These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE's summer expansion better focus on sovereignty
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#361 - 2013-01-25 21:48:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Gianna Thirostin wrote:
Lol.. so basically this whole thread has boiled down to a whine about boring "sov mechanics", then a constant stream of comments saying how bad changes to the "broken sov mechanics" would be for the game and turns into defending the very thing that the whine was started about (btw, which is it guys, structure grinding a horrible plague or a necessary mechanic?). Im beginning to think the null powers that be really don't want a change, just to whine and bring attention to their new RvB 0.0 content which would otherwise get little to no attention

Perhaps you haven't read, because pretty much nobody has given any realistic changes to the sov mechanics and have instead decided to latch on to a completely separate issue because they feel like soapboxing.



What sov changes do the alliance leaders need to see happen before they will decide to go to war?

Mittani was the chair of the csm and I have yet to see anything concrete from him. He ran on a platform of being a bastard but never really pushed any specific changes for null sec. Nothing substantial has changed in null sec mechanics since csm6. So why, all of a sudden, is it ccp's fault?

I think that is what many posters in this thread are saying.

Big alliances make friends with half of eve and turn nullsec into carebears online. Then Big alliances blame ccp and the sov mechanics, without saying what exactly they want changed.

I'm not saying the mechanics are not the problem but its hard to take this seriously.

Most of the proposals I see just seem to make null sec a richer carebear grazing land rather than doing anything to promote actual wars.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#362 - 2013-01-25 22:01:15 UTC
If you remove timers, then the critical mass for destroying a structure becomes whatever is enough to destroy the structure before the owner can respond effectively, just like in the real world. In the real world, if I want to destroy your house, I just have to wait for you to go to work and light it on fire. As it is right now with timers, I have to light your house on fire and then come back a day or two later and confront you and the cops and the firefighters, and if I get my ass kicked, then your house isn't even damaged. This system clearly wasn't designed with the intention of houses being burnt down. Hence, all the houses that Goonswarm and TEST and whoever else is out there have built are not being burnt down. They're not even being damaged.

In the scenario of NO timers, jump drives and instantaneous travel devices make sense, since you have to respond fairly quickly or you lose your stuff, but in the scenario of reinforcement timers, you already have tons of opportunity to stage an effective defense, so, now, every homeowner, police officer, and firefighter in the tri-state area is on station to put that fire out.

The problem isn't that TEST or Goonswarm or whoever can muster a force to burn a house down. The problem is that nobody else can win that confrontation after that timer is up to finish the job because TEST and Goonswarm and whoever is standing there with their hammers and their shotguns and their waterhoses. Now, your solution might be that I "get more friends". To that, I say . . . **** that and **** you.

See you in Jita!
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#363 - 2013-01-25 22:03:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
argument against timers: fights will inevitably happen instead of endless back and forth tz-based structure grind attrition, which is naturally the ideal form of warfare.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#364 - 2013-01-25 22:04:25 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Now, your solution might be that I "get more friends". To that, I say . . . **** that and **** you.

And this is why you fail at nullsec.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Dave Stark
#365 - 2013-01-25 22:08:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
random idea that crossed my mind: sov must link, move timers from the system being taken, to the enabling/disabling of adjacent sov being taken.

eg, you grab a system, then 12 hour count or whatever until the near by systems can be taken however re-taking a system isn't subject to the 12 hour cooldown.

any merit to that idea? i'm sure it's probably horrible but meh, it's late at night and i just thought i'd throw it out there.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#366 - 2013-01-25 22:09:00 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
argument against timers: fights will inevitably happen instead of endless back and forth tz-based structure grind attrition, which is naturally the ideal form of warfare.

With timers: Okay, we'd better form a fleet, they'll have a fleet too, we'll have two fleets in one spot at the same time attacking each other. Perfect!

Without timers: Oh ****, someone's attacking our structure, better form a fleet quickly!
Oh **** guys, we got here too late, structure and their fleet is gone, let's all go home.

Or even better,
Oh **** guys, what happened to our structures while we were all asleep?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#367 - 2013-01-25 22:12:54 UTC
couple months ago I took a neodymium moon singlehandedly by myself in an oracle
something clearly impossible due to those evil structure mails and timers
Dave Stark
#368 - 2013-01-25 22:13:50 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
couple months ago I took a neodymium moon singlehandedly by myself in an oracle
something clearly impossible due to those evil structure mails and timers


was it an -A- moon? if so...
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#369 - 2013-01-25 22:16:07 UTC

Some honest questions for you:

Malcanis wrote:
I'll say it again: if CCP think that players will be infinitely patient, they are incorrect. Matters are coming to a head in null and if there isn't a proper reworking of sov 0.0, it's not going to be pretty.

I fully understand that CCP wanted to work on empire for the last few years, but now the situation in null is approaching meltdown. It has been 5 years since the last work on improving sov 0.0 was done, and now that patience is wearing very thin indeed.

*Eliminate multi-million hp structures as the lynchpin of sov. Sov strength should be determined by player activity, not deployable structures.



What "activity" are you talking about? I hope not carebearing.


Malcanis wrote:

*Undefended sov should be easy to take, no to remotely set timers..


What exactly do you mean here? Can you give some sort of description of what you mean by "undefended" and how such territory would be taken? Would it be instantly taken?


Malcanis wrote:

*Make it viable for 0.0 players to actually live in 0.0 by reworking outposts so that we can upgrade them to match NPC systems
.


This will make the alliance leaders happy no doubt. But how will this cause the great wars we used to see?


Malcanis wrote:

*Base alliance income on the activity of players, not the output of lifeless moons owned by an elite few..



Aren't the moons the only thing worth fighting over?


Malcanis wrote:

At the moment, Sov 0.0 depends on supers, structures and moons. It should depend on players.


Players doing what?


What will make large alliances choose to actually risk large amounts of assets in a war instead of just continuing to collect insane amounts of assets?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#370 - 2013-01-25 22:23:38 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
couple months ago I took a neodymium moon singlehandedly by myself in an oracle
something clearly impossible due to those evil structure mails and timers


was it an -A- moon? if so...

-A- forever
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#371 - 2013-01-25 23:51:10 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

*Base alliance income on the activity of players, not the output of lifeless moons owned by an elite few..

Aren't the moons the only thing worth fighting over?


They were, the idea is that by shifting the income from top down stuff like moons to bottom up stuff like ratting/mining/industry/trading then a conflict driver would be something simple like a roaming gang coming in to kill the people making the income. That's what CCP has been referring to as the "farms and fields" concept, but they've yet to do anything to move us towards that concept.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
fukier
Gallente Federation
#372 - 2013-01-26 00:40:48 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
fukier wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:

Did I say a new sov system should be based on timers? No, I did not.


You haven't said anything about sov, you've just decided to howl about power projection in a thread that has very little to do with it.



They go hand in hand brosef


They don't mr. no sov holding person.


i have held sov before (would do it again if it were worth it) and yes they do go hand in hand if you understand dont expect me to explain it to you...

nublet...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#373 - 2013-01-26 01:04:47 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
fukier wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
fukier wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:

Did I say a new sov system should be based on timers? No, I did not.


You haven't said anything about sov, you've just decided to howl about power projection in a thread that has very little to do with it.



They go hand in hand brosef


They don't mr. no sov holding person.


i have held sov before (would do it again if it were worth it) and yes they do go hand in hand if you understand dont expect me to explain it to you...

nublet...


:ironicat: Please do educate us all I'd love to hear your amazing discourse on the subject :allears:.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#374 - 2013-01-26 01:23:11 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
fukier wrote:
i have held sov before (would do it again if it were worth it) and yes they do go hand in hand if you understand dont expect me to explain it to you...

nublet...

:ironicat: Please do educate us all I'd love to hear your amazing discourse on the subject :allears:.

He can probably try to take on CVA,

I'd say IRC but a friend of ours accidentally already did that.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#375 - 2013-01-26 01:28:00 UTC
Welp, sorry 'bout that.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#376 - 2013-01-26 01:42:08 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Welp, sorry 'bout that.

This wouldn't happen if it was impossible for you to project power over there :colbert:

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#377 - 2013-01-26 01:53:42 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Welp, sorry 'bout that.

This wouldn't happen if it was impossible for you to project power over there :colbert:


Nerfing power projection hurts highsec too as CONCORD has to light more cynos to use their JBs that have to much range to cover all of highsec. Us small allianced can't get a foothold because CONCORD is too good and have to many blues the NIP-NAP train and blue elcair is preventing us from doing anything. CCP fix please.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#378 - 2013-01-26 03:06:46 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Welp, sorry 'bout that.

This wouldn't happen if it was impossible for you to project power over there :colbert:


Nerfing power projection hurts highsec too as CONCORD has to light more cynos to use their JBs that have to much range to cover all of highsec. Us small allianced can't get a foothold because CONCORD is too good and have to many blues the NIP-NAP train and blue elcair is preventing us from doing anything. CCP fix please.

Being blue to CONCORD, huh.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#379 - 2013-01-26 04:09:37 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Welp, sorry 'bout that.

This wouldn't happen if it was impossible for you to project power over there :colbert:


Nerfing power projection hurts highsec too as CONCORD has to light more cynos to use their JBs that have to much range to cover all of highsec. Us small allianced can't get a foothold because CONCORD is too good and have to many blues the NIP-NAP train and blue elcair is preventing us from doing anything. CCP fix please.

Being blue to CONCORD, huh.


They keep awoxing me but the diplos won't do anything about it.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#380 - 2013-01-26 04:17:03 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Welp, sorry 'bout that.

This wouldn't happen if it was impossible for you to project power over there :colbert:


Nerfing power projection hurts highsec too as CONCORD has to light more cynos to use their JBs that have to much range to cover all of highsec. Us small allianced can't get a foothold because CONCORD is too good and have to many blues the NIP-NAP train and blue elcair is preventing us from doing anything. CCP fix please.

Being blue to CONCORD, huh.


They keep awoxing me but the diplos won't do anything about it.


Petition it & CCP will ban them because they are breaking the EULA.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.