These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 
Author
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#61 - 2013-09-20 12:34:44 UTC
Oh, man. Please more ideas from utterly clueless people on silver bullet nullsec fixes.

I won't deny that timers are a clumsy measure on a complex and fundamental problem, but the true solution will be an innovative step-forward in competitive sandbox MMOs, not your sophomoric "durrrr, no more timers to protect guuuuuuns" horseshit.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

Ka'Narlist
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#62 - 2013-09-20 12:35:12 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Please show me where goons steamrolled ~300 systems in 2-3 days

We could try if there weren't timers...

Yeah than you could do the same thing but luckily there are timers that prevent stuff like this.

Without timers no one could build up anything because you can't defend it 24h a day from everyone else.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#63 - 2013-09-20 13:15:06 UTC
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Please show me where goons steamrolled ~300 systems in 2-3 days

We could try if there weren't timers...

Yeah than you could do the same thing but luckily there are timers that prevent stuff like this.

Without timers no one could build up anything because you can't defend it 24h a day from everyone else.

No one suggested just removing timers. I pointed out that sov null is not sandbox. It's theme park, it favours big alliances who can wtfpwn anyone who turns up at the chosen time when the majority will be there to squash anyone stupid enough to challenge.

One other thing, who says you have to build up vast empires and lock the majority of people out of the sov game. In my opinion you should only take what YOU and your alliance can take. If you don't have the numbers then that's bad luck. Relying on the server to hand hold because you can't defend what you take is pathetic.

Emergent gameplay my ass, stagnant gameplay is more correct.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#64 - 2013-09-20 13:24:24 UTC
Timers protect smaller groups, you numpty.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

raz1980
North3rner
#65 - 2013-09-20 13:36:59 UTC
Guys... just get on with war and stop talking s**t Roll
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#66 - 2013-09-20 13:43:32 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Timers protect smaller groups, you numpty.

Server shouldn't be protecting anyone. And no the timers protect the big alliances.

If a big alliance wants to take someone's system they can timer or not. But if a small group wants to take a bigger groups they cannot as the bigger group gets to choose the time . Without timers they could take it when the alliance is most vulnerable, if the alliance hasn't been careful recruiting globally but the way things are they will always have to be on when the bigger alliance has its full force at its disposal.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Ka'Narlist
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#67 - 2013-09-20 13:57:46 UTC
Of course the bigger fish is in advantage. Please explain how Kuba for example could conquer a state of the US.

There is absolutly no reason why a 10 man group should be able to conquer something from a 1000 man group if the later is eager to defend it and Timers (or something very similar) have to be there because eve is a game and no 24h full time job/life.

By your model it wouldn't make any sense for small groups to take anything at all because they won't have any chance to defend it against one of the 1000 other small (and smaller) groups. They couldn't even hold when one or two hours later enough people from the bigger group log in again and just take it back.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#68 - 2013-09-20 13:59:19 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Server shouldn't be protecting anyone
The servers are protecting our sanity against you.
Should that also stop?

What you are advocating is that every day should look like S2N citizens dropped sov in the east and 300 systems were conquered by a supercap fleet.
Except that it can only be done if they have stable income, so everyplace will burn for a few days, and then you need a 50-man fleet in each system, all the time.
If what you suggests is the anti-goon / anti-blob, then I want my goon membership ASAP.

No, you're not right. Not even wrong. Just deluded and not-applicable.
Ezslider
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#69 - 2013-09-20 14:02:26 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Of course the bigger fish is in advantage. Please explain how Kuba for example could conquer a state of the US.

There is absolutly no reason why a 10 man group should be able to conquer something from a 1000 man group if the later is eager to defend it and Timers (or something very similar) have to be there because eve is a game and no 24h full time job/life.

By your model it wouldn't make any sense for small groups to take anything at all because they won't have any chance to defend it against one of the 1000 other small (and smaller) groups. They couldn't even hold when one or two hours later enough people from the bigger group log in again and just take it back.



But here is your problem...these guys have no idea what it takes to build a large entity they all ***** about.

They have no idea that an aaliance of 5000 autistic squirrels just does not spawn in the belts in Syndicate.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#70 - 2013-09-20 14:06:59 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
In Eve the victor any of war comes down to 3 things...

Number of Members (How big can you blob)
Isk
Organisation

CFC have all 3 and then some.

No other Coalition have these 3 combined hence the only thing that will topple the CFC will be some kind of internal drama which the chance of that happening is very very remote (about as remote as CCP showing some kind innovation)

Welcome to CFC Online :)



The number is not as important as you'd think as long as both sides surpass as specific amount (or general amount depending on how you look at it).

In a game where you can only hold 4,000 ships in one system, the fact you have 50,000 over the enemy's 35,000 isn't as big of an indicator to the victor.

The isk and organisational aspects have a bit of merit, but again, not as much as 1 can bury the other (employ of mercenaries for instance).

Commitment however... that's 1 trait that sure as hell is important.

Sov seems to be a war of attrition. Commitment being the biggest killer (lack of) that I've seen reading all the reports that happen.

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.

Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2013-09-20 14:12:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Server shouldn't be protecting anyone
The servers are protecting our sanity against you.
Should that also stop?

What you are advocating is that every day should look like S2N citizens dropped sov in the east and 300 systems were conquered by a supercap fleet.
Except that it can only be done if they have stable income, so everyplace will burn for a few days, and then you need a 50-man fleet in each system, all the time.
If what you suggests is the anti-goon / anti-blob, then I want my goon membership ASAP.

No, you're not right. Not even wrong. Just deluded and not-applicable.

I'm not suggesting anything. Don't get nervous, no need to attack. I'm just saying the solution to prevent people tearing down alliances while they're asleep (stupid thing to even suggest in a global MMO really) is propping up the mega alliances and causing an even bigger problem - preventing the majority of the playerbase from utilizing content because the minority who are protected by the server are invulnerable (literally with timers)

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#72 - 2013-09-20 14:17:59 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
I'm not suggesting anything. Don't get nervous, no need to attack. I'm just saying the solution to prevent people tearing down alliances while they're asleep (stupid thing to even suggest in a global MMO really) is propping up the mega alliances and causing an even bigger problem - preventing the majority of the playerbase from utilizing content because the minority who are protected by the server are invulnerable (literally with timers)
Going back to my rebuttal:
Like the Harry Forever charicature, you're so far off your comments are inapplicable.

Murk Paradox wrote:
Sov seems to be a war of attrition. Commitment being the biggest killer (lack of) that I've seen reading all the reports that happen.
To a large degree, yes. Try checking "The Art of War in EVE Online" on YT.
It's by The Mittani but from a grunt perspective it accurately represents how wars are fought in general.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#73 - 2013-09-20 14:19:12 UTC
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

If you're incapable of holding sov then you shouldn't hold it. If you're incapable of recruiting from other timezones you should lose sov to people that arnt. Player actions not server actions should decide who earns the right to a system. It would consequently solve many of the lag issues since there would be more dynamic smaller alliances rather than one or two huge US / Euro / Russian ones.

Thats a piece of bullshit.

Large Alliances allready have people in every timezone and if there where no timers the larger group of people could just steamroll the whole galaxy like N3 and pl did when their renter space dropped.
With no timers you would have to allways be rdy to log into the game with all you people because if not and you go to sleep for a few hours all your towers or sov could be blown up.



Read your reply again.

I'll point out the key parts...


"Large Alliances allready have people in every timezone"
"With no timers you would have to allways be rdy to log into the game"

Seems one compliments the other...

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.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2013-09-20 14:29:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Of course the bigger fish is in advantage. Please explain how Kuba for example could conquer a state of the US.

There is absolutly no reason why a 10 man group should be able to conquer something from a 1000 man group if the later is eager to defend it and Timers (or something very similar) have to be there because eve is a game and no 24h full time job/life.

By your model it wouldn't make any sense for small groups to take anything at all because they won't have any chance to defend it against one of the 1000 other small (and smaller) groups. They couldn't even hold when one or two hours later enough people from the bigger group log in again and just take it back.



Have you not watched Scarface?

Imagine 50 Scarfaces.

U.S would fall in a year.

Oh wait, Eve is a game, gotcha =)

Where if there were no timers, a large alliance could take EVERYTHING until they could not keep it all. And then would have to use diplomacy to not have sov switch back and forth on a daily basis (but a different group can come in and upset it) and worry about the dynamic of the entire game being able to upset their isk generation.

If you have Goons (example) keep saying "invade us!" then try to remove timers and see what happens.

Imagine all the fun with people who try to take your ancestral home (probably not succeed but the target/idea of it...) and how often Sov would switch hands.

Mercenary alliances would sprout all over the place lending their guns for fights since timers allow for too much organization and hurts guerrilla tactics and does in fact favor the larger group over the smaller because the smaller has to have suprise as their main strength, whereas surprise is simply a weaker tool in the target's arsenal.

Even to the point of just harassing the sov of a region would encourage more small/mid/large gang fights and temporary pacts just to "TRY".

A timer defeats those notions stronger than anything else. Timers help power projection. Timers allow forces enough time to scramble a defense from the other side of the universe.

It's a valid game mechanic sure.

But a lack of MIGHT or MIGHT NOT make it more "fun" due to the dynamics of being forced to commit titans and supers in order to keep up.

tl;dr Cyno chains, logistic chains, power projection and conquering forces would be deeply impacted by a lack of timers (for good or bad yay meta).

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.

Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2013-09-20 14:35:00 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Of course the bigger fish is in advantage. Please explain how Kuba for example could conquer a state of the US.

There is absolutly no reason why a 10 man group should be able to conquer something from a 1000 man group if the later is eager to defend it and Timers (or something very similar) have to be there because eve is a game and no 24h full time job/life.

By your model it wouldn't make any sense for small groups to take anything at all because they won't have any chance to defend it against one of the 1000 other small (and smaller) groups. They couldn't even hold when one or two hours later enough people from the bigger group log in again and just take it back.



Have you not watched Scarface?

Imagine 50 Scarfaces.

U.S would fall in a year.

Oh wait, Eve is a game, gotcha =)

Where if there were no timers, a large alliance could take EVERYTHING until they could not keep it all. And then would have to use diplomacy to not have sov switch back and forth on a daily basis (but a different group can come in and upset it) and worry about the dynamic of the entire game being able to upset their isk generation.

If you have Goons (example) keep saying "invade us!" then try to remove timers and see what happens.

Imagine all the fun with people who try to take your ancestral home (probably not succeed but the target/idea of it...) and how often Sov would switch hands.

Mercenary alliances would sprout all over the place lending their guns for fights since timers allow for too much organization and hurts guerrilla tactics and does in fact favor the larger group over the smaller because the smaller has to have suprise as their main strength, whereas surprise is simply a weaker tool in the target's arsenal.

Even to the point of just harassing the sov of a region would encourage more small/mid/large gang fights and temporary pacts just to "TRY".

A timer defeats those notions stronger than anything else. Timers help power projection. Timers allow forces enough time to scramble a defense from the other side of the universe.

It's a valid game mechanic sure.

But a lack of MIGHT or MIGHT NOT make it more "fun" due to the dynamics of being forced to commit titans and supers in order to keep up.

tl;dr Cyno chains, logistic chains, power projection and conquering forces would be deeply impacted by a lack of timers (for good or bad yay meta).

Wow someone who understands :)

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#76 - 2013-09-20 14:44:47 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:


Murk Paradox wrote:
Sov seems to be a war of attrition. Commitment being the biggest killer (lack of) that I've seen reading all the reports that happen.
To a large degree, yes. Try checking "The Art of War in EVE Online" on YT.
It's by The Mittani but from a grunt perspective it accurately represents how wars are fought in general.


Yea, and just reading the reports of a "major sov war" lasting a month is an indication.

People just do not have sand anymore.

When everyone wants to fly ships that cost billions as opposed to using older strategies (I get modernization I'm not arguing it) that utilized pure t1 and fights lasted MONTHS...

You can definitely demoralize an enemy fast.

If wars were fought and won without capitals and super caps and titans... the longevity would increase.

Fights would be more fun (not so stagnant and definitive as well as you could afford to reship everyday).

When I tried Eve briefly 10 years ago, it was because someone I knew who played Eve, talked about playing all night in a big fight with very large ships that were expensive, but still the fights lasted for DAYS on end. He would tell me how he would finally go to bed, wake up and go to work, get home, login, and join that VERY SAME fight.

That right there, is epic.

Now? 4,000 ships (granted much higher and resource intensive than back then) 14 hour fight, and it's over to the point most groups cannot come back from.

In the game of isk that's awesome.

In a game of battles that's terrible.

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.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#77 - 2013-09-20 14:46:40 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Of course the bigger fish is in advantage. Please explain how Kuba for example could conquer a state of the US.

There is absolutly no reason why a 10 man group should be able to conquer something from a 1000 man group if the later is eager to defend it and Timers (or something very similar) have to be there because eve is a game and no 24h full time job/life.

By your model it wouldn't make any sense for small groups to take anything at all because they won't have any chance to defend it against one of the 1000 other small (and smaller) groups. They couldn't even hold when one or two hours later enough people from the bigger group log in again and just take it back.



Have you not watched Scarface?

Imagine 50 Scarfaces.

U.S would fall in a year.

Oh wait, Eve is a game, gotcha =)

Where if there were no timers, a large alliance could take EVERYTHING until they could not keep it all. And then would have to use diplomacy to not have sov switch back and forth on a daily basis (but a different group can come in and upset it) and worry about the dynamic of the entire game being able to upset their isk generation.

If you have Goons (example) keep saying "invade us!" then try to remove timers and see what happens.

Imagine all the fun with people who try to take your ancestral home (probably not succeed but the target/idea of it...) and how often Sov would switch hands.

Mercenary alliances would sprout all over the place lending their guns for fights since timers allow for too much organization and hurts guerrilla tactics and does in fact favor the larger group over the smaller because the smaller has to have suprise as their main strength, whereas surprise is simply a weaker tool in the target's arsenal.

Even to the point of just harassing the sov of a region would encourage more small/mid/large gang fights and temporary pacts just to "TRY".

A timer defeats those notions stronger than anything else. Timers help power projection. Timers allow forces enough time to scramble a defense from the other side of the universe.

It's a valid game mechanic sure.

But a lack of MIGHT or MIGHT NOT make it more "fun" due to the dynamics of being forced to commit titans and supers in order to keep up.

tl;dr Cyno chains, logistic chains, power projection and conquering forces would be deeply impacted by a lack of timers (for good or bad yay meta).

Wow someone who understands :)


I like chaos and fights that are GvG (guild versus guild) that have no definitive outcome on the long term.

I understand Eve is not this so I do not maintain or advocate it for this game, but the hot and fast guerilla tactics and uncertainty appeal to me regardless.

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.

Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#78 - 2013-09-20 14:55:34 UTC
if you're upset about having to deal with timers in nullsec maybe you shouldn't go to nullsec

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#79 - 2013-09-20 14:57:02 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Now? 4,000 ships (granted much higher and resource intensive than back then) 14 hour fight, and it's over to the point most groups cannot come back from.

In the game of isk that's awesome.

In a game of battles that's terrible.
That was after 6 or 8 weeks of war, at which point the war was mostly determined (TEST wasn't really contesting timers for some days before that one).
We had a lot of smaller battles, some where Goons won by putting a fleet to guard their onlining objective for half a day.
The 6VDT battle was more than 4000 ships, btw, it was topping at a little over 4000 characters in that system and smaller intermediary fights elsewhere.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#80 - 2013-09-20 15:05:38 UTC
I see Infinity is at it again?

The only think you need to know about Infinity Ziona is that (s)he has an intensely selfish and even greedy worldview. This is why (s)he is against local because it warns people (s)he wants to kill, against cloaking because (s)he can't find them to kill and against SOV space because when (s)she raided Tribe's space it meant actual logistical effort instead of having some kind of free port to dock at to make killing ratting ships easier.

It's the same here, infinity doesn't like timers because it doesn't let infinity go solo into space that favors organized groups. And building a group of sufficient size and organization is too much effort. In short, Ziona is a solo-supremacist who doesn't understand that different areas of EVE-space have different things they focus on and that not all areas are supposed to favor "solo" players.

It seems that EVE solo-able lands (high sec, low sec, npc null, and up to class 4 wormholes) just aren't enough for some.