EVE General Discussion

LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons.
Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them.

That aside. The newest proposal for the sov team is getting closer to good.
Still missing that "something" to encourage new comers to vie for sov.
In fact this latest iteration of "prime time, vulnerability windows" is an absolute deterrent to any new group entering the sov game.

18 hours per day vulnerability for at least the 1st week (longer if your sov is actually being contested) is just way too much.

I have never even looked at the icons thread.

That has been the core of a lot of feedback though, that unless the space is worth having, why go take it?

CCP seem to at least be listening to that. I agree with them that no region should be independent of others as resource shortages help fuel conflict, but there definitely needs to be more than an epeen reason to take sov for a small group.

They need to be able to survive and thrive in their space too. That will only encourage them to defend it better.

i wonder what impact destructible stations will have on null sec?

without more npc null sec systems scattered around the outer fringes of new eden i suspect sov null inhabitants will drop once sov null outpost are destructible.

people wont want to risk leaving their stuff in sov null and then having to go salvage a station wreck to get their stuff back.

CCP Falcon, I would be really interested to hear whether your perspective of the new and improved "Eve by numbers" has changed your "opinion" as quoted above.[/quote]

I'm glad you feel that way so here goes. ( sorry I didn't quote everything CCP Falcon said, but I wouldn't have room for what I needed to say)Top of thread if your interested.

CCP Falcon,I don't believe anything you said in your response really addresses the concerns of the OP. Anyone who plays Eve knows it can be a ball-buster at times. That kinda goes without saying. However, ball busting IN GAME is different than getting your balls busted because CCP is making multiple rapid fire changes that have a huge impact of things like sov. Please note that I DON'T object to the changes (well most of them) only the RATE of change.

Patches are coming out fast and furious. While I don't spend the majority of my time in null sec I feel for those who do. I think most players can/will adapt to their corporations being uprooted for various reasons... every now and then. But when you add in things like nerfs to cap ships that force null sec corps make major changes in deployment of resources while simultaneous turning those cap ships "white elephants" thereby forcing many corporations to give up large amounts of hard won territory too, then it becomes problematic. That has nothing to do with Eve being a rough and tumble game, it has to do moving the goalposts around.

That said, I have enormous respect for the devs, their commitment to the Eve community and their desire to make a good product even better. My only recommendation would be if you're going to make big changes that have large strategic and logistical consequences, take it slowly. The cap ship and sov changes could have been spaced further apart to avoid patch whiplash.

Eve has proven it's durability over the last 12 years and will likely be around for at least another decade. What's the hurry?

Could be people mining and consuming more of their own locally. Could just as easily be a sign of increased industry activity.

It could also be a sign of increased industry activity in stations following the changes to blueprint requirements with POS use.

It's not really conclusive one way or the other.

Only CCP's metrics could say conclusively.

Those alliances who can afford SRP will be ok for the most part. They are generally well established, with reasonable income streams.
For any independent group considering a move to sov nul;
The ever rolling and soon, increasing cost of taking and holding sov only adds further barriers for anyone without a blue army.

The proposed changes are likely to do little more than create a bit of nuisance value for a few months. While at the same time weeding out those who can't afford the upkeep and time required to maintain sov.

There are some very good aspects to the new proposal, as long as they are implemented in the right way.

You have to take into account:

Banning of multiboxers.
Bannings of botters.
MCT.

You don't.
Thus your numbers are irrelevant.

Because if you weren't such a sad egofreak you would see that we are actually
beyond old numbers, if we take things into account.

Realise already that most other people aren't liars,
hypocrites and constantly twisting things like you do.

Thanks.

I produce evidence as soon as you come up with an honest and neutral thought.

That being said... yes, you're right.
I was wrong.

You're right. You are absolutely right. You are flawless.
You always make the right decisions.

When you rage about gankers how they are sociopaths
and monsters you are right. You are a nice, honest and loveable person.

CCP need not fear. Alts will keep this game alive.