Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This is a good idea. while it would be great for current sov. holders to have only supers field the entosis. its illogical to think a low sec gangs wanting space would be able to field one, even if they could afford one now they most likely would lose it once, then never be able to enter sov again as all sov holding corps would never let anyone produce one (supers) for neutral sales. You would also eventually run out of those on the market currently. I agree there needs to be a limit on the size of ships required to fit an entosis otherwise you will have non-stop harassing trolling fleets, and small alliances would never be able to hold sov as it would become to much of a hassle to get you indices up after getting your ihub reinforced.

Never ever going to happen. Missions and anoms are isk faucets. Converting null sov systems to having missions will just mean more isk flowing into the economy and result in inflation.

Not.
Going.
To.
Happen.

By limiting 'Entosis' links to supers you cut out on the spam that will come with being able to fit it on any ship.

In response to "so that many small groups all attacking different constellations will be hard for even a very large defender" - this is wrong. So you have some small alliances trying to take sov? Ok, the small entity spreads across 5 different constellations with small groups to take space! But no one has thought about how big groups, like mine, could easily field six or more defense fleets - each much larger than a small groups biggest fleet. Also, in response to "guys didn't have enough super" - just wait till the smaller guys spread their forces across five points of interest only to meet with super fleets in each one.

Lets say 'Entosis' links can be fit on, umm, cruisers and higher: Do you know how easy it would be to send a mass fleet around EVE nullsec and 'Entosis' link everything there is? Literally could make one swift round-about through 0.0 and reinforce everything in one day, no problem. Ok, maybe not everything, but 75-80% of all sov. Fitting "Entosis" links to anything sup-capital is asking for exploitation.

Making supers the only ones able to "Entosis Link" stuff will definitely influence more fighting however.


Yes, you can buy supers from most anyone regardless of ~standing~.

No, nullsec is not currently an isk fountain, we need more.

If you want to allow for higher population density in each null sec system, just add a level of anom above sanctum which is like an incursion or WH anom requiring multiple players to complete, but worth more ISK. This way if multiple people are in system they can run the big anom, but if one guy is solo, he can do the sanctum.

I would make it like a WH anom where if a cap ship warps in they escalate with their own caps which are worth nothing to prevent gaming the system.

I can see this, although if the reflection ability isn't defined right it could become a way to abuse multiple doomday into an AOE weapon.

As for Anoms in null, a lot of space out there is owned and empty. The combat groups could spread out along the edges systems while industry focuses at the core with a few combat guys to get the trollceptors andclear belts.
An agent will just cause everyone to focus at the systems around an outpost sadly.

edit: I didn't see the reflection titan taking the 50% damage, but I have see titans exchange doomsdays all day so it could still take a few

seems he is right

I have thought about how big groups could intelligently organize themselves into a mass of smaller groups actually. That's why i suffixed what i wrote with "if not extremely well organized". Since I recognize that GSF/CFC is actually extremely well organized, that's why I don't think this change will be one that you simply can't cope with.

That's fine, you can deploy your super fleets in each of those points of interest. This still isn't helping to sway me that Entosis links should be super only.

The point behind the change is if you want to keep the space you need to be active within it. As CCP Fozzie said during that controversial Eve Down Under podcast, "if we don't make the balance of the entosis module correctly.....you will not have time to respond" and then yes your concerns are valid. I am pretty sure Fozzie is thinking about his options as to the fitting requirements of the module, but Super-only is way too far in the direction of maintaining status quo.

--
Fang

Not only would this inject too much isk into the system but it is also a terrible long term plan. Anoms do not scale with either inflation or rising populations. Missions are much better in both areas due to the infinate amount of population they can handle and that most of their reward comes in the form of LP.

The main problem with supers is the CCP approach to the problem: quite shortsighted .

It's all about being analytical:
CCP, through Fozzie, stated recently that the main problem with supers is that they've become too common/there are too much supers and this turn em into a wrecking ball.
I mostly agree with this statement.

Given the trouble, is when being analytical is relevant:

-You can go the CCP way, somehow childish, and start nerfing the ships reducing their use (wtf), therefore their rotation and turn the problem even bigger. Aka Phoebe.
-You can, even after a big failure, go into another one(aka ceptorsov) and announce your intention of developing a third and apocalyptical failure: give a finger to your most loyal customers. Tell the people that have invested more time and money on this game to gtfo and take down years of ingame sacrifice and effort to the floor.

Fail.

Why, instead all this ****, you don't think how to solve the problem instead creating bigger new ones?
If the problem is "there are too many supers" develop ways for players to lose em in glorious combat. In glorious events. >25b spaceships DESERVE a glorious death at least.

*rave*
Why don't create a PVE background, around this drifter shitlords and Joves and whatever you want, where supers explode in glorious combat for sov-**** and magnificient especial/officer-like/whatever modules?
*end of rave*

The point is that, to fix the current problem with super capitals you should create a workflow around something like this:

1) There are too many supers -> lots of supers need to explode.
2) How do we make content that make supers explode, without pissing our BEST F**** customers.
3) Deliver content, watch fireworks.
4) People receive bacon, enjoy content, new meta emerge.
5) Rework super manufacturing, according to current EVEO financial situation and with a system which is escalable to EVE's financial reality. This system should allow CCP to "handle" supercapitals population.
Basically, you should be the UN no-proliferation watchers.

Come on guys, Asakai and B-R bringed more people to the game that whatever thing you'll ever do. Supercapital pilots gave you millions of dollars with the content they created.
With your current workflow you're aiming towards giving a finger at thousands of players who invested thousands of hours to train for those ships, fly those ships and RISK A LOT into those ships.
If you rework supers into command ships you'll fail at EVE, because super pilots don't want a giant commandship nor whatever delirious idea you have.

If you wanna kill supercapital ships, kill em on combat. That's what they the deserve.