These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dave Stark
#401 - 2013-01-26 09:01:22 UTC
the last 2 pages of this thread is comedy gold.

this is why i think goons are great and why i can't understand why people hate them, they're like eve's version of frankie boyle.
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts
#402 - 2013-01-26 09:02:09 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yes TEST is known for its brutal and invasive security screenings (they call it "the /r/colonoscopy") and elite pvp recruitment standards

TEST is becoming elite pvp huh. This is a sad day in history.


It's Delve/Querious. It does things to those inhabit that space.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#403 - 2013-01-26 09:03:25 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
the last 2 pages of this thread is comedy gold.

this is why i think goons are great and why i can't understand why people hate them, they're like eve's version of frankie boyle.


Sadly it might get the tread locked/deleted...
Dave Stark
#404 - 2013-01-26 09:05:58 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
the last 2 pages of this thread is comedy gold.

this is why i think goons are great and why i can't understand why people hate them, they're like eve's version of frankie boyle.


Sadly it might get the tread locked/deleted...


if that's the case then people need a sense of humour check.

between jokes about being blue with concord and the biggest forum troll test has, i'm still chuckling.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#405 - 2013-01-26 09:24:43 UTC
Or a lame attempt to bury the talk about power projection and how is is a core issue with sov...
Dave Stark
#406 - 2013-01-26 09:25:57 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Or a lame attempt to bury the talk about power projection and how is is a core issue with sov...


said the one who couldn't actually make a legitimate argument for it even though they were asked repeatedly to do so?
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#407 - 2013-01-26 09:30:02 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Or a lame attempt to bury the talk about power projection and how is is a core issue with sov...


said the one who couldn't actually make a legitimate argument for it even though they were asked repeatedly to do so?

lol

Oh I did, multiple times. You and others shoved your fingers in your ears yelling, "lalala I can't hear you, lalalala..." But that is ok. The right people saw it and I'm satisfied. Enjoy it while you can. Blink
Dave Stark
#408 - 2013-01-26 09:31:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Marlona Sky wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Or a lame attempt to bury the talk about power projection and how is is a core issue with sov...


said the one who couldn't actually make a legitimate argument for it even though they were asked repeatedly to do so?

lol

Oh I did, multiple times. You and others shoved your fingers in your ears yelling, "lalala I can't hear you, lalalala..." But that is ok. The right people saw it and I'm satisfied. Enjoy it while you can. Blink


that's funny, considering every point you made was refuted, it seemed to be you with your fingers in your ears when you couldn't answer a question when it was put to you directly.

just to recap: you still didn't answer the question of why smaller entities would benefit from a timed cooldown on jump drives.
Katherine Jasmone
#409 - 2013-01-26 09:31:15 UTC
The whole of null needs to be turned into one giant sausage-fest with a revamp of Sovereignty mechanics, Alliance mechanics, more bottlenecks and and more jumpgates/links between regions forcing the hand of those backwater dwellers who just want to rat and gather technetium to their hearts content and general safety. Only by making things more scarce (or harder to hold on to) do you create the necessary backdrop for change.

As it stands, null tends to lean towards monopoly with alliances that are too big ("That is no moon, that is a space station.") and hold too much sway/ground limiting others from venturing out into null. And no, people don't want to join an alliance simply to be "renters" to some god-awful dictatorially minded corp/alliance. The social aspect begins with wanting to play with a few like-minded individuals to that of broad cooperation with other corps. If CCP are going to do something about mechanics it has to be done from the aspect of decreasing the monopoly of null by large alliances.

Monopoly bad, m'kay. It breeds restlessness in the mob/"fanbois" and other mainstream "wannabes".

Carebears, Nullbears and CCP, oh my.

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#410 - 2013-01-26 09:35:04 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Or a lame attempt to bury the talk about power projection and how is is a core issue with sov...


IMO, limiting projection power would probably only bring 2 different things.

1- Hidden diplomacy where one corp/alliance deal with another so one open a front and the other one try to capitalise on the fact the enemy moved his assets to counter the 1st front. The insane waiting game to know who would be willing to be on the opening move side instead of the capitalisation side would be horrible. There is also the problem of the second front never opening if they don't see it as easy to get it as it should thus letting the first attacked alone to deal with the trouble. Coalition don't start war they don't think they really have the grater chance to win. Why would they under another system?

2- Even more waiting game where everybody wait for someone to get angry enough to open the first front to cause an asset shift to create a better opening elsewhere. Who would make the first move? The impatient one I guess...

There is also the whole diplomacy possible to stop any exploitation attack on the second front after the first one caused an asset shift...
Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#411 - 2013-01-26 09:36:10 UTC
LOL @ the thought of Goons trying to blue CONCORDP

Seriously though, if their Glorious Leader is whining about not going to war "because of grind" you'd have thought the scrubs would have fully backed this thread. Oh well, just another day in GD I guessRoll
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#412 - 2013-01-26 09:59:35 UTC
true warriors like eve-uni, pioneers of the dec shield
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#413 - 2013-01-26 10:23:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Vilnius Zar
The true reasons nothing ever really happens in 0.0:


- we're all jaded, we've all been doing this for years and back then we had really good reasons for it (extreme dislikes, the "us vs them" feeling) but these days... pffff. It's all one big melting pot where we know our enemies on a first name basis due to meta gaming and players switching corps/alliances/powerblocks. Lets face it, perhaps the old garde is still clinging to this game for no other reason than "we don't know when to quit" but these days lack the fire, drive and youthful eagerness to make stuff happen. The old boys network prevents stuff from actually happening and changing.

- we're lacking a universal bad boy, a target people can rally against/for and there's simply no grudge matches anymore, this also ties in with reason #1

- power projection, because of jump bridges, titans rides and Scaps being able to deploy just about anywhere on a whim's notice location is a non-issue and as such there's no reason to fight for "better space" other than moons and not wanting to have nasty hostiles next door. Logistics are silly easy and aren't affected by location.

- 0.0 is full of risk averse carebears just as in high sec. By that I mean that choices are made based on income possibilities and security, there's no difference between an alliance deciding to stay put and blue everything in the surrounding area because they might lose a moon or fight and a high sec bear not entering low sec because he might lose his raven. People can claim and posture all they want taking the high ground but in reality they're just as bad. This results in NIPS and 0.0 folks moving to high sec to "have some fun" while in reality it just means easy non-risk shooting at fish in a barrel. And while that's fun to do it's also showing they're taking the game so serious that they don't want to "risk" anything

- powerblocks, doesn't need explanation I hope



So, while sov issues certainly don't help they never stopped us before, 15 minute module activation didn't stop us, terrible exploits/features didn't stop us. What IS stopping us is a lacking motivation, taking the game too serious and the old boys still being in control while being burnt out on the game and having lost the fire. Changing the SOV mechanics is overdue yes, but it won't change anything because all of the above still applies.
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#414 - 2013-01-26 11:22:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Zloco Crendraven
I as a small entity with 90% of other small entities say that nerfing the force projection will do more good than bad to us. Goonies have no rights to talk about it cos they dont give a **** about small entities and dont know anything about it. Ty and good bye :D

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#415 - 2013-01-26 11:32:51 UTC
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.

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

*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

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


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


sounds good to me! as I like to say there should always be something fun to shoot! a small roaming gang should be met with force, not dock up for a few mins till they get bored and move on. or if you do run and hide they can do something that will annoy you, I was just thinking if they shoot your thingy all your anoms revert to the lowest level till they all get cleared. or some sort of incursion like penalty, or a bounty stealer.

and of course players need stuff to do, having one guy ratting and another doing all the anoms sucks for getting players out to 0.0. especially when there are systems where you are better off mining veldspar than ratting.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Mamucha
Rookie Empire Citizens
#416 - 2013-01-26 11:33:53 UTC
I dont have perfect answers. but i have newer seen 0.0 this peacefull. So wheres the risk thats supposed to be on 0.0?

Intel channels gets you early warning of any reds seen.

So maybe CCP should just remove local from 0.0. Would make it harder to call cavalry since you dont see how many reds are on system...

Why does jumpdrive/titan briding has to be 100% reliable allways? Heck our crappy autopilot needs 15 km safetyclearance just for gates in same system. So add some randomness, a chance of failure when you jump. Little bad luck and you endup entire somewhere else then you intended to jump... Maybe some high multiplier skill to train that reduces chance of jump ending up on landing somewhere random, but it should newer be 100% reliable all the time.. And naturally shorter jumps has higher chance to go where you intended to land...

Would bring a little risk into moveing that super capital hammer fleet arround...

We were recruiting.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#417 - 2013-01-26 14:51:19 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I also asked for an unbiased answer. Your petty bitchiness does not help accomplish whatever goal you are setting out to do. You are saying a whole shift of things would make things more boring than they already are? Based on what you and yours are already saying, that is impossible. Yet here you are saying the same thing over and over even at the cost of contradicting yourself.

What effort or lackthereof you exert will only assert the fact you wish to troll and be selective in what you read and spout current mechanics as the problem, yet rebel change and only offer that CCP do something to make things better for you.

Obviously you wanted to get away from highsec or you wouldn't be here in the first place, yet you are showing your envy generated tears at what you cannot have.

If you think it will be more boring to generate more content, by all means do not like it. If you do not like my ideas, by all means do not like it.

But if you think people are getting HAPPIER by having to choke down your self righteous crying about how high it atop the mountain, you aren't going to find sympathy.

Be happy there are still people wanting DRASTIC changes to change things up and reset the boredom you cry about on a daily basis.

Just because I don't have a management role in a sov corp doesn't mean I can't read the same sanctimonious bullshit you guys post each and every single day.

Doesn't mean I don't want to see change. You are like a petulant child crying that jimmy broke your heart and then yell at the parent "You don't understand! I love him! waaaaahhhh!!!" because I am not feeling your pain.

Regardless, it will not affect my daily routine, and maybe, just maybe, other people would also want to see a change to get into null.


Your current attitude is not going to be make null be even more inviting.


So instead of fixing your post into a readable format and participating in a coherent discussion you decide to have a mini-meltdown on the forums. Thank you for that this was very enjoyable.

E: I should note all of us who live in nullsec already know you aren't in a sov nullsec corp and have no idea what you are talking about.



Funny you should say that. As I am affiliated with corps and an alliance based out in stain, and have mentioned doing exactly what is going on right now. TEST and Goons have reset. You all have spent pages and pages explaining how that wouldn't work because of sov, and now you are doing exactly that. E: small gangs of goons and test roaming around killing each other while you are reset and are not killing structures.

Weird how I have been clamoring for that and told it wouldn't work, then you guys end up doing it anyways.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#418 - 2013-01-26 14:52:19 UTC
All of you power projection whiners don't realize that any nerf you can think of will be better coped with using numbers. Who has the numbers? Not you, hence it will hurt you more than us. All the nerf serves to do is make the game more miserable for the both of us and I don't think either of us want that.

As long as timers exist power projection is a non-issue.

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

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#419 - 2013-01-26 14:55:38 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Funny you should say that. As I am affiliated with corps and an alliance based out in stain, and have mentioned doing exactly what is going on right now. TEST and Goons have reset. You all have spent pages and pages explaining how that wouldn't work because of sov, and now you are doing exactly that. E: small gangs of goons and test roaming around killing each other while you are reset and are not killing structures.

Weird how I have been clamoring for that and told it wouldn't work, then you guys end up doing it anyways.



Took you how many pages to finally respond to that? Fixing that post you made with the terrible formatting would have been a better idea. What you were asking for was moving moons to lowsec only which is a terrible idea, we debunked all of your arguments and you replied as was "lol no."

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

Dave Stark
#420 - 2013-01-26 15:00:14 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
we debunked all of your arguments and you replied as was "lol no."


that seems to be a common theme in this thread.