These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Encounter Surveillance System - Fix the anomaly...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2014-05-15 01:11:15 UTC
mmmmm delicious tears......i hate the ess

i think it was a waste of time and effort and added nothing overall to the game

then someone discovered how to put in in anoms and surprise surprise people in their solo ceptors discovered that they could not just jump...run...take isk and get out....the perfect solution to the ratting nerf ccp tried to put on null

as for op...get friends...fly something other than a ceptor
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#22 - 2014-05-15 02:01:55 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
OK.. so it's one of those threads.
...
If you think fleets, counter-drops and CTAs are going to happen over a ESS you're a long way off from approaching a sensible discussion on the topic.


Do you even realize how you sound when you start a post this way? probably not...

while trying to put yourself on the "higher" ground, you seem to disregard that small scale PvPers could do hot drops... well, yes they can.

This said, I do agree that the inty buff and the simultaneous ESS release was unfortunate.. Still there are some solutions to this specific issue, one of them I suggested in previous posts, but placing ESS in anomalies should not remain the solution as this risk adds up to all the other risks already highlighted before, and prevents small scale engagement around them.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project
Falin Whalen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-05-15 04:53:03 UTC
Saisin wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
OK.. so it's one of those threads.
...
If you think fleets, counter-drops and CTAs are going to happen over a ESS you're a long way off from approaching a sensible discussion on the topic.


Do you even realize how you sound when you start a post this way? probably not...

while trying to put yourself on the "higher" ground, you seem to disregard that small scale PvPers could do hot drops... well, yes they can.

This said, I do agree that the inty buff and the simultaneous ESS release was unfortunate.. Still there are some solutions to this specific issue, one of them I suggested in previous posts, but placing ESS in anomalies should not remain the solution as this risk adds up to all the other risks already highlighted before, and prevents small scale engagement around them.


WAH! I don't have the mental capacity to figure out how to defeat emergent game play, CCP please nerf. That is all your OP is. The fact is, some clever individuals have already found cleaver ways around the "problem". Just because you can't figure out how to do it, doesn't make it a problem for everyone else.

"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka 
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#24 - 2014-05-15 05:09:13 UTC
Falin Whalen wrote:

WAH! I don't have the mental capacity to figure out how to defeat emergent game play, CCP please nerf. That is all your OP is. The fact is, some clever individuals have already found cleaver ways around the "problem". Just because you can't figure out how to do it, doesn't make it a problem for everyone else.

Oh look, another goonwaffe drone!!

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#25 - 2014-05-15 05:20:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tauranon
Saisin wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
OK.. so it's one of those threads.
...
If you think fleets, counter-drops and CTAs are going to happen over a ESS you're a long way off from approaching a sensible discussion on the topic.


Do you even realize how you sound when you start a post this way? probably not...

while trying to put yourself on the "higher" ground, you seem to disregard that small scale PvPers could do hot drops... well, yes they can.

This said, I do agree that the inty buff and the simultaneous ESS release was unfortunate.. Still there are some solutions to this specific issue, one of them I suggested in previous posts, but placing ESS in anomalies should not remain the solution as this risk adds up to all the other risks already highlighted before, and prevents small scale engagement around them.



Nobody wants homogenous interceptor fleets as the only roaming formations ever seen. The interceptor is a support ship.

You only need 1 T3 to completely manage the NPCs, and the T3 has more than sufficient mobility to get anywhere you get an interceptor to, and since you are investing, you can invest in making it warp faster too.

Whether or not CCP wanted the anomoly trick to occur, its a good brake on homogenous raiding interceptors - so its plain they aren't going to remove it.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#26 - 2014-05-15 05:22:10 UTC
Saisin wrote:
Falin Whalen wrote:

WAH! I don't have the mental capacity to figure out how to defeat emergent game play, CCP please nerf. That is all your OP is. The fact is, some clever individuals have already found cleaver ways around the "problem". Just because you can't figure out how to do it, doesn't make it a problem for everyone else.

Oh look, another goonwaffe drone!!


Oh look you lost the argument and are resorting to adhominem.
Solecist Project
#27 - 2014-05-15 06:59:55 UTC
He had no argument to begin with, Tauranon.

See 10mn AB on a frigate.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#28 - 2014-05-15 07:08:02 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
I'm sure CCP has data on precisely how much isk was "stolen" from all ESS units, and will rebalance the risk/reward aspect of them accordingly if sov should ever come under another balance pass. Twisted
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#29 - 2014-05-15 07:10:11 UTC
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Please allow us to anchor ESS in highsec.






Yes. Let alone another feature where "this is the first iteration but we will release other versions later".

A highsec one would be great for mission runners. A lowsec one for FW farmers would be great too.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Solecist Project
#30 - 2014-05-15 07:32:38 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Please allow us to anchor ESS in highsec.






Yes. Let alone another feature where "this is the first iteration but we will release other versions later".

A highsec one would be great for mission runners. A lowsec one for FW farmers would be great too.

Imagine that!

Highsec ESS have to be dropped in the first room of a mission,
reducing the bounty for the mission runner.

If he attacks it, he goes suspect.




*snickers* xD

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#31 - 2014-05-15 13:16:35 UTC
Saisin wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
OK.. so it's one of those threads.
...
If you think fleets, counter-drops and CTAs are going to happen over a ESS you're a long way off from approaching a sensible discussion on the topic.


Do you even realize how you sound when you start a post this way? probably not...

while trying to put yourself on the "higher" ground, you seem to disregard that small scale PvPers could do hot drops... well, yes they can.


Well, yes actually. The higher ground to take here is "has actual experience of them", which I have, and you do not.

On any given day, just in one region (Deklein, for example) there are dozens of thefts / attempted thefts. I'm not sure what problem you are trying to solve here, but the people who are stealing from them have already solved it.

If you remove the ability to place them in anoms, then you remove the existing small roaming gangs and replace them with solo interceptors.

You're literally suggesting a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, which would actually create the problem you are trying to solve. This is why it's dangerous to try to "fix things" that you don't have experience of.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#32 - 2014-05-15 14:27:22 UTC
Saisin wrote:
Commandante Caldari wrote:
From what I understand is that you just want an easy and risk-free access to an unprotected ESS to steal stuff without getting scrammed by frigs and ganked by battleships for 3 minutes additionally scrammed inside the bubble. What about rats insta-lock your pod and kill it? Same logic. But it still doesn't happen. Placing the ESS in an anomaly is good because noone can protect it 24/7 and therefore it's a nice challange to steal. Isn't it?


I would totally agree to see access to ESS curved in such a way that interceptors for example can't access it, may be by having a special hacking module required on the ship to access it that would be beyond frig size ships capacity to fit.





Yeah, let's change the completely senseless mechanic like people deploying deployable objects in a place you don't like into something that makes far more sense, like completely arbitrary ship restrictions.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#33 - 2014-05-15 14:49:17 UTC
Give it up folks.
There is zero chance the cartels will allow CCP to alter the ESS mechanics, unless it is another buff.
The ISK is just too easy for the cartels to allow anyone to mess with it.

Though I am looking forward to when CCP introduces the ESS to the most intense high sec L4 missioning systems and Incursion systems, and then tell the high sec player base it is an improvement to their income and game content.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2014-05-15 14:50:31 UTC
Ahahahaha hilariously enough a terrible highsec anti-suicide gank argument fits this:

"You aren't doing real pvp you just want to shoot things that don't shoot back."

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
#35 - 2014-05-15 14:52:12 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Give it up folks.
There is zero chance the cartels will allow CCP to alter the ESS mechanics, unless it is another buff.
The ISK is just too easy for the cartels to allow anyone to mess with it.

Though I am looking forward to when CCP introduces the ESS to the most intense high sec L4 missioning systems and Incursion systems, and then tell the high sec player base it is an improvement to their income and game content.


We discussed this at our last meeting, incursions no longer pay bounties/lp but, must be shared/stolen from the ESS and if no ESS exists then incursion runners won't be paid.

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
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#36 - 2014-05-15 16:15:40 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
The higher ground to take here is "has actual experience of them", which I have, and you do not.

You'r wrong, I do. What kind of stuff do you take to gain this all-awareness powers? well, you should change your kool-aid, as it does not really work...

Plenty are trying to obfuscate my point, but my main issue is that the current anomaly NPC protection adds up to the already existing benefit of placing them in your home turf. With the risk of the ESS being in such anomaly, it makes sense that most of the steal attempts currently are done with interceptors, as you can warp out easily of the anomaly if the ESS has indeed been deployed there.

It does make sense the cartels want to keep that capability to cheaply defend them this way, but this is at the expense of the original game design described by CCP when they introduced the ESS, which is encouraging small gangs PvP action around them.

Now if CCP was to provide statistics to show that indeed, even in the anomalies, small gangs are taking on ESS and they serve their design purpose, then I'd be glad to back off. Until proven otherwise, though, I simply do not believe the ESS are filling their design purpose.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2014-05-15 16:50:29 UTC
Saisin wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
The higher ground to take here is "has actual experience of them", which I have, and you do not.

You'r wrong, I do. What kind of stuff do you take to gain this all-awareness powers? well, you should change your kool-aid, as it does not really work...

Plenty are trying to obfuscate my point, but my main issue is that the current anomaly NPC protection adds up to the already existing benefit of placing them in your home turf. With the risk of the ESS being in such anomaly, it makes sense that most of the steal attempts currently are done with interceptors, as you can warp out easily of the anomaly if the ESS has indeed been deployed there.

It does make sense the cartels want to keep that capability to cheaply defend them this way, but this is at the expense of the original game design described by CCP when they introduced the ESS, which is encouraging small gangs PvP action around them.

Now if CCP was to provide statistics to show that indeed, even in the anomalies, small gangs are taking on ESS and they serve their design purpose, then I'd be glad to back off. Until proven otherwise, though, I simply do not believe the ESS are filling their design purpose.


The state war academy has no sov space so no, you do not have any experience with 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
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#38 - 2014-05-15 17:17:14 UTC
Tauranon wrote:

Whether or not CCP wanted the anomoly trick to occur, its a good brake on homogenous raiding interceptors - so its plain they aren't going to remove it.

I believe it is the opposite that occurs... It is because of the anomaly placement that people are encouraged to raid them with interceptors as you can then warp out of the anomaly easily.


Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project
Pubbie Spy
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#39 - 2014-05-15 17:18:13 UTC
Saisin wrote:
[
Now if CCP was to provide statistics to show that indeed, even in the anomalies, small gangs are taking on ESS and they serve their design purpose, then I'd be glad to back off. Until proven otherwise, though, I simply do not believe the ESS are filling their design purpose.


Thanks for admitting you've never actually put up an ESS.

10/10 would read your argument again.
Higgs Foton
Mission And Mining Inc
#40 - 2014-05-15 17:37:03 UTC
I would support such a move like the OP posted, provided that:

1. Apart from scramming the one trying to steal is also webbed to 95% speed when accessing the ESS.

2. Apart from scramming and webbing the one trying to steal is also neuted to zero capacitor

Oh, and we need more LP, and the pay out bonus should be 25% when an ESS is deployed. And gecko drones need a serious buff. I feel they are quite underpowered now. :(