These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Summer of Sov - Nullsec PVE and Upgrades

First post
Author
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#141 - 2015-07-08 23:26:26 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:

Heh nice try.

Your unassailable empire was shrunk to a handful of regions, because under the new system (fozzie sov) it would not have been defensible. The CFC could do that only because those regions provide all the income you need, and then some. So congratulations, you're now living in a virtually unconquerable space, where you can AFKtar and make mad iskies w/o any significant risk whatsoever.

If large groups such as yours were forced to hold more space, said space would be more easily contested. You catching my drift?

Resources need to be limited, why would anyone fight over them if they weren't? That's some straight-forward logic that even you can understand. You're welcome.


our unassailable space shrunk because owning half of the entire map was not worth the effort and was not vital

when things become vital for us, anything in the way gets crushed

but let us discuss how insane your claim that if we were to own more space, it would be easier for smaller groups to carve out their own portion of that space than if we did not own that space, elaborate on that, let us talk about how your tiny worthless corp would have an easier time not getting brutally murdered as an example to everyone else if you attacked space we want vs. space we dont want


Oo tiny worthless corp ... you're getting personally very quickly there, I like your style.

I also think you're confusing the words "vital" and "viable". If the CFC could have continued to hold that amount of space, they would have. You're pretty delusional if you think otherwise m8
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#142 - 2015-07-08 23:27:25 UTC
Denidil wrote:
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:
Increasing anomaly spawns is somewhat contradictory to incentivize group PVE, you know that right?

I really think Pirate Detection Arrays should work more like Survey Networks and Entrapment Arrays do, i.e. it only increases the chance that a particular sites spawns in the system, however, it doesn't give you a fixed amount of sites to run. This way, PVE content per systems would be limited and people would actually be forced to spread out and travel to make isk (similar to the way it is in wormholes).

You keep going on about your idea that you want to more small and independent groups out in nullsec and more localized conflicts. You won't be accomplishing that as long as it is viable for extremely large groups to live off a comparatively small space. Period.

uh you realize the more systems our unassailable space empire needs, the less room for small and independent groups there is

your logic could not be more backwards, this is an impressively bad post


he's been rage shitposting on Reddit about this too. we just had to downvote him to oblivion and tell him to shut up and go back to his wormhole


I made an argument, I didn't shitpost. But thanks for your valuable input ...
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#143 - 2015-07-08 23:36:12 UTC
I'd like to read more about what Team Space Glitter has accomplished so far with AI and NPC improvements in a devblog, at their convenience :)

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#144 - 2015-07-08 23:41:33 UTC
Ab'del Abu wrote:
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:

Heh nice try.

Your unassailable empire was shrunk to a handful of regions, because under the new system (fozzie sov) it would not have been defensible. The CFC could do that only because those regions provide all the income you need, and then some. So congratulations, you're now living in a virtually unconquerable space, where you can AFKtar and make mad iskies w/o any significant risk whatsoever.

If large groups such as yours were forced to hold more space, said space would be more easily contested. You catching my drift?

Resources need to be limited, why would anyone fight over them if they weren't? That's some straight-forward logic that even you can understand. You're welcome.


our unassailable space shrunk because owning half of the entire map was not worth the effort and was not vital

when things become vital for us, anything in the way gets crushed

but let us discuss how insane your claim that if we were to own more space, it would be easier for smaller groups to carve out their own portion of that space than if we did not own that space, elaborate on that, let us talk about how your tiny worthless corp would have an easier time not getting brutally murdered as an example to everyone else if you attacked space we want vs. space we dont want


Oo tiny worthless corp ... you're getting personally very quickly there, I like your style.

I also think you're confusing the words "vital" and "viable". If the CFC could have continued to hold that amount of space, they would have. You're pretty delusional if you think otherwise m8

Please tell us more about how the Imperium operates.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Aneu Angellus
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#145 - 2015-07-08 23:57:19 UTC
PL Reddit thread is so much better than this one... especially where they cry a lot.
Gideon Enderas
Mafia Redux
#146 - 2015-07-09 00:51:02 UTC
Aneu Angellus wrote:
PL Reddit thread is so much better than this one... especially where they cry a lot.


Yeah, this change specifically, all wormholes to and from and nullsec being reduced to 16 hours only is basically putting the nails in the coffin of wormhole space. PL used an in game tool to find content, this tool isn't new. It's been used by several wormhole groups before. Now that a large organized group is using this method to travel, somehow it's unfair.
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2015-07-09 00:54:22 UTC
Gideon Enderas wrote:
Aneu Angellus wrote:
PL Reddit thread is so much better than this one... especially where they cry a lot.


Yeah, this change specifically, all wormholes to and from and nullsec being reduced to 16 hours only is basically putting the nails in the coffin of wormhole space. PL used an in game tool to find content, this tool isn't new. It's been used by several wormhole groups before. Now that a large organized group is using this method to travel, somehow it's unfair.


Welcome to our world since....forever

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#148 - 2015-07-09 01:23:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Trinkets friend
S199's are not that prevalent, and are no harder to collapse than a N432 or K162 to C5.

Really, who is giving you this information, or are you guys literally blind and dumb?

I rarely find an S199 when I go to nullsec. Most wormholes are K162's or N432's to C5's, followed by C1-2-3's, and very, very rarely a B499 or N944. So, great, you are cutting down on S199's which are already quite rare.

Good work on making pirate detection arrays more efficient. You know what the hardest part about ganking caps in nullsec is? When there is 60 anoms in system, it's hard to filter through for the Hubs and Sanctums past all the abandoned low-grade chaff. Ratters best protection is having more sigs in the list, more green dots on the overview, because it's harder for a hunter to find them amongst the debris.

So, good work, CCP. Nullsec is now confirmed a giant farm, and wih sov timers coming to the API, the number of landholders will shrink.
Gideon Enderas
Mafia Redux
#149 - 2015-07-09 01:33:02 UTC
Aryth wrote:
Gideon Enderas wrote:
Aneu Angellus wrote:
PL Reddit thread is so much better than this one... especially where they cry a lot.


Yeah, this change specifically, all wormholes to and from and nullsec being reduced to 16 hours only is basically putting the nails in the coffin of wormhole space. PL used an in game tool to find content, this tool isn't new. It's been used by several wormhole groups before. Now that a large organized group is using this method to travel, somehow it's unfair.


Welcome to our world since....forever


Yeah, I'm probably going to quit EVE if the wormhole changes go through in their current state. Taking a chainsaw to something just because it's being used effectively is ridiculous. I'm fine with altering one thing at a time, slowly. Knee jerk reactions like the ones CCP seems to make are merely bandaid solutions. Bandaids given to little kids to stop them from crying. From what I understand CCP has a history knee jerk reactions, however I was under the impression that CCP was going to stop making them and work more so on tweaking the current system.

CCP needs to stop making drastic changes to perceived problems that may or may not actually exist. I feel that changes should be done for gameplay reasons, not to appease people.

For Example, limiting jump range to 5 LY for caps is rather boring. I think carriers should have been able to jump 7 LY, but at the cost of gaining extra fatigue associated with it. These jump changes were heavy handed, and in my opinion a bit too much.

The nerf to the lifetime of the null wormholes doesn't really hurt groups like PL who (I'm guessing) have multiple chains set up. A few from their home system, and several from their target system(s). It can take anywhere from a couple of minutes to a several hours to find a route close to your target system.
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
#150 - 2015-07-09 01:41:08 UTC
THIS is the dev blog I have been waiting for. Excellent stuff.

My only suggestion (and as you mentioned - you are working on it) - more PVE content for groups! Excellent!!!

Love the changes to Incursions and WH's....Bob will still be pleased. I like the array changes too.

As someone else mentioned, please REMOVE moon mining and make it a MINING activity equivalent to gold! :) Then people will really flock to null and low to feed the T2 industrial machine.

Excellent changes that will reinvigorate SOV along with the capture the flag mechanics.

Looking forward to the next year in EVE.

o7

Let's get those subscriber numbers back up.
Kant Boards
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2015-07-09 02:18:22 UTC
Gideon Enderas wrote:
Yeah, I'm probably going to quit EVE if the wormhole changes go through in their current state

Delicious Smile
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#152 - 2015-07-09 03:02:56 UTC
Ms Michigan wrote:

MINING activity

Ms Michigan wrote:

get those subscriber numbers back up

ummmmmmmm
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#153 - 2015-07-09 03:14:03 UTC
boy howdy the first thing i think of when approaching the problem of eve retention rate is making more mining activities
Eodp Ellecon
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#154 - 2015-07-09 03:34:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Eodp Ellecon
Survey and Entrapment arrays

"...We will be keeping a close eye on the results of these changes to ensure that we don’t flood the market with the drops from these sites, and we’ll step in and make more changes if needed. However we currently believe that these new spawn rates will be much closer to the ideal balance for these two system upgrades."

Survey Networks.

Increasing spawn rate, ok.
Meaningful change comes only if accompanied by loot table adjustment.

Please no more Caldari Encryption and eveN worse, Jury Rigging skill books in these sites.

At least add the 'storyline' bpc's to drops if you are going to continue to have 'Armor Blocks' and other 'faction material' to make this stuff useful since we no longer have the Interface Tools.

Still getting empty cans at times.

Mix up the loots a bit....While Drone Lands gets all the Faction/Storyline drone bpc's it would be nice to see these pop up once in a while in regional flavor. Also mix in stuff that would have dropped from PVP activity. Neither of those likely to happen but thinking out loud.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#155 - 2015-07-09 04:48:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Zappity
Yes if you are going to increase Data and Relic spawn rates you should also increase the industry usage of the dropped materials a little.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#156 - 2015-07-09 06:34:53 UTC
Wormhole hunters can operate out of Thera just fine. They'll need to relocate and adapt but I don't think this change kills the playstyle. If they also own sov or have allies that do, they can use Thera to shortcut to somewhere near home too.

If Thera didn't exist I'd be more concerned about the WH changes.

On increasing anomolies - this will be a massive ISK faucet, and a massive (indirect) faucet of exploration combat site drops. Right now the better two types of X-type large armor reppers trade at around 380m ISK or 70m units trit. I wouldn't be surprised if this changes to 300m ISK and 50m units trit (Trit supply staying constant, ISK supply increasing, X-type repper supply dramatically increasing).

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#157 - 2015-07-09 06:52:21 UTC
SCom Thor wrote:
(...)

FFS get your heads out of your ass, it's clear as daylight: REDUCE the number of anoms/system so one system won't be enough for 100 carebears, increase their ISK/h so to motivate hisec mission runners to move into nullsec, and then come back for more suggestion.

(...)


Here lies a common misconception, so let me adresss it: choosing a security level it's not about the "reward" part of the risk/reward ration. Pumping up the reward of a certain securiy level just fills up the pockets of those who adopted that certain risk.

So no. More rewards don't will make people move out of highsec. But they certainly will allow nullbears to rake up ISK even faster than before, as if iSK was an issue in nullsec.

I just find ironical how, suddenly, nullsec PvE has become the most important issue to adress right now. Oh yes. Forget about the 73% of guys who log into highsec: it's not as if they were quitting in hordes as PCU digs itself below 2008 levels, no. It's all about poor nullerites and incursion runners who don't rack up enough billions per month!

Frankly, each time I ask myself "What has CCP done for me in the last years?" I feel stupider and stupider about giving them any money... Sad

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Sigras
Conglomo
#158 - 2015-07-09 07:18:25 UTC
I fully support the idea of group only content in null sec, but I'm not the biggest fan of artificial limits.

Couldnt we simply make a type of anom that is unable to be soloed?

I'm thinking a gated anom so no carriers, and 1000 DPS omni damage output with a really high active tank to EHP ratio... So something like a 1300 DPS active tank. Top all that off with a respawning neut tower or two and you got yourself an anom that cant be soloed... Thoughts?
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#159 - 2015-07-09 07:29:34 UTC
These are intended as a slight buff to anyone who uses Quantum Flux Generators for PVE daytripping, while also addressing concerns expressed by some CSM members. With these changes we still don’t expect that most alliances will find the Quantum Flux Generators to be extremely valuable, but hopefully their PVE value should increase somewhat.

Then why not make them even better? Roll
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#160 - 2015-07-09 08:36:43 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Then why not make them even better? Roll

One Thera is enough.Roll

--

I am very well aware of what I am suggesting now:

With the increase in anomaly clutter in system and the scan result window, can we have a way to permanently hide certain anomalies?

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.