These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Share your experiences with Fozziesov!

First post First post
Author
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#381 - 2015-08-06 17:32:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Damien Power wrote:
I hate the Fossisov stuff.. I left nullsec because
1) the vulnerable times. Nothing really happens until the timer that was set begins but like mentioned before you get mostly trolls just being annoying and not really creating content.

Hardly anyone is active except a couple guys who are ratting/mining just to increase the timer.

And when I say active I'm talking about people who actually undock! Not have 30 to 80 online sitting in station because they logged in and went to work just to appear online and active.

You harldy have any big opps or even small opps in this case. Yea I can fly around hoping to find someone trolling your area
But that's boring!

I trained all my accounts to fly cap ships and now they don't even get used now!
Mostly because you see a system being entosed I guess you can say that Lol you fly to check the system
And like mentioned before they run away! It's hard to get people to want to roam in small fleets because the chances are high that all you will find is a ceptor or a tech1 destroyer and occasionally a small camp with a bubble maybe 2 to 3 guys at most. But those guys are only looking for single pilots to gank who aren't immune to bubbles.

All in all its boring .



Does anyone in nullsec know that entrenched sov holders WILL come and defend their holdings?

It seems that none of you do because instead of leaving enough people behind to protect your holdings and finding another vested sov holder to fight you instead just whine falsely on the forums that you CANNOT find anyone to fight.

You could CHOOSE to use fozziesov and entoss another nullsec sov holder. You could CHOOSE to fight said sov holder when the must defend against your entossing and get into trillions ISK worth of ship carnage. In short, you could USE rather than fight AGAINST fozziesov to get into large scale fights easier than ever before.

But those pesky non agression pacts keep getting in the way, if only CCP would remove that game mechanic that forces you to make non agression pacts, then think of all the big fights you could be getting into, damn you CCP!

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Salvos Rhoska
#382 - 2015-08-06 17:53:20 UTC
Snowmann wrote:
If they were to take their own medicine, they would realize they are not supposed to be safe anywhere in Eve Online.


HALLELUJAH!

Let us always remember the Golden Rules.

*pops champagne*
Salvos Rhoska
#383 - 2015-08-06 18:02:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Lucas Kell wrote:
One guy is enough of a threat to sov to require a response. For a mechanic that is supposed to be alliance level that's just too far.


So its too far for your alliance to respond to a one guy threat?

I mean for thousands of alts controlling most of known space, to have to drive off a single guy?

Thats terrible, man.
I really feel for you.
Let me console you with my worlds tiniest violin.
Upon it, I will play the music of my people, the deposed and ousted Minmatar...

screeeaach ScreeeeAch SCREEEAACHaa...
screch..
pling!

Beautiful, is it not?
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
#384 - 2015-08-06 18:09:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Snowmann
Lucas Kell wrote:
Snowmann wrote:
I agree that this new form of Sov introduced a new form a Sov warfare that the Super Cap heavy organizations are having issues countering.
They want to force direct actions that they can escalate and return it to a form of warfare they have mastered during Dominion Sov.
That's not it at all. We're perfectly happy for sov to be easier to take and even for unused sov to be basically free for the taking, but the way this has been set out is too far in the other direction. One guy is enough of a threat to sov to require a response. For a mechanic that is supposed to be alliance level that's just too far.

We're certainly not having issues countering. There's fits listed in this thread for ships that put an end to an interceptor's attempts at sov trolling pretty quickly and the only people we're losing sov to is ourselves. It's not difficult to counter, it's just boring to do so.

The problem with it being so easy is that it's not encouraging people to take sov, it's just encouraging people to contest it and evade, hence the term "whack-a-mole sov". We certainly don't want to go back to the days of requiring a fleet of battleships a freighter and several days to take sov, but the commitment from the attacker should be at a level that most attacks on sov are serious attempts to take it. That would create real conflict which is what nullsec needs most.


What you are talking about is asymmetrical, or guerrilla warfare.
Attacking and not holding is the point of that type of warfare.

The fact that is boring and tedious for you is the point of that type of warfare.
You are being attacked in ways that you would not prefer, again asymmetrical warfare.

Symmetrical warfare would mean you are attacked by similar forces in ways you prefer and are used to.

Hi Sec players have been attacked asymmetrically for years by many null/low sec groups forcing them to adjust.

It is interesting to see how the Null Sec power blocks are now reacting now that they can be asymmetrically attacked by sole players in a truly meaningful way they are forced to react to.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#385 - 2015-08-06 18:13:48 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Goal of fozziesov: little used space will be tough (annoying) to hold, this is your problem you are fighting fozziesov rather than adapting to its tenants.
Except of course that the vast majority of us are talking about space we live in, not "little used space". Even if I'm sitting in a system in a PvP capable ship and a trollceptor comes in to mine a structure, it's still dull to have to go chase off someone who has no interest in taking the space


I miner bump people that come to the system i mine in, do so for as many hours as need be to get back the system for myself. Have had some miners spend weeks in my system being bumped everytime i logged in to EVE. Eventually my will won out in every case. If you think that bumping a mining vessel hour after hour for weeks on end is fun give it a try. I put up with whatever i need to in order to defend what i consider mine, now HTFU and defend yours or gtfo of nullsec.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#386 - 2015-08-06 18:19:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Snowmann wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Snowmann wrote:
I agree that this new form of Sov introduced a new form a Sov warfare that the Super Cap heavy organizations are having issues countering.
They want to force direct actions that they can escalate and return it to a form of warfare they have mastered during Dominion Sov.
That's not it at all. We're perfectly happy for sov to be easier to take and even for unused sov to be basically free for the taking, but the way this has been set out is too far in the other direction. One guy is enough of a threat to sov to require a response. For a mechanic that is supposed to be alliance level that's just too far.

We're certainly not having issues countering. There's fits listed in this thread for ships that put an end to an interceptor's attempts at sov trolling pretty quickly and the only people we're losing sov to is ourselves. It's not difficult to counter, it's just boring to do so.

The problem with it being so easy is that it's not encouraging people to take sov, it's just encouraging people to contest it and evade, hence the term "whack-a-mole sov". We certainly don't want to go back to the days of requiring a fleet of battleships a freighter and several days to take sov, but the commitment from the attacker should be at a level that most attacks on sov are serious attempts to take it. That would create real conflict which is what nullsec needs most.


What you are talking about is asymmetrical, or guerrilla warfare.
Attacking and not holding is the point of that type of warfare.

The fact that is boring and tedious for you is the point of that type of warfare.
You are being attacked in ways that you would not prefer, again asymmetrical warfare.

Symmetrical warfare would mean you are attacked by similar forces in ways you prefer and are used to.

Hi Sec players have been attacked asymmetrically for years by many null/low sec groups forcing them to adjust.

It is interesting to see how the Null Sec power blocks are now reacting now that they can be asymmetrically attacked by sole players in a truly meaningful way they are forced to react to.


What you ans others aren't getting is that we all understand that. We go out all the time during out vulnerability window and kill of little buggers who have no intention other than to ring a door bell. We do it all the time. We can do it forever. We WILL do it forever to protect our space.

Or at least till people start refusing to even log in because that kind of thing is boring. Easy killboard padding victory over people who don't care if they lose ships or take space is boring. Watching ALL of us in Sov null (not just Goons) create the fortresses that no one can take because trying would be more maddening that killing all those POSes in pre-dominion Sov.

We (some of us anyways) tried to explain this to you types and CCP 6 years ago before Dominion*. You didn't listen and the whole game suffered. you (and ccp) aren't listening again while 'we' have already figured out how to game the system to max effect (SELF-HARDENING RENTAL EMPIRES ARE SPROUTING UP, can't you all see that?). Again.

This is why history repeats itself, people aren't capable of listening to the people they should. Hopefully it won't take 6 years this time....


*Funny side note, the people who supported Dominion were the same kind of people defending this new system. I called them the 'disenfranchised optimists', they were the anti-big group (and BoB/Goons/Old NC/Drone Russians/Stainwagon) types who were SURE that Dominion was the cure, that 'now small groups will be in null!!. 6 years later not a one of them has admitted that they were wrong.
Falin Whalen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#387 - 2015-08-06 18:22:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Falin Whalen
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:


A non sov holding corp could dock up and do nothing but sov holders if they want their sov cannot. I choose to ANNOY corps that can not dock and wait because I dont really want a fight. I know sov holders cannot dock up and wait me out so I go find a sov holder and ANNOY them rather than fight. Oh yeah i forgot I hate people for working together for common goals. So the problem again isnt I CANT find sov to take it is I CHOOSE not to.

I fixed your post.

"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka 

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#388 - 2015-08-06 18:23:04 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
So its too far for your alliance to respond to a one guy threat?

I mean for thousands of alts controlling most of known space, to have to drive off a single guy?
It's too low a bar to be a threat. Having to chase disposable ships around while they evade is not fun. They have no interest in taking sov, just wasting time. The mechanic currently supports that and it's dumb that it does. I get that you're either a terrible troll or you legitimately don't think games should be fun, but the mechanic isn't creating conflict, because after chasing frigates all day, who really wants to go mine structures?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Salvos Rhoska
#389 - 2015-08-06 18:24:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is why history repeats itself, people aren't capable of listening to the people they should. Hopefully it won't take 6 years this time....


So vats ze Final Solution?

Please, lay it out here straight.
I for one am listening.

Lucas Kell wrote:
It's too low a bar to be a threat.

Ok then.

No threat, no problem.

Thats that then.
Thanks.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#390 - 2015-08-06 18:25:46 UTC
Snowmann wrote:
What you are talking about is asymmetrical, or guerrilla warfare.
Attacking and not holding is the point of that type of warfare.
No, it's not. Guerilla warfare still has a strategic goal. Trollceptors don't. They are literally there to make the game less fun for sov holders. Whether you like sov holders or not, can you not see how it's bad game design to allow a mechanic to promote boring gameplay.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lim Yoona
#391 - 2015-08-06 18:35:31 UTC
Release a squirrel in your house and then you and your friends have to spend hours running around chasing after it. Do this and you will know the new sov system in and out.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#392 - 2015-08-06 18:38:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Snowmann wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Snowmann wrote:
I agree that this new form of Sov introduced a new form a Sov warfare that the Super Cap heavy organizations are having issues countering.
They want to force direct actions that they can escalate and return it to a form of warfare they have mastered during Dominion Sov.
That's not it at all. We're perfectly happy for sov to be easier to take and even for unused sov to be basically free for the taking, but the way this has been set out is too far in the other direction. One guy is enough of a threat to sov to require a response. For a mechanic that is supposed to be alliance level that's just too far.

We're certainly not having issues countering. There's fits listed in this thread for ships that put an end to an interceptor's attempts at sov trolling pretty quickly and the only people we're losing sov to is ourselves. It's not difficult to counter, it's just boring to do so.

The problem with it being so easy is that it's not encouraging people to take sov, it's just encouraging people to contest it and evade, hence the term "whack-a-mole sov". We certainly don't want to go back to the days of requiring a fleet of battleships a freighter and several days to take sov, but the commitment from the attacker should be at a level that most attacks on sov are serious attempts to take it. That would create real conflict which is what nullsec needs most.


What you are talking about is asymmetrical, or guerrilla warfare.
Attacking and not holding is the point of that type of warfare.

The fact that is boring and tedious for you is the point of that type of warfare.
You are being attacked in ways that you would not prefer, again asymmetrical warfare.

Symmetrical warfare would mean you are attacked by similar forces in ways you prefer and are used to.

Hi Sec players have been attacked asymmetrically for years by many null/low sec groups forcing them to adjust.

It is interesting to see how the Null Sec power blocks are now reacting now that they can be asymmetrically attacked by sole players in a truly meaningful way they are forced to react to.


Damn. nice post !

It does seem they forgot about burn jita / amarr. Any of the larger alliances could perma-own jita if they wanted to but burn jita and now amarr was never about owning jita it has always only been about annoying those that live there and nothing else and now that highsec and other regions of EVE can annoy nullsec, nullsec goes running off to mommy with tears in its eyes telling mommy to make the bad people go away because it is ruining their fun and if they are defending their sov how are they going to find time to get back to jita to burn it and annoy the people there just for laughs, it just isnt fair mommy, it just isnt fair!

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Snowmann
Arrow Industries
#393 - 2015-08-06 18:38:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Snowmann wrote:
What you are talking about is asymmetrical, or guerrilla warfare.
Attacking and not holding is the point of that type of warfare.
No, it's not. Guerilla warfare still has a strategic goal. Trollceptors don't. They are literally there to make the game less fun for sov holders. Whether you like sov holders or not, can you not see how it's bad game design to allow a mechanic to promote boring gameplay.



The same could be said about Hi Sec gankers. They make the game less fun for the targets, but it adds realism and shows you that you are never safe in Eve Online.

This is Eve, ganking is allowed, so should Trollceptors, they are the same types of warfare just with different targets and goals.

Gankers have been said to be counters to the isk printers called Lvl 4s.

Trollceptors force Sov holders to only hold space where they are active. It is a counter balance to Sov Sprawl that we have seen for years.

Trollceptors will probably result in some leaving the game, but so has Hi Sec ganking.
It is the nature of this game, and why it is considered so hard and visceral by many.

Baku Saissore
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#394 - 2015-08-06 18:46:19 UTC
I am certainly a big fan of fozzie sov changes. Many here have pointed out great things that it has brought so i wont go into them.

However there seems to be a certain misconception about the key principle behind the mechanics. Trolling or not the attacking side must take the structure/node/stn within the period determined by the defense multiplier. Hence an organised side will ensure industry and military multipliers are kept at a certain minimum. every time a T1 entosis ship loses it's lock is an additional 5 minutes. Even when the entosis timer is 30 minutes, that would put off most but serious attackers. So as long as defense multipliers are kept high enough even a small alliance/corp cam hold on to a constellation.

As for trolling/solo ceptors they are my favorite target nowadays. The trick is ... fly a ceptor yourself :)
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#395 - 2015-08-06 18:46:26 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is why history repeats itself, people aren't capable of listening to the people they should. Hopefully it won't take 6 years this time....


So vats ze Final Solution?

Please, lay it out here straight.
I for one am listening.


I just laid it out. The problem is that you are not interested in listening.

What you types just don't get (abive what's been said) is that these kinds of situations are win/win for people like me. If CCP does nothing I sit back in my impossible to conquer Ratting systems making loads of isk while padding my killboard with ever increasing numbers of small ships (not the fleet action fun i want though), if they wise up and scrap this horrible system (preferably for a true sandboxy "no sov" situation), we win because we get to have fun with emergent experiences again.

One thing that's real funny is the low sec and high sec people in here celebrating a boring null conflcit system. Not understanding that this does nothing but mean more bored null sec playerss in low sec/FW and ganking in high sec... They are literally celebrating the fact that they are about to get ****** around way more often. Shortsightedness is a powerful affliction.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#396 - 2015-08-06 18:47:58 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Snowmann wrote:
What you are talking about is asymmetrical, or guerrilla warfare.
Attacking and not holding is the point of that type of warfare.
No, it's not. Guerilla warfare still has a strategic goal. Trollceptors don't. They are literally there to make the game less fun for sov holders. Whether you like sov holders or not, can you not see how it's bad game design to allow a mechanic to promote boring gameplay.


It can take a long time annoying someone before they decide that fighting guerillas isnt worth it and given that some many alliances in EVE are already whining to the heavens about fozziesov, im pretty sure your will is already beginning to flounder.

So, when can u haz your stuff cuz you seem like you arent going to make it in the new nullsec and im anticipating a rage quit.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Salvos Rhoska
#397 - 2015-08-06 18:48:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Lim Yoona wrote:
Release a squirrel in your house and then you and your friends have to spend hours running around chasing after it. Do this and you will know the new sov system in and out.


I know exactly what thats like!

So.
How about baiting it with some nuts into a trap?
How about sallying forth boldly to destroy its home?
How about keeping the door closed and watched?
How about encircling it so it has no means to escape?
How about dressing up as a squirrel and infiltrating its organisation?
How about whining real hard to the powers that be that that squirrels are eliminated?
If its a really ferocious and persistent squirrel, maybe you will have to surrender a room to it...

Ive done all of the above (or, well, most) successfully, and still love the annoying curious little buggers.

Squirrels are the spirit animal of the Minmatar, btw. Few people know that.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#398 - 2015-08-06 18:48:52 UTC
Snowmann wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Snowmann wrote:
What you are talking about is asymmetrical, or guerrilla warfare.
Attacking and not holding is the point of that type of warfare.
No, it's not. Guerilla warfare still has a strategic goal. Trollceptors don't. They are literally there to make the game less fun for sov holders. Whether you like sov holders or not, can you not see how it's bad game design to allow a mechanic to promote boring gameplay.



The same could be said about Hi Sec gankers. They make the game less fun for the targets, but it adds realism and shows you that you are never safe in Eve Online.

This is Eve, ganking is allowed, so should Trollceptors, they are the same types of warfare just with different targets and goals.

Gankers have been said to be counters to the isk printers called Lvl 4s.

Trollceptors force Sov holders to only hold space where they are active. It is a counter balance to Sov Sprawl that we have seen for years.

Trollceptors will probably result in some leaving the game, but so has Hi Sec ganking.
It is the nature of this game, and why it is considered so hard and visceral by many.



So when you see (and you will) that this system create even more sov sprawl (because now renters can harden their own systems with pve) like Dominion did, will you come back to this forum and admit you were wrong?
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#399 - 2015-08-06 18:52:23 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
So its too far for your alliance to respond to a one guy threat?

I mean for thousands of alts controlling most of known space, to have to drive off a single guy?
It's too low a bar to be a threat. Having to chase disposable ships around while they evade is not fun. They have no interest in taking sov, just wasting time. The mechanic currently supports that and it's dumb that it does. I get that you're either a terrible troll or you legitimately don't think games should be fun, but the mechanic isn't creating conflict, because after chasing frigates all day, who really wants to go mine structures?


Im sure the british thought that guerilla warfare was both unfair and pointless when America used guerilla warfare against them, they were wrong on both accounts and so are you.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Salvos Rhoska
#400 - 2015-08-06 18:54:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jenn aSide wrote:

I just laid it out. The problem is that you are not interested in listening.


Where exactly?

All I saw was accusations and gemeralisations how nobody is listening to you.
I did check back again and didnt find it.

Vere ist ze Final Solution, preferably in a coherent, itemized and numbered list?

Im quite serious.
Id love to see it and it would bring some structure to this thread.