let me see how you appreciate what you have.
Xeno Szenn
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#105 - 2016-03-18 17:25:16 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:
"It's funny when we do it to other people, but now that they're doing it to us it's becoming old hat and nobody should do it anymore."
It's actually more like "It was dumb when we used it, which is why it was expected for CCP to remove it, not base a game mechanic on it". Kinda like when everyone went nuts with drone assist, if CCP came out with a mechanic specifically based around that, everyone would have been like Shocked



it's human nature you cant remove boredoom without making artifical figths. if you have something i want i can chose to fight you or not. if you have something to harras i can or chose to not. when deffending you have to deffend or chose to recapture it latter. it's just the nature of the sandbox moons are an example of this somethimes people fight over them sometimes they reinforce it anfd blueball.
Nigerian Banker Prince
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#106 - 2016-03-18 17:29:06 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
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.



The current mechanics didn't invent this. All of the old mechanics had the same thing. Pre-Dominion sov had towers. You put down as many as you could if you were the defenders and dickstar them. At that time it would literally take a day or longer just to RF enough of the towers to contest one system. The defenders could set up all the dickstars and start evacing stuff or setting up ambushes. This current sov mechanic is much much much better than that.


Now you are complaining because the defenders have to send out small gangs to hunt attackers that are entosising as much stuff as they can. Here is a hint.....if you cannot send out enough dudes to kill the entosis peeps or set up effective choke points, then you don't deserve your space.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#107 - 2016-03-18 17:29:39 UTC
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:
Yun Kuai wrote:
Kuetlzelcoatl wrote:
Maintain less Sov.


This and more this. If you're complaining about the number of timers then you're holding on to too much space. Less space, less to defend, more time to unblue yourself from the blue doughnut, more time to actually PvP in the "lawless" space that is nullsec.

P.S. FW is vulnerable for 23.5hrs, 7 days a week and can be attacked by any and all ship types. You don't hear us complaining about that.

That's the entire reason we're in it in the first place.


Being vulnerable 23.5/7 is not as bad as it looks when you realize even with all stars aligning for you, it will still involve many hours to take a system. You can easily let the other side PLEX to 75% and then send a fleet and fight over the rest. If we leave that much time in SOV, it's over, the structure got hacked and the system fell.
Nigerian Banker Prince
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#108 - 2016-03-18 17:33:09 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:
Yun Kuai wrote:
Kuetlzelcoatl wrote:
Maintain less Sov.


This and more this. If you're complaining about the number of timers then you're holding on to too much space. Less space, less to defend, more time to unblue yourself from the blue doughnut, more time to actually PvP in the "lawless" space that is nullsec.

P.S. FW is vulnerable for 23.5hrs, 7 days a week and can be attacked by any and all ship types. You don't hear us complaining about that.

That's the entire reason we're in it in the first place.


Being vulnerable 23.5/7 is not as bad as it looks when you realize even with all stars aligning for you, it will still involve many hours to take a system. You can easily let the other side PLEX to 75% and then send a fleet and fight over the rest. If we leave that much time in SOV, it's over, the structure got hacked and the system fell.


No, the structure got hacked and you have a timer....see you in a day or two.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#109 - 2016-03-18 17:42:42 UTC
Nigerian Banker Prince wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
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.



The current mechanics didn't invent this. All of the old mechanics had the same thing. Pre-Dominion sov had towers. You put down as many as you could if you were the defenders and dickstar them. At that time it would literally take a day or longer just to RF enough of the towers to contest one system. The defenders could set up all the dickstars and start evacing stuff or setting up ambushes. This current sov mechanic is much much much better than that.


Now you are complaining because the defenders have to send out small gangs to hunt attackers that are entosising as much stuff as they can. Here is a hint.....if you cannot send out enough dudes to kill the entosis peeps or set up effective choke points, then you don't deserve your space.



Last time I checked, we were still winning most of the timers so we would still be able to send enough dude. That does not mean the system is a good one. I still think reinforcing 40 structure at the same time or SBUing 20 system was playing the rules in a stupid way but I can't do anything about the past. It's stupid and was stupid because in both case, an actual takeover of all of this was and is only possible if the other side fail-cascade so you no longer need your fleet together. The rest is just fluff to **** off the other side and force them into clean-up OPS because is slowly but surely drain his will to play this game. In all of those case, you were not beating your enemy by fighting him but by fighting his resolve to play a game in an un-fun way.

The new SOV system was slated to be a move against that. Since it has now been demonstrated that it didn't work, I think iteration should be discussed/worked on. Unless people are gonna say it's ok now. I mean, if people are OK with weaponized boredom, then the game should stay like that but I think it's a stupid way of setting up a game.
Nigerian Banker Prince
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#110 - 2016-03-18 17:49:15 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Nigerian Banker Prince wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
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.



The current mechanics didn't invent this. All of the old mechanics had the same thing. Pre-Dominion sov had towers. You put down as many as you could if you were the defenders and dickstar them. At that time it would literally take a day or longer just to RF enough of the towers to contest one system. The defenders could set up all the dickstars and start evacing stuff or setting up ambushes. This current sov mechanic is much much much better than that.


Now you are complaining because the defenders have to send out small gangs to hunt attackers that are entosising as much stuff as they can. Here is a hint.....if you cannot send out enough dudes to kill the entosis peeps or set up effective choke points, then you don't deserve your space.



Last time I checked, we were still winning most of the timers so we would still be able to send enough dude. That does not mean the system is a good one. I still think reinforcing 40 structure at the same time or SBUing 20 system was playing the rules in a stupid way but I can't do anything about the past. It's stupid and was stupid because in both case, an actual takeover of all of this was and is only possible if the other side fail-cascade so you no longer need your fleet together. The rest is just fluff to **** off the other side and force them into clean-up OPS because is slowly but surely drain his will to play this game. In all of those case, you were not beating your enemy by fighting him but by fighting his resolve to play a game in an un-fun way.

The new SOV system was slated to be a move against that. Since it has now been demonstrated that it didn't work, I think iteration should be discussed/worked on. Unless people are gonna say it's ok now. I mean, if people are OK with weaponized boredom, then the game should stay like that but I think it's a stupid way of setting up a game.


Yes you are winning most timers....but your allies are dying internally in the process. The whole weaponized boredom isn't a 'oh it's okay now' sorta thing....it is a 'you reap what you sow' sort of thing.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#111 - 2016-03-18 17:50:40 UTC
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
killerkeano wrote:
HMmmmmm juicy CFC tears. so tasty



you reap what you sow.


The issue I have with post like that is that it means I am not allowed to think as an individual. My though are supposedly always associated with my corp and alliance tag even if I have some position that would more than likely be against what the leaders think. I don't know if other corp/alliance have a line of post to follow or other stuff like that but I surely don't follow one and really hope you don't have to follow one either.

TBH, I'n not unhappy toward any player currently playing the game how it is right now. This stupidity is the name of the game now so anyone not playing it like that would be shooting himself in the foot for no reason. Using weaponized boredom is effective so of course people will use it. The real question to me is, why the hell they they make a system where such terrible strategy cans till be used.

When the CFC back in the previous SOV demonstrated that boredom could be a weapon, I though it was both a creative way of using the rules AND dropping a turd on the game in plain view. Doing it right now in the new way of doing it is just the same thing. It's using the rules how they are written while also shitting on the system. Both are just as bad imo.

"It's funny when we do it to other people, but now that they're doing it to us it's becoming old hat and nobody should do it anymore."


WRONG.

It was never good gameplay or fun. Other people might have though it was but not I. It was an efficient one and still is but that's still isn't good. If you think I was ok with weaponized boredom before, then you are not comprehending what I am trying to say correctly. It might be my english but I really never though it was good gameplay. Not playing should never have been and never should be an effective strategy to the game.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#112 - 2016-03-18 18:00:13 UTC
Nigerian Banker Prince wrote:


Yes you are winning most timers....but your allies are dying internally in the process. The whole weaponized boredom isn't a 'oh it's okay now' sorta thing....it is a 'you reap what you sow' sort of thing.


I know the organisation is effectively reaping what they sow. I do not condemn anyone for doing it. It's efficient gameplay to achieve an objective and EVE has always been about using whatever mean to achieve what you want. What I will condem is who made the system how it is since it once AGAIN enable a form of play that is again beating the opposition out of boredom.

I honestly wish nobody ever even had the though that they should bore their opponent to death in game. It's like someone invented cancer and now we can't get rid of it. Cancer was **** back then and is still **** right now. Please god rid us of cancer and kill it every single time anyone find a new way to re-create it, be it my friends or my enemy.
Travis Uchonela
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#113 - 2016-03-18 18:00:42 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:


You (horde) shouldnt be able to challenge sov



This is the real TL:DR for where all these tears are coming from, btw.
Sootsia
HIgh Sec Care Bears
Brothers of Tangra
#114 - 2016-03-18 18:01:02 UTC
Kuetlzelcoatl wrote:
Maintain less Sov.


+1

Time for the Clusterfuck Coalition to disband.... I mean the Imperatives... or whatever they call themselves these days...

If its too much to handle.... get out of SOV holding just to support someone else's ego and not your play style.

There are plenty of Rental Systems you can obtain, where you can rat in peace and SOV is someone else's problem for less than the taxes your paying now.
Eddiie
Hooded Underworld Guys
Brotherhood of Spacers
#115 - 2016-03-18 18:05:28 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:
Eddiie wrote:
goons complaining about boredom and repetition ???

SUCK IT UP



Says the guys who reinforce a CSAA tower claiming it was to "generate content" and then dont show up to actually finish the job.
That was highly enjoyable, sitting on a jumpbridge for 2 hours waiting for you to not show up.

Great content 10/10 would fleet again


THE BURN. OUCHSTOPIT
Dodo Veetee
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#116 - 2016-03-18 18:17:07 UTC
Yo, I have a solution for you.

It's really simple, actually.

You don't like the sov system? Don't live in sov. There is NPC null, low-sec FW, non-fw lowsec, highsec, wormholes, thera, a lot of different places for you to go.

Now if you WANT to play in sov null, then stop complaining like a little ***** about sov null. It's this way or the highway. Just because your alliance sucks and everyone else is getting paid to beat on you, that doesn't mean the devs should go easy on you. Maybe your alliance leaders shouldn't have been such fuccbois to other people and **** on their website/steal from them.

Now, the real easy way for you, as a line member, is drop that bad alliance and go join somewhere you find fun. If you don't want to, it's fine, go defend 20 sov timers against exodus/horde while your teeth gets kicked in and you keep bleeding members.

Remember, it's your own fault you're getting targeted, not the devs. So deal with it.
Nigerian Banker Prince
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#117 - 2016-03-18 18:24:17 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Nigerian Banker Prince wrote:


Yes you are winning most timers....but your allies are dying internally in the process. The whole weaponized boredom isn't a 'oh it's okay now' sorta thing....it is a 'you reap what you sow' sort of thing.


I know the organisation is effectively reaping what they sow. I do not condemn anyone for doing it. It's efficient gameplay to achieve an objective and EVE has always been about using whatever mean to achieve what you want. What I will condem is who made the system how it is since it once AGAIN enable a form of play that is again beating the opposition out of boredom.

I honestly wish nobody ever even had the though that they should bore their opponent to death in game. It's like someone invented cancer and now we can't get rid of it. Cancer was **** back then and is still **** right now. Please god rid us of cancer and kill it every single time anyone find a new way to re-create it, be it my friends or my enemy.


I agree with you on all points....but sadly I don't remember you or many other Goons (if any) making these statements when the system was in their favor. That is why most of these arguments are moot and also why there is a lot of hostility towards CFC members here in this thread.

Sure you make good arguments but because you are on the receiving end this time, they seem hypocritical.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#118 - 2016-03-18 18:38:31 UTC
Nigerian Banker Prince wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Nigerian Banker Prince wrote:


Yes you are winning most timers....but your allies are dying internally in the process. The whole weaponized boredom isn't a 'oh it's okay now' sorta thing....it is a 'you reap what you sow' sort of thing.


I know the organisation is effectively reaping what they sow. I do not condemn anyone for doing it. It's efficient gameplay to achieve an objective and EVE has always been about using whatever mean to achieve what you want. What I will condem is who made the system how it is since it once AGAIN enable a form of play that is again beating the opposition out of boredom.

I honestly wish nobody ever even had the though that they should bore their opponent to death in game. It's like someone invented cancer and now we can't get rid of it. Cancer was **** back then and is still **** right now. Please god rid us of cancer and kill it every single time anyone find a new way to re-create it, be it my friends or my enemy.


I agree with you on all points....but sadly I don't remember you or many other Goons (if any) making these statements when the system was in their favor. That is why most of these arguments are moot and also why there is a lot of hostility towards CFC members here in this thread.

Sure you make good arguments but because you are on the receiving end this time, they seem hypocritical.


I was not there during siege fleet for example. I get your feeling tho. I really wish more people would recognize it was just as stupid back then. This game has problem that might never get solved correctly because the "winning" side of the issue usually is to smug to admit they are winning because it's broken. The current fun/hours battle is probably WAY in horde and co's favor and they will probably milk it for all they can because it's how people EVE. You never know when you will be on the receiving end of it. People instead should just be mad about any systems that are like that because it does not make for a great game anyway. The memorable event of EVE didn't happen on night were blueballing was going on. Nothing really great happened in EVE while one side was docked while the other side did a clean-up operation while thinking why they even logged to this boring game of rep the tower, rep the station, burn the SBU and other stuff like that.
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
EDENCOM DEFENSIVE INITIATIVE
#119 - 2016-03-18 18:45:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Nana Skalski
Its a problem of battlefield. Some battlefields pronmote tactics that are favored by one side, not the other. If every side fights with the same tactics, it comes down to attrition warfare. The side with more resources win then. People tend to follow the tactic that works, but also try to avoid the attrition, because it leads to depletion of every resource, time, man, everything. So it just blueball everyone or thunderdome if you have the same battlewfield the same time all the time. Maybe If we could shape the battlefield to our tactics, or choose the battlefield we like most, then more people would consider it leveled out for them, because they would have their favorite strong points occupied as they like.

ᴇᴠᴇʀʏ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴏғ ᴀ ɢᴀᴍᴇ ʜᴇʟᴘs ᴛᴏ ᴛᴇʟʟ ᴀ sᴛᴏʀʏ 📕

ᴡʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ᴀɴɢʀʏ ᴄᴏɴᴄᴏʀᴅ ɢᴜʏ ᴡʜᴇɴ ʏᴏᴜ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ʜɪᴍ

ᴏsᴘʀᴇʏ 🚀

≡⋁≡ ♥
Lasse R Farnsworth
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#120 - 2016-03-18 19:03:56 UTC
Well if you can't handle sov , just join RvB ;) We got rid of our last poco .. so no mre timers for you. Just saying ;)