EVE General Discussion

Getting rid of the sov map would create a truly occupy sov situation. if you have the strength then you own it if not then rip. I don;t think it's the right answer though planting a flag on the map is important so some people in this game. mabey just have a tcu no sov upgrades and all that just you can put your flag here now protect it kind of deal.

If you mean initial timers, 20 minutes is incredibly short. It's easier to let those go and respond to the finals which are on a schedule, than scramble to get people there in the last few minutes of an initial hack. The initials are gimmes.

There is a downside to IHUB flipping mech the way I see it - it doesn't incentivise people to blow the thing up except in situation when people who invade a system aren't looking forward to settling there. I'm not sure if hardware not going boom more often is within EVE philosophy and/or economical model.

On a side note, when CCP declared sov changes, I was actually expecting this kind of thing instead of what we have ended up with.

Not sure but if someone decided to hold the territory and consider himself as a land lord later on this would automatically means that someone else would think of to take that territory as well. So here we have this conflict of interests which lead both sides to have a deal or fight. Having limited period of time during which one the territory vulnarable for capture is a complete nonsence. Same thing about that a small gang of rookie ships mounted with single module could 'destabilize' the whole system by opening doors for invaders. This type of sov is a cancer. The disease which tend people to collaborate under 'blue doughnut' or let the land go into someone else hands.

double post

there have been a ton of good fights recently and a few things have highlighted the strength of fozie sov. Small groups working away from the main fleets. Fights going down almost nightly including large engagements. neither side commiting to fights they will obviously lose. All in all so far the system seems to work. i don;t know how it works on a large scale yet but on a small scale it seems to work quite well. I am really interested in seeing what citdels brinig to the mix. also Lucas Kell and Rain6637 it's been a ton of fun chatting and debating with you. I hope we can have more conversations about game mechanics and keep the discussion going.

i'm not anyone in PL but i don't think it would to be honest. It's hard to be nomadic when you have to defend assets all over. If you could cyno over the entire map again potentially but witht he current way we move in eve it would take away our nomadic lifestyle. Like i said i'm no one and could be 100 percent wrong.

Dear CCP,

You know how Thera failed to become the "Mos Eisley of EVE" without Concord because it's way too dangerous to appeal to industrialists? In the same way, Entosis fails to appeal to players who aren't willing to make EVE a full-time job.

By participating in Entosis gameplay I feel as though I'm betraying the playerbase with "but activity has increased."

It feels like you're trying to make social gameplay harder to maintain in spite of you. Your notions of what gameplay should be are out of touch and we are literally using the act of playing as punishment against each other.





Open up Jove space held by CCP alliance for a week and see what it's like to maintain Entosis sov. Even if you fail, I would give you credit for having experienced this epically disjointed gameplay.

It appeared that Entosis module one of the most powerfull tools in Eve which makes people think that they got almost thumb of god in their hands or makes it feel Eve your second home full of assets which you have to protect or take care of which in the end makes it full time asssignment.

Better do it AFK though or else you'll lose your damn mind, potentially a fleet at a time.

I can't imagine a better way to dare your playerbase to stage a mass exodus but I'm sure you'll surprise me.