These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

We want your SOV little things!

First post First post
Author
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#61 - 2015-07-20 13:12:43 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Ted McManfist wrote:
Could you please allow Stront in cargo holds of ships stored in carriers? It's required for the operation of an Entosis Link, but you currently cannot store a vessel in a carrier / super / titan with Strontium in the cargo hold.



Liquid Ozone is a charge for a cyno and you can't store that either.....

REMOVE ALL restrictions on cargo holds. Moving anything with a carrier is aids compared to a JF post phoebe


Fully supported. Great idea.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Chase Hakoke
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#62 - 2015-07-20 17:30:02 UTC
command nodes are awful. just have one node so we can have one fun concentrated fight.
Scorpio DK
Doomheim
#63 - 2015-07-20 19:16:09 UTC
not sure if it's been mentioned

add the % to the levels like you see on the ihub to the corporation - alliances - claimed systems window so all can see what % a level is currently at in any system for any char rather than having someone to fly to the ihub for every system
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#64 - 2015-07-20 19:54:47 UTC
If an overview has other sov structures checked, can you auto-check new sov structures when you introduce them?

Apparently, the capture nodes are like Attack Battlecruisers in that they were slipped in to the overview settings unchecked by default.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2015-07-20 23:37:51 UTC
Chase Hakoke wrote:
command nodes are awful. just have one node so we can have one fun concentrated fight.

It has been specifically designed to have many spread out fun fights instead of getting your blob on top of it and being fat.

That said, you can always have your fun fight on initial reinforce, there's only station/TCU/IHUB to reinforce, here's your one node. If you want to get a gudfait out of it, I suggest to tell your opponents in advance, so they will have a fun welcoming party.
CCP Sharq
C C P
C C P Alliance
#66 - 2015-07-21 10:50:01 UTC
Thanks guys!

We're processing your feedback, we'll see what we can do to give you a better Sov experience.

Fly dangerously

EVE UI Designer | Team Psycho Sisters | @CCP_Sharq

Jennifer Cho
Oberon Incorporated
Fedaykin.
#67 - 2015-07-21 11:08:34 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Ted McManfist wrote:
Could you please allow Stront in cargo holds of ships stored in carriers? It's required for the operation of an Entosis Link, but you currently cannot store a vessel in a carrier / super / titan with Strontium in the cargo hold.



Liquid Ozone is a charge for a cyno and you can't store that either.....

REMOVE ALL restrictions on cargo holds. Moving anything with a carrier is aids compared to a JF post phoebe


Fully supported. Great idea.


You used to be able to put anything in the cargoholds of ships in a carrier hangar - that was until it was discovered you could fit Skiffs with a volume of 5,000 with cargo expanders and place 20,000+ in their cargoholds creating a jump freighter.... CCP were less than impressed hence the limits to what you can place in cargoholds.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#68 - 2015-07-21 11:22:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Masao Kurata
Jennifer Cho wrote:
You used to be able to put anything in the cargoholds of ships in a carrier hangar - that was until it was discovered you could fit Skiffs with a volume of 5,000 with cargo expanders and place 20,000+ in their cargoholds creating a jump freighter.... CCP were less than impressed hence the limits to what you can place in cargoholds.


Uh really? Skiffs used to have an unpackaged volume of 5000 m3? Because that's 5% of what it is now.

Well regardless of the details it would still be abusable today, although the details would be different.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#69 - 2015-07-21 14:20:12 UTC
Jennifer Cho wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Ted McManfist wrote:
Could you please allow Stront in cargo holds of ships stored in carriers? It's required for the operation of an Entosis Link, but you currently cannot store a vessel in a carrier / super / titan with Strontium in the cargo hold.



Liquid Ozone is a charge for a cyno and you can't store that either.....

REMOVE ALL restrictions on cargo holds. Moving anything with a carrier is aids compared to a JF post phoebe


Fully supported. Great idea.


You used to be able to put anything in the cargoholds of ships in a carrier hangar - that was until it was discovered you could fit Skiffs with a volume of 5,000 with cargo expanders and place 20,000+ in their cargoholds creating a jump freighter.... CCP were less than impressed hence the limits to what you can place in cargoholds.



CORRECT

NOW, however, you can spit farther than a carrier can jump and using a JF is a much much much better proposition, therefore the "NEED" for the restrictions is no longer applicable
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#70 - 2015-07-21 14:21:13 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Jennifer Cho wrote:
You used to be able to put anything in the cargoholds of ships in a carrier hangar - that was until it was discovered you could fit Skiffs with a volume of 5,000 with cargo expanders and place 20,000+ in their cargoholds creating a jump freighter.... CCP were less than impressed hence the limits to what you can place in cargoholds.


Uh really? Skiffs used to have an unpackaged volume of 5000 m3? Because that's 5% of what it is now.

Well regardless of the details it would still be abusable today, although the details would be different.



No, he means assembled, then cargo expanded to hold "Stuff" then put in the SMA

It was why the restriction were put in place cause a carrier could jump 14.25 LY
Dr Cedric
Independent Miners Corporation
Care Factor
#71 - 2015-07-21 16:35:44 UTC
Aeon Veritas wrote:
What makes me a little unhappy is that atm not small scale groups are encuraged, what iirc was the intention of this sov change.
But solo gameplay with entosis-interceptors is encuraged, no matter if for attacking the sov or for deffending it...
Except maybe for the case that someone actually shows up to claim the thing after the RF-period...

I'm not sure if I realy want this, but my proposal is to increase the capture time by 500% but allow up to 5 people of the same alliance to use their entosis links simultaneously. That way 5 people should be as fast as one is now...
As soon as one link of another alliance is used on the structure the capturing proces is paused, like is is now.



On this,

How about a diminishing return, similar to stacked modules, so that more people can entose, but the have less return. It is a good mechanic to add pressure to defenders to get out and defend, but at the same time, they can get their stuff back that much faster.

Then, you, CCP, can fiddle with the entosis timers up or down to reach the sweet spot for fleet work.

Could also be fun to add different types of command nodes that respond differently to Entosing, so that different fleet comps are needed to capture the flag. The different types of nodes could be based on the Sov Index of the system the structure is in, so that higher sov generates bigger/badder nodes that need heavier ships/capital support. In that case, maybe you tell your line members to go anom somewhere else to keep the index artificially low since you can't field the best fleet for it.

Just random thoughts :)

Cedric

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#72 - 2015-07-21 17:03:03 UTC
Jennifer Cho wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Ted McManfist wrote:
Could you please allow Stront in cargo holds of ships stored in carriers? It's required for the operation of an Entosis Link, but you currently cannot store a vessel in a carrier / super / titan with Strontium in the cargo hold.



Liquid Ozone is a charge for a cyno and you can't store that either.....

REMOVE ALL restrictions on cargo holds. Moving anything with a carrier is aids compared to a JF post phoebe


Fully supported. Great idea.


You used to be able to put anything in the cargoholds of ships in a carrier hangar - that was until it was discovered you could fit Skiffs with a volume of 5,000 with cargo expanders and place 20,000+ in their cargoholds creating a jump freighter.... CCP were less than impressed hence the limits to what you can place in cargoholds.


That was before Jump Fatigue.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Dr Cedric
Independent Miners Corporation
Care Factor
#73 - 2015-07-21 19:09:17 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Jennifer Cho wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Ted McManfist wrote:
Could you please allow Stront in cargo holds of ships stored in carriers? It's required for the operation of an Entosis Link, but you currently cannot store a vessel in a carrier / super / titan with Strontium in the cargo hold.



Liquid Ozone is a charge for a cyno and you can't store that either.....

REMOVE ALL restrictions on cargo holds. Moving anything with a carrier is aids compared to a JF post phoebe


Fully supported. Great idea.


You used to be able to put anything in the cargoholds of ships in a carrier hangar - that was until it was discovered you could fit Skiffs with a volume of 5,000 with cargo expanders and place 20,000+ in their cargoholds creating a jump freighter.... CCP were less than impressed hence the limits to what you can place in cargoholds.


That was before Jump Fatigue.


This particular mechanic was removed because it turned Carriers into the default item moving vessel and was terribly abused. People would back Itty 5's (back when that was the only industrial that could hold 25k+ m3) with large guns and other items that would then be melted at some destination. The problem is that the melted minerals took up more volume than the item itself... basically compressed minerals in the form of modules.

This made logistics way too easy, was very much abused, and took roles away from the (jump) freighter and gave too much versatility to Carriers.

No, the change to disallow certain items in the cargo of Ships stored in a carrier is a good change and should not be changed. They've already given us item-specific industrials, Transport ships w/ 50k m3 fleet hangars and everything in between anyway!

Cedric

Tallardar
PC Culture
#74 - 2015-07-21 21:22:51 UTC
Not sure if it was brought up but one thing that'd be nice is to see the percentages of how much a Sov Structure is being defended.

For example http://i.imgur.com/yKLIyeR.jpg

We can hover over systems for FW and see that, like the picture shows, Abune is 38.7% defended but with the info for VV0-R6 we can only guestimate based off the bar underneath the structure that is currently contested. Doing something similar shouldn't be hard and would be useful information to have as both an attack and a defender no?
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2015-07-22 02:40:19 UTC
From what I see on the timetable...

1) IHUBs are being reinforced only in 2 cases: people are going to live in that system, or troll purposes. Otherwise nobody cares.
2) TCUs are being reinforced for troll purposes only. Literally nobody cares about those, and honestly, there's no reason to - if enemy is willing to pay sov bills for you, who are you to forbid them? There is no benefit of having them, only the trolling liability, which is happily shifted to enemy, with all the strategic defense multiplier they have mounted over time.
3) Stations were supposed to be a gudfait, but instead they are lock break bombs trollfest, alpha thrasher gangs trollfest, and griffins trollfest. I know lock breaking is supposed to be a sov thing now, but capturing a node with only contest being a lock-breaking bomber every 5 minutes is a royal PITA.

1 is working as intended I guess. you don't need IHUB if you don't want upgrades now.
2 is questionable at the moment. Holding sov provides no meaningful benefit and not tied to stations anymore, so why hold it? All the "ego" reasons turned into thin air. Guess the new influence maps are going to be based on station ownership only...
3 I believe it was supposed to be revolving around "grid control", and trollfest parties doesn't care much about that. Well, I guess there can be meta-fix of this, involving entosis ships with high ECCM and EHP fits... but still, this was supposed to be lowsec fwfest, and it turned into hisec gankfest instead, now with no criminal flagging.

new suggestions:
Deal with 2.
For 3, increase weapon timers on attacking active entosis ships and disallow self-destruction while on timer, before whole alliances start showing up in nothing but thrashers.
Evelgrivion
Origin.
Black Legion...
#76 - 2015-07-22 18:41:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
The capture system for FozzieSov is beautiful, but the vulnerability and index-boosting mechanics make it a full time job to try and secure a newly captured system - and it's even worse if you don't make good friends with everyone in close reach of the region. In effect, the vulnerability window mechanics are backwards; systems start at maximum vulnerability, and then become less and less vulnerable (allowing established groups to invest a lot less effort and time) into holding up their guard. This is working against the stated goals of making it easier for small groups to get started, it makes taking sov into a full time job (the exact opposite of the stated goal), and the 100% guarantee of decreased vulnerability over time works against the goal of making people live in their space.

The sov system would work much better for all parties, IMO, if the vulnerability window did not start at maximum vulnerability. A system's vulnerability trend that looked something like this would be much better:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CKieLGaUkAA1oQ7.png
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#77 - 2015-07-22 20:55:33 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
The capture system for FozzieSov is beautiful, but the vulnerability and index-boosting mechanics make it a full time job to try and secure a newly captured system - and it's even worse if you don't make good friends with everyone in close reach of the region. In effect, the vulnerability window mechanics are backwards; systems start at maximum vulnerability, and then become less and less vulnerable (allowing established groups to invest a lot less effort and time) into holding up their guard. This is working against the stated goals of making it easier for small groups to get started, it makes taking sov into a full time job (the exact opposite of the stated goal), and the 100% guarantee of decreased vulnerability over time works against the goal of making people live in their space.

The sov system would work much better for all parties, IMO, if the vulnerability window did not start at maximum vulnerability. A system's vulnerability trend that looked something like this would be much better:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CKieLGaUkAA1oQ7.png



Well, the "Easier" part was you didn't need 50 supers to grind the EHP of the TCU, iHUB and Station

Never was Fozzie sov supposed to be a welfare sov handout system. You still have to work for Sov
Evelgrivion
Origin.
Black Legion...
#78 - 2015-07-22 21:46:57 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Well, the "Easier" part was you didn't need 50 supers to grind the EHP of the TCU, iHUB and Station

Never was Fozzie sov supposed to be a welfare sov handout system. You still have to work for Sov


Asking for a window to get some traction isn't begging for welfare.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#79 - 2015-07-22 22:02:45 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Well, the "Easier" part was you didn't need 50 supers to grind the EHP of the TCU, iHUB and Station

Never was Fozzie sov supposed to be a welfare sov handout system. You still have to work for Sov


Asking for a window to get some traction isn't begging for welfare.



Gee, that is funny, we RF'd 28 items today, a few hours ago, we had a total of One Crow and One manitcore come hassle us. I am not sure what other window you want.

In the past week, i have entosis'd roughly 10 things SOLO and haven't seen as much as a single spaceship on my overview

Maybe you are just not doing it right
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#80 - 2015-07-23 01:36:54 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Well, the "Easier" part was you didn't need 50 supers to grind the EHP of the TCU, iHUB and Station

Never was Fozzie sov supposed to be a welfare sov handout system. You still have to work for Sov


Asking for a window to get some traction isn't begging for welfare.


You mean you want a free buffer defense multiplier in the time it takes to get your ratting/mining people rolling?