EVE General Discussion

If you can't think of all of the incredibly awful repercussions of your suggestion, you're even more blind than I thought you were. Hint, the game cannot tell the difference between "friendly" and "hostile" target locks, it's completely incapable of such a thing. Your idea would allow people to lock their own ships and make them immune to targeted damage.

Trying to tilt the windmills against numbers as a force multiplier, or put a different way, trying to nerf other people having more friends than you, will only lead to screwing up the game. Attempting to do such is foolish.

A) If all your friends lock you up to protect you from being lockable they are giving up their lock slots and allowing themselves to be vulnerable. Spider locking would work, but it would then kill your ability to apply dps to anything as your lock slots are now full. (Think Tengu and 5 lock slots max)

B) Why should an interceptor be able to get RR from 50 basi's??? would it really be a bad thing to prevent friendly mass RR of small ships?

I think Herzog's suggestion is the best way to remove N+1 in this game and make null fights mean something again. Sorry you can't open your mind up to real suggestions and feel your omnipotent opinion trumps all others.

Capture the flag in other popular games is very different to what is proposed with Fozziesov.
Capture the flag in most games is with minimal to no financial risk to loser or winner. Re-spawning in your current state is not the same as losing billions of isk because 3,000 guys decided to blob a 1,000 man group.
Eve is very costly and time consuming when you lose your flag and those costs are on the road to increasing much more with the introduction of Citadels. It doesn't auto respawn in a few hours to be fought over again.

5 to 10 mins to respond??
Sorry but it is 48 hours to respond and the established defender due to defensive indexes and unbalanced vulnerability mechanics get to choose when they want to turn up to defend. The initial 5 or 10 mins doesn't really need to be addressed, unless you happen to have a fleet nearby and want to use it for more killmails.

"New tactics", interesting. From that I gather you believe the existing groups will no longer use blobs? If they get attacked by a group of 100 trying to take their sov with new tactics, they will only respond with 100 to enable "new tactics" to be used?


Cool idea, now all you need to do is get devs to incorporate a mechanic so it can happen. Vulnerability windows could have been used as the "reed in the storm" but devs decided to use it to favor attackers over new sov holders.

Eve is a game of annihilation - Break your target with overwhelming force, doesn't leave room for bending with the storm. You win it is a victory, you lose it is time to dig into the wallet, there is no "bend" with the storm unless you have unlimited isk and resources.
As long as a small holder is able to bounce back, the storm will not pass. It will just keep coming in ever increasing strength.

Nice thought though; Can see it now - They endured our attempt to stomp them and weathered the storm. We won't go back in 2 days with a fleet 2 or 3 times the size, "they won against us so we'll leave them alone."

-- - -- - -- - -- - --
Devs are designing sov to suit those with unlimited resources who can "fight on". Problem is, only a few groups have the ability to participate in an arena balanced toward possession of unlimited resources.

Power of SOV is a curious thing
Makes a one man weep, and another man sing
Change a hawk to a little white dove
More than a feeling, it's the power of SOV

It's tougher than diamonds, and rich like cream
Stronger and harder than a bad girl's dream
Make a bad one good, make a wrong one right
Power of SOV that keeps you home at night

Don't need money, don't take fame
Don't need no credit card to ride this train
It's strong and it's sudden and it's cruel sometimes
But it might just save your life
It's the power of SOV
It's the power of SOV

You must be a serious thumbsup magnet in youtube music video comments.

NONSENSE ! THIS IS ALL NONSENSE !!!

Sgt Ocker, I thought i read that once the new changes come attacking sov will involve fitting a device on a specific ship and then using that ship to disrupt the enemies sov, and that the process takes 5 to 10 minutes, please correct me if I'm wrong.

If I am correct it should be easy to attack an alliance out of their time zone and take their sov, defending the sov you've just taken will be a different story when your enemies time zone comes back around.

When I say different tactics what I mean is alliances may have to rely on members from different time zones in order to defend their sov, also sov defence may involve dealing with multiple attacks, so we may find stronger blue coalitions rising in order to carry out multiple attacks and make it so a 3000 man defence force will have a hard time dealing with say 12 multiple sov incursions. Perhaps a goal would be to split that 3000 man defence force into manageable chunks and then dismantle it. Most would agree there is an art to warfare.

The neverending sov battle will change. If you want to keep hold of sov you will have to work as a well organised team which will include stuff like pvp'ers respecting miners because it is miners that will assist in fast and efficient ship building. I've always felt miners should be wrapped in cotton wool and protected with the highest priority.

Also consider that Seagull and all of the devs are in a better position than us to analyse trends in order to reshape the game to make it better.

Sov warfare on steroids. I CAN'T WAIT!!!!

First off, one of the things about a sandbox is that if the players decide to ignore the intended incentives and make their own game, then they will. If they decide to take a game intended to be fun-but-gloves-off competition for land, resources and glory and turn it into a contest to see who can scour whom from the game entirely, then what do you want to happen? Indestructible, unconquerable structures, so that I could plant my one-man flag in some system and then go play Elder Scrolls Online for the rest of the year, safe in the knowledge that all my stuff will be there when I come back? Does the station only become vulnerable when this character finally biomasses? That's not going to scale very well.

If I recall the last argument to this effect correctly, the justification for the scouring is precisely that most alliances are already reeds: they have enough ISK in reserve, and enough people who are good at making ISK, that their alliance can bend all the way back to Empire and then pop up again. -A- is a classic example; Brave is a more recent one. Ironically, I think that the change to destructible-everything will make it easier to be a reed: as you say, ISK is secure and liquid, so small alliances will probably only put down what they can afford to lose, liquidate anything they no longer need and then work on recouping the investment--which the all-PVE sov index variables incidentally encourages. ISK becomes even more the currency of power and perdurability, and assets become even more the tactical use of that power. Maybe dandelions would be a better metaphor than reeds: mow them, scour them, pull them out, and they'll still be back the next spring. Even if you poison them to death, you'll just get new ones next spring. And, as poison exacts a cost on the land, it exacts a cost on the game.

In other words, it wouldn't surprise me if the point of making everything easier to do destroy is to make alliances reconfigure into forms that are harder to completely destroy, making 'scouring' essentially pointless.

You realised that Null Sec alliances hold moons in Low Sec all the time without any presence or sovereignty in the system?
Somehow you think that staging from Low or NPC Null and controlling moons from there is impossible?

They did post some data which confirms the theory that accounts are on the drop. They announced stats about why the new characters don't stay in eve. Judging from the sheer number that don't sub longer than the first month, there is no way they are keeping up with attrition.

All evidence points to accounts online dropping. All empirical evidence points to accounts subscribed dropping. What we have no way of knowing without CCP's help is are the numbers of players dropping or are people just scaling back to 1 alt account instead of 10.

I would suggest you go READ the blogs.
Sorry to say but your wrong

Read the blog
You can ONLY attack their Sov during THEIR chosen vulnerability period
Sorry your wrong

5 or 10 mins for unclaimed sov (which there is very little of) For Claimed sov the times are based on biased to established sov holders, defensive indexes. New groups entering the sov game will not have the benefit of defensive indexes, or the ability to build them up if constantly harassed by existing sov holders who don't want them there. Defensive indexes and vulnerability windows are biased toward existing sov holders.

The proposed changes have NOTHING to do with analysis of trends, they are an attempt to get all the AFK (many unsubbed) members of sov groups away from what they are playing now and back to eve. (it will fail)

IF CCP were to follow "trends" and analysis in order to make the game better (called balance) We would not be getting FozzieSov.

Analysis is a funny beast, it can be collected so it tells you the story YOU want to hear. (good example was a few years ago when CCP boasted about passing 500k subscribers, they left out the part where only 10% of those were active paying customers)
Again, if CCP Seagull was to analyse the current state of nulsec with the intent of improving it and opening it up to more players, we would not be getting Fozziesov.

"Sov wars on steroids" LOL (you will be waiting a LONG time) - Due to FozzieSov, the existing mega groups who control most of the sov map, get to pick when they want to fight (not very balanced, is it?)

CCP Seagull may be a good team leader (if letting people do what they want can be called leading) but she has no idea about game balance and neither it seems do the Dev teams she said could do it their way. (If silly forced childish giggles was the way to balance eve, we would have a winner)

FozzieSov is so well balanced and ready to change the sov game - It was dropped from the release lineup, with no comment or reason.

Need I go on??