These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenshae Chiroptera
#441 - 2015-04-20 11:33:18 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
My popcorn is ready for when a strong all around coalition kicks out a prime EU TZ alliance from a region and installs a US -> AU TZ alliance (that probably paid them) in their place (or for free like Brave into Fountain)
Because this has totally been a major issue under current TZ mechanics with fuel and timers?
I mean really, there's plenty happening or probably going to happen that might provoke an "oooo! free show!" response, but this just doesn't fit unless you didn't actually bother to read the dev-blog...
I have scanned and dropped a fleet onto a refuelling ship.
Show me where the timer windows can be affected at all by the attackers.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#442 - 2015-04-20 11:45:39 UTC
One question that still needs to be answered:

When does the interruption of an existing link occur?

In other words, bad guys are on a structure with an active Entosis Link, and the capture timer is ticking down. Our hero lands on grid, locks up the structure, and activates his own link. When is capture progress halted?

1) Progress halts once the second EL is activated?
2) Progress halts once the first cycle completes and the second EL is "synchronized"?

If 2, then you'll have a minimum of 2 minutes to murder any counter-links on grid before they halt your capture progress. If 1, however, you're in a situation where it's completely viable to suicide an endless stream of T1 crap onto grid, simply to interrupt the enemy's ability to capture the node.

Some clarity on this would be good, as the different modes have very different implications.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#443 - 2015-04-20 12:10:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
WhyTry1 wrote:
Disclaimer : I am not affiliated with any power bloc therefore this is not a biased post. Also this is my main and not an alt Smile However I have been playing eve for many years and have spent a silly amount of time in nullsec. Just thought i would get that in there before the alt, troll, grr goons, grrr n3, grrr whatever posts come....

You're too late.Just posting here on that kind of character will already do that.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Cade Windstalker
#444 - 2015-04-20 18:56:54 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
One question that still needs to be answered:

When does the interruption of an existing link occur?

In other words, bad guys are on a structure with an active Entosis Link, and the capture timer is ticking down. Our hero lands on grid, locks up the structure, and activates his own link. When is capture progress halted?

1) Progress halts once the second EL is activated?
2) Progress halts once the first cycle completes and the second EL is "synchronized"?

If 2, then you'll have a minimum of 2 minutes to murder any counter-links on grid before they halt your capture progress. If 1, however, you're in a situation where it's completely viable to suicide an endless stream of T1 crap onto grid, simply to interrupt the enemy's ability to capture the node.

Some clarity on this would be good, as the different modes have very different implications.


I'd hardly call that viable. In either case you only halt progress as long as your link is working, so if you show up on grid, activate your link, and immediately blow up you've only stalled the capture for maybe 30 seconds at best. The enemy are still winning and you haven't ticked down the timer at all back in your favor, and you can't actually *stop* the cap, even if it's no longer your group's vulnerability period, until you tick the timer all the way back down to zero.

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
My popcorn is ready for when a strong all around coalition kicks out a prime EU TZ alliance from a region and installs a US -> AU TZ alliance (that probably paid them) in their place (or for free like Brave into Fountain)
Because this has totally been a major issue under current TZ mechanics with fuel and timers?
I mean really, there's plenty happening or probably going to happen that might provoke an "oooo! free show!" response, but this just doesn't fit unless you didn't actually bother to read the dev-blog...
I have scanned and dropped a fleet onto a refuelling ship.
Show me where the timer windows can be affected at all by the attackers.


One, this bears almost no resemblance to your AU/EU TZ comment. Just because you could gank POS fuel doesn't make that good for TZ mechanics or mean there should be any relative equivalent of that in this system. If you can gank someone's refule you can hit their structures.

Two, the point of TZ mechanics is that you actually have a chance to defend your stuff when you're around to defend it. With two days of reinforcement you can set up an attack on someone in almost any TZ you like. If part of that is paying someone else in a more favorable TZ to nail an enemy the whatever, that's part of the meta-game. The people who just got their space knicked can pay someone else to knick it back if they really need to.
Cade Windstalker
#445 - 2015-04-20 19:03:15 UTC
WhyTry1 wrote:
Disclaimer : I am not affiliated with any power bloc therefore this is not a biased post. Also this is my main and not an alt Smile However I have been playing eve for many years and have spent a silly amount of time in nullsec. Just thought i would get that in there before the alt, troll, grr goons, grrr n3, grrr whatever posts come....

Anyway, I have been thinking about the fozziesov thing for sometime, much like many others i guess. The recent changes with jump fatigue etc have been good, and i support that, it was needed. The lets hold lots of space, make billions renting lots of regions and not even living in it, just because you could throw 100 supers at someone in minutes was becoming a joke. I still don't think one alliance should be able to hold one full region to be honest and i would like to see the verite map changed to be sov only map not a influence map as it can wrongly give information about how much space one owns. But i digress...Sorry...


Everyone is biased, you're just not biased by affiliation you're biased by your lack of it.

Those are maps created by third parties (aka, other players), they're not created by CCP. If you think the currently available maps don't present information accurately then feel free to create your own. At the end of the day though systems controlled doesn't really matter, and that info is clearly available on Dotlan as well. Flat saying someone can't own a region is unreasonable and not in keeping with CCP's balance practices. They may make it harder or discourage it, but they won't flat out say it's not possible.

WhyTry1 wrote:
On to fozziesov, great idea as a concept, will make more fights local, will make people think a little more about the space they want to own and defend, especially for the larger alliances. Now i assumed (and maybe wrongly) that this was also to let the little guys get a chance to harass and even hold sov. Which would be great! However my concern is how really easy it is, meaning the time it takes to cause disruption.

We seem to have gone from one extreme to the other. Now again you may thing hey well that helps the little guys, but does it? My worry is the purposeful setting up of large newbie alliances to effectively cause havoc in nullsec just to create content. This isn't just about PL horde, although its convienient that a group that was so elitist all of a sudden decided to create a newb alliance, but also the likes of Brave and Goons. Which can effectively sum up 100,200,300+ gangs just to roam nullsec and disrupt lots of systems in a night, then go back again the next night and the next. The smaller alliances have literally no chance at all, they can compete with that may pilots 'constantly' roaming about, disrupting everything in 20 minutes. Surely fozzie must of thought of this and again just as the high sec poco debacle, they create a game that obviously favours Goons, and Brave and now PL Horde. I worry this will just have the complete opposite effect where no one dares live, or invest in nullsec because of the constant harassment. For example you think about increasing mining yield but who in the right mind is going to have mining sessions with 300+ people coming about constantly? I think this could actually end up destroying nullsec
I always wonder if CCP every look at the bigger picture rather than this inward thinking...


The game obvious favors those who live in their space and are willing to defend it. There is no way to even eliminate the advantage of simply putting more bodies in ships than the other guy, that's just not possible while keeping the core gameplay of Eve intact.

Trust me, CCP have definitely considered this sort of gameplay, if you don't believe me look at the recent interview with CCP Fozzie. The defenders have a massive advantage so maybe those 300 people are running around but if they're going to seriously try and take your Sov they need to split up for the Node events, and you don't need to split up as much as the defender, so you have one 100 man fleet, and they've got 5-6 50 man fleets. Who wins each of those little fleet engagements?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#446 - 2015-04-20 19:21:09 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
One question that still needs to be answered:

When does the interruption of an existing link occur?

In other words, bad guys are on a structure with an active Entosis Link, and the capture timer is ticking down. Our hero lands on grid, locks up the structure, and activates his own link. When is capture progress halted?

1) Progress halts once the second EL is activated?
2) Progress halts once the first cycle completes and the second EL is "synchronized"?

If 2, then you'll have a minimum of 2 minutes to murder any counter-links on grid before they halt your capture progress. If 1, however, you're in a situation where it's completely viable to suicide an endless stream of T1 crap onto grid, simply to interrupt the enemy's ability to capture the node.

Some clarity on this would be good, as the different modes have very different implications.

All links have a warmup cycle. So one would assume this is taken as given to not interrupt capture till it completes.
It's not explicitly spelt out though, sure.

Also if you can continually flood the field in T1 crap, they don't have effective control of the field, even if they aren't losing anything you are still capable of fielding ships on grid to oppose them.

Also remember, the 'Window' is not a hard window. As soon as there is any time on the timer, it remains open 24/7 until that time is removed. So as long as they can stay on grid running their own link, they can continue to capture the structure once they have killed your 50,000 rifters with 20 mil modules each.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#447 - 2015-04-20 20:34:44 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
All links have a warmup cycle. So one would assume this is taken as given to not interrupt capture till it completes. It's not explicitly spelt out though, sure.

Also if you can continually flood the field in T1 crap, they don't have effective control of the field, even if they aren't losing anything you are still capable of fielding ships on grid to oppose them.

Also remember, the 'Window' is not a hard window. As soon as there is any time on the timer, it remains open 24/7 until that time is removed. So as long as they can stay on grid running their own link, they can continue to capture the structure once they have killed your 50,000 rifters with 20 mil modules each.

Absolutely, if they can't keep you off field I'm totally good with the timer being interrupted. The reason I ask is the parallel to FW capture mechanics - if ships from both militias are within the 30km radius of the capture point, the timer freezes until one or the other is forced off.

The parallel for Entosis Links could be viewed either way. In FW, you don't have a warmup cycle, but you do have to kill NPCs. That's an argument for interruption to begin after the warmup cycle as a parallel.

On the other hand, the timer stops immediately once an opposing militia member arrives on grid. That argues for immediate interruption as the parallel.

Either way could be viable under the new system, but it does determine the degree of effort that you have to put into contesting the timer. If it's possible to use attrition tactics to stall a capture long enough to get your main force on field, that's much different than if the bad guys get a full warmup cycle before the interruption begins. That kind of a system would require your opponent to murder all your links in a hurry, otherwise you continue to make progress even while he's on field.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Cade Windstalker
#448 - 2015-04-20 23:12:28 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
Absolutely, if they can't keep you off field I'm totally good with the timer being interrupted. The reason I ask is the parallel to FW capture mechanics - if ships from both militias are within the 30km radius of the capture point, the timer freezes until one or the other is forced off.

The parallel for Entosis Links could be viewed either way. In FW, you don't have a warmup cycle, but you do have to kill NPCs. That's an argument for interruption to begin after the warmup cycle as a parallel.

On the other hand, the timer stops immediately once an opposing militia member arrives on grid. That argues for immediate interruption as the parallel.

Either way could be viable under the new system, but it does determine the degree of effort that you have to put into contesting the timer. If it's possible to use attrition tactics to stall a capture long enough to get your main force on field, that's much different than if the bad guys get a full warmup cycle before the interruption begins. That kind of a system would require your opponent to murder all your links in a hurry, otherwise you continue to make progress even while he's on field.


If you're active in your systems and have good occupancy metrics you have between 30 and 40 minutes to respond to a reinforcement attempt. If this is a capture event you know when it starts 2 days in advance. In either case that's plenty of time to throw together a fleet and go kick faces in.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#449 - 2015-04-21 04:18:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal. <-- Okay. I am done talking in circles with "someone."
I think this plan for SOV is completely stupid. The proof will be in the pudding.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Teddy J Rogers
Society of Mechanics Engineers and Gearheads
#450 - 2015-04-22 04:26:18 UTC
WhyTry1 wrote:
Disclaimer : I am not affiliated with any power bloc therefore this is not a biased post. Also this is my main and not an alt Smile However I have been playing eve for many years and have spent a silly amount of time in nullsec. Just thought i would get that in there before the alt, troll, grr goons, grrr n3, grrr whatever posts come....

Anyway, I have been thinking about the fozziesov thing for sometime, much like many others i guess. The recent changes with jump fatigue etc have been good, and i support that, it was needed. The lets hold lots of space, make billions renting lots of regions and not even living in it, just because you could throw 100 supers at someone in minutes was becoming a joke. I still don't think one alliance should be able to hold one full region to be honest and i would like to see the verite map changed to be sov only map not a influence map as it can wrongly give information about how much space one owns. But i digress...Sorry...

On to fozziesov, great idea as a concept, will make more fights local, will make people think a little more about the space they want to own and defend, especially for the larger alliances. Now i assumed (and maybe wrongly) that this was also to let the little guys get a chance to harass and even hold sov. Which would be great! However my concern is how really easy it is, meaning the time it takes to cause disruption.

We seem to have gone from one extreme to the other. Now again you may thing hey well that helps the little guys, but does it? My worry is the purposeful setting up of large newbie alliances to effectively cause havoc in nullsec just to create content. This isn't just about PL horde, although its convienient that a group that was so elitist all of a sudden decided to create a newb alliance, but also the likes of Brave and Goons. Which can effectively sum up 100,200,300+ gangs just to roam nullsec and disrupt lots of systems in a night, then go back again the next night and the next. The smaller alliances have literally no chance at all, they can compete with that may pilots 'constantly' roaming about, disrupting everything in 20 minutes. Surely fozzie must of thought of this and again just as the high sec poco debacle, they create a game that obviously favours Goons, and Brave and now PL Horde. I worry this will just have the complete opposite effect where no one dares live, or invest in nullsec because of the constant harassment. For example you think about increasing mining yield but who in the right mind is going to have mining sessions with 300+ people coming about constantly? I think this could actually end up destroying nullsec
I always wonder if CCP every look at the bigger picture rather than this inward thinking...


A group organized enough to regularly fly in 100 - 300 ships fleets is organized enough to take sovereignty in a few systems. But guess what happens next; they have the sov and need to defend it. They now have to split their fleet between home defense and troll/roamers.
WhyTry1
Comply Or Die
Pandemic Horde
#451 - 2015-04-24 12:34:41 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
WhyTry1 wrote:
Disclaimer : I am not affiliated with any power bloc therefore this is not a biased post. Also this is my main and not an alt Smile However I have been playing eve for many years and have spent a silly amount of time in nullsec. Just thought i would get that in there before the alt, troll, grr goons, grrr n3, grrr whatever posts come....

Anyway, I have been thinking about the fozziesov thing for sometime, much like many others i guess. The recent changes with jump fatigue etc have been good, and i support that, it was needed. The lets hold lots of space, make billions renting lots of regions and not even living in it, just because you could throw 100 supers at someone in minutes was becoming a joke. I still don't think one alliance should be able to hold one full region to be honest and i would like to see the verite map changed to be sov only map not a influence map as it can wrongly give information about how much space one owns. But i digress...Sorry...


Everyone is biased, you're just not biased by affiliation you're biased by your lack of it.

Those are maps created by third parties (aka, other players), they're not created by CCP. If you think the currently available maps don't present information accurately then feel free to create your own. At the end of the day though systems controlled doesn't really matter, and that info is clearly available on Dotlan as well. Flat saying someone can't own a region is unreasonable and not in keeping with CCP's balance practices. They may make it harder or discourage it, but they won't flat out say it's not possible.

WhyTry1 wrote:
On to fozziesov, great idea as a concept, will make more fights local, will make people think a little more about the space they want to own and defend, especially for the larger alliances. Now i assumed (and maybe wrongly) that this was also to let the little guys get a chance to harass and even hold sov. Which would be great! However my concern is how really easy it is, meaning the time it takes to cause disruption.

We seem to have gone from one extreme to the other. Now again you may thing hey well that helps the little guys, but does it? My worry is the purposeful setting up of large newbie alliances to effectively cause havoc in nullsec just to create content. This isn't just about PL horde, although its convienient that a group that was so elitist all of a sudden decided to create a newb alliance, but also the likes of Brave and Goons. Which can effectively sum up 100,200,300+ gangs just to roam nullsec and disrupt lots of systems in a night, then go back again the next night and the next. The smaller alliances have literally no chance at all, they can compete with that may pilots 'constantly' roaming about, disrupting everything in 20 minutes. Surely fozzie must of thought of this and again just as the high sec poco debacle, they create a game that obviously favours Goons, and Brave and now PL Horde. I worry this will just have the complete opposite effect where no one dares live, or invest in nullsec because of the constant harassment. For example you think about increasing mining yield but who in the right mind is going to have mining sessions with 300+ people coming about constantly? I think this could actually end up destroying nullsec
I always wonder if CCP every look at the bigger picture rather than this inward thinking...


The game obvious favors those who live in their space and are willing to defend it. There is no way to even eliminate the advantage of simply putting more bodies in ships than the other guy, that's just not possible while keeping the core gameplay of Eve intact.

Trust me, CCP have definitely considered this sort of gameplay, if you don't believe me look at the recent interview with CCP Fozzie. The defenders have a massive advantage so maybe those 300 people are running around but if they're going to seriously try and take your Sov they need to split up for the Node events, and you don't need to split up as much as the defender, so you have one 100 man fleet, and they've got 5-6 50 man fleets. Who wins each of those little fleet engagements?


Why are you assuming that everyone who has sov willbe able to form 50 man fleets? they wont, most larger alliances cannot form a 50 man fleet! Im also talking about smaller alliances that this was supposed to help. Those 30,40,100 man alliances or corps that take some random system. Constantly having to defend it will be a nightmare thats a simple fact. Being constantly harassed gets tiresome. I mena look at Brave and PL, being constantly harassed ends up driving u mad and out..
WhyTry1
Comply Or Die
Pandemic Horde
#452 - 2015-04-24 12:36:41 UTC
Teddy J Rogers wrote:
WhyTry1 wrote:
Disclaimer : I am not affiliated with any power bloc therefore this is not a biased post. Also this is my main and not an alt Smile However I have been playing eve for many years and have spent a silly amount of time in nullsec. Just thought i would get that in there before the alt, troll, grr goons, grrr n3, grrr whatever posts come....

Anyway, I have been thinking about the fozziesov thing for sometime, much like many others i guess. The recent changes with jump fatigue etc have been good, and i support that, it was needed. The lets hold lots of space, make billions renting lots of regions and not even living in it, just because you could throw 100 supers at someone in minutes was becoming a joke. I still don't think one alliance should be able to hold one full region to be honest and i would like to see the verite map changed to be sov only map not a influence map as it can wrongly give information about how much space one owns. But i digress...Sorry...

On to fozziesov, great idea as a concept, will make more fights local, will make people think a little more about the space they want to own and defend, especially for the larger alliances. Now i assumed (and maybe wrongly) that this was also to let the little guys get a chance to harass and even hold sov. Which would be great! However my concern is how really easy it is, meaning the time it takes to cause disruption.

We seem to have gone from one extreme to the other. Now again you may thing hey well that helps the little guys, but does it? My worry is the purposeful setting up of large newbie alliances to effectively cause havoc in nullsec just to create content. This isn't just about PL horde, although its convienient that a group that was so elitist all of a sudden decided to create a newb alliance, but also the likes of Brave and Goons. Which can effectively sum up 100,200,300+ gangs just to roam nullsec and disrupt lots of systems in a night, then go back again the next night and the next. The smaller alliances have literally no chance at all, they can compete with that may pilots 'constantly' roaming about, disrupting everything in 20 minutes. Surely fozzie must of thought of this and again just as the high sec poco debacle, they create a game that obviously favours Goons, and Brave and now PL Horde. I worry this will just have the complete opposite effect where no one dares live, or invest in nullsec because of the constant harassment. For example you think about increasing mining yield but who in the right mind is going to have mining sessions with 300+ people coming about constantly? I think this could actually end up destroying nullsec
I always wonder if CCP every look at the bigger picture rather than this inward thinking...


A group organized enough to regularly fly in 100 - 300 ships fleets is organized enough to take sovereignty in a few systems. But guess what happens next; they have the sov and need to defend it. They now have to split their fleet between home defense and troll/roamers.



Its not about them defending or even taking sov, they dont care its purely about the' becuase we can' and we like to grief as mnay people as we can purely for the fun and hell of it. thats what it will be down to. Havent you played eve long enought to understand that?
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#453 - 2015-04-24 15:31:52 UTC
WhyTry1 wrote:
Its not about them defending or even taking sov, they dont care its purely about the' becuase we can' and we like to grief as mnay people as we can purely for the fun and hell of it. thats what it will be down to. Havent you played eve long enought to understand that?

as opposed to now where they only take sov if they need it?
Cade Windstalker
#454 - 2015-04-24 19:28:20 UTC
WhyTry1 wrote:
Why are you assuming that everyone who has sov willbe able to form 50 man fleets? they wont, most larger alliances cannot form a 50 man fleet! Im also talking about smaller alliances that this was supposed to help. Those 30,40,100 man alliances or corps that take some random system. Constantly having to defend it will be a nightmare thats a simple fact. Being constantly harassed gets tiresome. I mena look at Brave and PL, being constantly harassed ends up driving u mad and out..


Because if you can't field a decent sized fleet you shouldn't expect to be able to defend your sov against someone who can?

This is going to make it easier for smaller alliances, but by forcing the larger ones to contract. If they decide they want to go harass the smaller ones there's not a lot CCP can do to stop them, because a larger alliance will always have more people and resources.

No where does it say that this update is supposed to allow some dinky little 10-man corp to go out and tank Sov, that's an assumption by players, and IMO a poor one.

WhyTry1 wrote:
Its not about them defending or even taking sov, they dont care its purely about the' becuase we can' and we like to grief as mnay people as we can purely for the fun and hell of it. thats what it will be down to. Havent you played eve long enought to understand that?


And what everyone is trying to say is that if they don't bother to take any sov then they'll have a hard time doing that consistently because the logistics involved will be prohibitive. If they do have Sov then there's something for people to harass and attack right back, meaning they're just as vulnerable to whatever they're doing as whoever they're doing it to is.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#455 - 2015-04-29 00:27:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Cade Windstalker wrote:
...No where does it say that this update is supposed to allow some dinky little 10-man corp to go out and take Sov, that's an assumption by players, and IMO a poor one.....
So... about that ...
CCP Fozzie wrote:
... Our realistic goal for the new Sovereignty system is that a very small group of players in virtually any ship types should be able to completely conquer an undefended system with a few ~10-30 minute sessions spread across a few days....
... which realistically means that you have to have people in almost every system guarding them.

"Sorry little Timmy, Jonny and Sammie you drew the short straws and have to stay in system WH0-C4R35 and make sure we don't have an enemy getting in our way. Do enjoy being griefed by every little tourist group and having to go out and fight every little pest for the foreseeable future. No, you can't come on any roams because you have to say home and watch all the holes in the walls for rats.
No fun for you until we get some other new lame-o that wants to hang around long enough, doing this boring stuff; hoping to become one of the cool kids. Welcome to why Low Sec 2.0 that will be another empty waste land and suck."

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#456 - 2015-04-29 02:47:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
...No where does it say that this update is supposed to allow some dinky little 10-man corp to go out and take Sov, that's an assumption by players, and IMO a poor one.....
So... about that ...
CCP Fozzie wrote:
... Our realistic goal for the new Sovereignty system is that a very small group of players in virtually any ship types should be able to completely conquer an undefended system with a few ~10-30 minute sessions spread across a few days....
... which realistically means that you have to have people in almost every system guarding them.

"Sorry little Timmy, Jonny and Sammie you drew the short straws and have to stay in system WH0-C4R35 and make sure we don't have an enemy getting in our way. Do enjoy being griefed by every little tourist group and having to go out and fight every little pest for the foreseeable future. No, you can't come on any roams because you have to say home and watch all the holes in the walls for rats.
No fun for you until we get some other new lame-o that wants to hang around long enough, doing this boring stuff; hoping to become one of the cool kids. Welcome to why Low Sec 2.0 that will be another empty waste land and suck."

Key words being "completely undefended". If you don't live there and use the space is it really of any consequence? You're already in system using it for :reasons: it's not like you have to sit at the structure and stare at it.

If you have to force someone to sit and guard a system because it's index is so low you'll never form a defense for the initial assault (successive timers give you 20-28 hours advance notice) then why are you holding that system again?

Also, less need to go on roams if people bring the content to you as often as you imagine they will.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#457 - 2015-04-29 02:50:01 UTC
I'm so tired of all this talk. I'm unsubbing.

from this thread.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Jenshae Chiroptera
#458 - 2015-04-29 04:27:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Rowells wrote:
... Also, less need to go on roams if people bring the content to you as often as you imagine they will.
The day is 4 hours old and the region has had two and a half page of "content" during one of its more quiet time zones. I dock up and avoid the riff raff, joining fleets that look like they might matter.
I am already thinking about where I want to be when people can come and start messing with structures. Probably not docked up with a bunch of miners, that don't believe they can overwhelm a solo guy never mind an escorting gang for the magic wand ship.

I have no interest in trying to form up a squad of people that are in system or nearby to then scan down and chase one guy with a cloak and his magic wand around a system.
This sounds more tedious to me than structure grinding.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#459 - 2015-04-29 04:44:27 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Rowells wrote:
... Also, less need to go on roams if people bring the content to you as often as you imagine they will.
The day is 4 hours old and the region has had two and a half page of "content" during one of its more quiet time zones. I dock up and avoid the riff raff, joining fleets that look like they might matter.
I am already thinking about where I want to be when people can come and start messing with structures. Probably not docked up with a bunch of miners, that don't believe they can overwhelm a solo guy never mind an escorting gang for the magic wand ship.

I have no interest in trying to form up a squad of people that are in system or nearby to then scan down and chase one guy with a cloak and his magic wand around a system.
This sounds more tedious to me than structure grinding.

Well then I guess you won't be trying to defend sov like that.

Op success

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Jenshae Chiroptera
#460 - 2015-04-29 05:18:27 UTC
I think the best tactics will be hell gate camping but that is more boring than mining ... or ... just don't bother defending at all.

Stage out of Low Sec or NPC Null Sec then let them flip the station. Then later go and annoy them instead. If they come out looking for a fight, deny them the fight, warp off, cloak up and wait.

They decide to do some ratting? Drop a bubble on the undock and kill them.

It is going to be far easier under Fozzie SOV to get people to give up and leave you alone if you make them try and defend this junk.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.