These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kah'Les
hirr
Pandemic Horde
#1381 - 2015-03-04 14:51:06 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Kah'Les wrote:
And yes null sec is supposed to be for the hardcore.


Yes yes, tell us all how hardcore you are while playing an internet video game. Look, sov should be something where when someone wants it, they have to earn it. Their ability to earn it should be based on effort and ability, not on whether or not they've met an arbitrary threshold of account age. And that's all 'being able to fly X ship' really is - are you old enough to have gotten the training time in for this kind of hull?


Thanks for explaining what hardcore is? Taking time and effort to earn your space, not just activate a Entosis Link, but put efforts and guns into it.
Cr Turist
Arcana Noctis
#1382 - 2015-03-04 14:51:25 UTC
AlexKent wrote:
Hear that boys?

It's the titan prices falling in a cascade of delicious NCdot tears.

Also, RIP renter empire, you might wanna merge NA in your alliance so you will be able to protect their space. So much for being elite.



umm this effects you just as much if not more than us m8.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#1383 - 2015-03-04 14:51:38 UTC
Cr Turist wrote:
if you can take space and keep space u can have space it shouldnt take CCP giving it to you. provi is a great example of this they took the space they wanted and they defend it at all cost.


Right. If you can take space you can have space. But 'if you can take space' should be 'if you can take space', not 'if your account is old enough for CCP to allow you to try'.

Someone who's ballsy enough, smart enough, and busts his butt to do the work shouldn't be sitting around saying 'well, I'd love to hold sov, but CCP says I can't until I have X hull'. That's just bull.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1384 - 2015-03-04 14:51:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

So interceptors ensure occupants, active, and engaged.
Banning them reinforces current sovereignty stagnation.

Don't think you are going to get your way.


You might actually be handicapped.

You can just park a battleship on a timer to contest it, with a tank that an interceptor can't break. These changes are a huge buff to even a semi active defender. So no matter what, you don't get your way.

Interceptors need nerfed for a lot of reasons, besides.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Black Ambulance
#1385 - 2015-03-04 14:52:25 UTC
Suede wrote:
DeadDuck wrote:
CCP,

In order to prevent abuses and griefing please restrict the use of Entosis Link to Capital Ships. If a group or alliance wants to mess with someones sov make them commit seriously.




what you are saying it going to lock it to one sided again
most new player can not fly capital ships,

stuff like this will force new players to not want to play eve


restrict it to noobships only
Cr Turist
Arcana Noctis
#1386 - 2015-03-04 14:53:10 UTC
Ummm Yes.[/quote]
Incorrect.[/quote]

No pritty sure im right. [/quote]
No, pretty sure it's not supposed to be for the elitist few. Eager, but inexperienced pilots should be able to have a go as well, adding a ship which requires sov into that mix is going the wrong way. So no, you're not right.[/quote]

looks at brave and thinks to self what is this guys argument. so still right
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1387 - 2015-03-04 14:53:34 UTC
Kah'Les wrote:
Arrendis wrote:
Kah'Les wrote:
And yes null sec is supposed to be for the hardcore.


Yes yes, tell us all how hardcore you are while playing an internet video game. Look, sov should be something where when someone wants it, they have to earn it. Their ability to earn it should be based on effort and ability, not on whether or not they've met an arbitrary threshold of account age. And that's all 'being able to fly X ship' really is - are you old enough to have gotten the training time in for this kind of hull?


Thanks for explaining what hardcore is? Taking time and effort to earn your space, not just activate a Entosis Link, but put efforts and guns into it.

Oh hey what's this, the defenders undocked another ship and put their own entosis link on the target, stopping the reinforcement? Oh dear, guess the defender's ****** now.
Kah'Les
hirr
Pandemic Horde
#1388 - 2015-03-04 14:53:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Kah'Les
Lord TGR wrote:

No, pretty sure it's not supposed to be for the elitist few. Eager, but inexperienced pilots should be able to have a go as well, adding a ship which requires sov into that mix is going the wrong way. So no, you're not right.


Pretty sure that you missed the point, look at brave they are comidet to their sov they hold it at all cost. They are low sp but they put effort in and time = hardcore...
Behr Oroo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1389 - 2015-03-04 14:53:37 UTC
So with the prime time thing... what stops a group from just making their prime the same as one of the big blocks like Goons or NC, or whoever.

Then you havent created content. Just a stalemate.
Cr Turist
Arcana Noctis
#1390 - 2015-03-04 14:54:46 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Cr Turist wrote:
if you can take space and keep space u can have space it shouldnt take CCP giving it to you. provi is a great example of this they took the space they wanted and they defend it at all cost.


Right. If you can take space you can have space. But 'if you can take space' should be 'if you can take space', not 'if your account is old enough for CCP to allow you to try'.

Someone who's ballsy enough, smart enough, and busts his butt to do the work shouldn't be sitting around saying 'well, I'd love to hold sov, but CCP says I can't until I have X hull'. That's just bull.


so instead it should be because i have X amount of ishtars?
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#1391 - 2015-03-04 14:55:05 UTC
I wonder where the CSM stands in all of this. There's only a single post from them in this thread. Considering the significance of the matter, some representation may be appropriate?

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Cr Turist
Arcana Noctis
#1392 - 2015-03-04 14:55:33 UTC
Kah'Les wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:

No pritty sure im right.

No, pretty sure it's not supposed to be for the elitist few. Eager, but inexperienced pilots should be able to have a go as well, adding a ship which requires sov into that mix is going the wrong way. So no, you're not right.


Pretty sure that you missed the point, look at brave they are comidet to their sov they hold it at all cost. They are low sp but they put effort in and time = hardcore...[/quote]

hey look another goon
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1393 - 2015-03-04 14:55:41 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

So interceptors ensure occupants, active, and engaged.
Banning them reinforces current sovereignty stagnation.

Don't think you are going to get your way.


You might actually be handicapped.

You can just park a battleship on a timer to contest it, with a tank that an interceptor can't break. These changes are a huge buff to even a semi active defender. So no matter what, you don't get your way.

Interceptors need nerfed for a lot of reasons, besides.



Somewhat missing the point, once again. Interceptors are able to take uncontested systems into contention, if no one comes, you don't need to return with anything better.

Systems with people living in them, will have no problems with them, all banning interceptors from this role will achieve is to enable an alliance to hold large areas of lightly occupied or empty buffer systems within strong borders.

Of course they want interceptors banned, it is cozy at the moment, but you already knew that, didn't you?Roll

Hence we will get the propaganda war against interceptors, cause they will work as designed.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Demons Hell
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1394 - 2015-03-04 14:56:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Demons Hell
O_O....25 km t1.....O_o...250 km t2....whaaaaaaat?.....o_O....its ******* OP....good boost for a tech 2 stuff....i dont see in game one another stuff can boost +1000% the tech1 variant.

its ok if u boost the entosis range with the class ship(role bonus)....more big ship for more entosis range....but max 100 km not more..250 km in interceptor is ridicolous.

and please station service invulnerable....only hackable in the freeport mode or during the second timer...i dont want run in a station every time a troll frigate with a tech 1 module try hack and disable a station service.

i want play the game not only run in the game.

fix trolletto mechanics please.
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#1395 - 2015-03-04 14:57:37 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:

Trollceptors are only an issue if the space is vacant - active areas can just undock almost any single ship to just sit at zero.


To just sit at zero and do..what? Sit there with a 20/80M link fitted just to borrow a little time and wait for the interceptor's support fleet to pass by and shoot him down, while the interceptor is still pretty much untouchable at 100km@5000m/s ? (OR also play that interceptor game resulting in a stalemate)



I'm with the voices asking to limit those links to battleship or at least battlecruiser sized ships. (Black Ops could increase in application value that way, too)
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1396 - 2015-03-04 14:57:41 UTC
Demons Hell wrote:
O_O....25 km t1.....O_o...250 km t2....whaaaaaaat?.....o_O....its ******* OP....good boost for a tech 2 stuff....i dont see in game one another stuff can boost +1000% the tech1 variant.

its ok if u boost the entosis range with the class ship(role bonus)....more big ship for more entosis range....but max 100 km not more..250 km in interceptor its ridicolous.

and please station service invulnerable....only hackable in the freeport mode or during the second timer...i dont want run in a station every time a troll frigate with a tech 1 module try hack and disable a station service.

i want play the game not only run in the game.

fix trolletto mechanics please.


Yes 250km in an interceptor IS ridiculous - which is why their slot layouts and fitting attributes don't enable them to be fit to lock that far Roll

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1397 - 2015-03-04 14:57:42 UTC
Kah'Les wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:

No, pretty sure it's not supposed to be for the elitist few. Eager, but inexperienced pilots should be able to have a go as well, adding a ship which requires sov into that mix is going the wrong way. So no, you're not right.


Pretty sure that you missed the point, look at brave they are comidet to their sov they hold it at all cost. They are low sp but they put effort in and time = hardcore...

I'm sure your titans'll get a role somewhere, but I strongly doubt being a direct part of reinforcing a station/TCU/IHUB is going to be one of those.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1398 - 2015-03-04 14:58:04 UTC
Demons Hell wrote:
O_O....25 km t1.....O_o...250 km t2....whaaaaaaat?.....o_O....its ******* OP....good boost for a tech 2 stuff....i dont see in game one another stuff can boost +1000% the tech1 variant.

its ok if u boost the entosis range with the class ship(role bonus)....more big ship for more entosis range....but max 100 km not more..250 km in interceptor its ridicolous.

and please station service invulnerable....only hackable in the freeport mode or during the second timer...i dont want run in a station every time a troll frigate with a tech 1 module try hack and disable a station service.

i want play the game not only run in the game.

fix trolletto mechanics please.



Shoot frigate, or activate your own module. You surely can deal with a single frigate?

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1399 - 2015-03-04 14:58:55 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
I wonder where the CSM stands in all of this. There's only a single post from them in this thread. Considering the significance of the matter, some representation may be appropriate?


CSM is only a Sounding board to CCP

would be very to nothing to there feedback under the NDA
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1400 - 2015-03-04 14:58:57 UTC
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Trollceptors are only an issue if the space is vacant - active areas can just undock almost any single ship to just sit at zero.


To just sit at zero and do..what? Sit there with a 20/80M link fitted just to borrow a little time and wait for the interceptor's support fleet to pass by and shoot him down, while the interceptor is still pretty much untouchable at 100km@5000m/s ? (OR also play that interceptor game resulting in a stalemate)



I'm with the voices asking to limit those links to battleship or at least battlecruiser sized ships. (Black Ops could increase in application value that way, too)

So suddenly THEY have a support fleet closer than you do...in your home system that your trying to defend during your primetime?


You don't deserve your sov.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager