These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Galatea] First batch of sov capture iterations

First post First post
Author
Carribean Queen
Vadimus Quarrier Works
#221 - 2015-08-19 06:13:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Carribean Queen
Warmeister wrote:
troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.

if each system the alliance owns actually had someone there for the duration of the vuln. window, then nobody would try and troll in a ceptor.

not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.





^ THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS^

Also reading about 'barrier of entry into a trollceptor', 70 to 90 days? Crying about that on reddit... And yet the barrier of entry into a max skilled Catalyst pilot for ganking is... a LOT LESS than that. Yes, less nodes and this iteration is better. However if these crybabies can't get off their lazy butts and learn how to do more than be just a bunch of F1 monkeys, then Trollceptor away with your 3 month barrier of entry. CCP would do a lot more good rebalancing a few things to prevent all the people rage quitting over gankfreighterfest that EVE has turned into. It's basically ganks online and nullsec tears ragequit online.

Luckily I invested heavily in popcorn, all this salt is gonna give me a heart attack though.
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#222 - 2015-08-19 06:18:43 UTC
Congratulation on the choice of changes for Galatea, they are reasonable and measured.
It shows that CCP truly listen to all sides.
Good job!

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project

TWISTED TRANZISTOR
2nd Echelon
#223 - 2015-08-19 06:21:09 UTC
This is similar to a crutch.
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#224 - 2015-08-19 06:23:48 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
Here are my thoughts about the set of 'tweaks' that Fozzie announced:

They are simply amazing.
They absolutely manage to touch and correct almost none of the issues that the majority of null players were pointing out very vocally.

Node reductions might be pointed out as a positive change, but the tweak on them is so light that is suspiciously looks like to me an attempt to damage control after the overwhelmingly negative feedback that has been addressed to Fozzie & the team.

With these levels of excellence at the inability to comprehend the basic demands of the null sov players, I can easily foresee EVE Online going F2P in short to medium term with the current trends of concurrent logins and subscription numbers rapidly bleeding out.

Well done Fozzie, now please do pen a dev blog about how you succeeded on placing the game on life support and prevented the death. Meanwhile, we'll be throwing soil on EVE's casket and saying our prayers in the grim cemetery of reality.

Reagalan made an excellent post about why your ideas and insistence on shoving a certain playstyle down the nullseccers collective throats is a bad idea. You might want to read that several times.


The majority of nullsec hasn't pointed to anything. A loud minority, consisting mostly of your alliance is crying and pointing at all the wrong things, rest of the playerbase and devs laugh at your futile mongering. You're wrong, suck it up or just gtfo- there''s literally nobody that cares whether you unsub or not, but at least have the decency to shut up.

Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#225 - 2015-08-19 06:24:48 UTC
Galphii wrote:
Consider prohibiting microwarpdrive use while entosis links are running

I like this.
4km/s hard limit seems really random to me. What next? 100k EHP hard limit for T3 cruisers? 150km drone control range? 500 GJ/s capacitor regen when in triage?
Vacant Glare
Nefariam Cementarii
#226 - 2015-08-19 06:27:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Vacant Glare
Finally some feedback from AFK CCP

1: Speed needs to be severely limited when an Entosis Link is online(block Entosis and MWD running concurrently).
2: Remove ability from ALL nullified ships to fit a Entosis Link.
3: Make cloaks and the Entosis Link mutually exclusive to each other.

Unfortunately, we are seeing the ishtar tweak approach here. Hint the game and especially the new SOV system will not survive ice-cube tweaks it badly needs a Titanic sized ice-BERG to fix this.

The speed limitation does nothing to fix the 'trollceptor' and still doesn't address the issue of when systems are attacked with "Trollceptors" but never following up on, this is making SOV ownership worthless.

Make command nodes appear 1 or 2 appear at a time so that combat has to occur if contested. If no contest then have the nodes revert to sov owner over time but pretty fast say 2 hours.
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#227 - 2015-08-19 06:35:13 UTC
Marcus Covinus wrote:

Iteration 3: Aegis/Fozzie Sov

Implementation: TCU anchored and online in the system.

What does it take to capture: An interceptor with an entosis link.

***

Now do we see a problem here? You've gone the route of World Of Warcraft by slowly pandering to the lowest common denominator. You see smug bullsh*t like https://eveskunk.com/e/353067497 where the sole goal is to troll sov and create nodes with no intention of capture. (Yes I am calling MOA lowest common denominator)

Recommendation: Entosis Link fits on Cruiser or larger hull only. Like a cyno, it restricts your movement. You've stated yourself.

Quote:
You should only be using an Entosis Link if you've won the field - CCP Fozzie


If one can use an interceptor to take your sov, that means you've lost the field. You have no military control on grid. How does it feel to lose to one cheap frigate? Bear
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#228 - 2015-08-19 06:49:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
Warmeister wrote:
troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
...
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.

While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing.
This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.
People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin.
Jaxel Devren
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#229 - 2015-08-19 06:56:08 UTC
You like feedback from real players CCP? My accounts are slowly going inactive 1 by 1 and now I play Elite Dangerous. Lol
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus
#230 - 2015-08-19 07:05:24 UTC
Balthusdire Dominus wrote:
The speed limitation while helpful doesn't solve the underlying problem of no risk to an attacker.

Good to see things moving forward. I think fozzie sov can be fun, just needs some more work.


If you can't kill a 4km/s ceptor that cannot warp, the issue is with you not the system...
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus
#231 - 2015-08-19 07:06:55 UTC
Lim Yoona wrote:
I'm gonna vote with my wallet on this one and cancel my subs. This used to be a good game maybe one day it'll get better.

After this crop of small gang devs goes to Riot.


Thank you. You won't be missed.
Sigras
Conglomo
#232 - 2015-08-19 07:07:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
I understand that one of your stated design goals was to have as little effect on the ships that people brought to a fight as possible. I understand the reason for that desire and I respect it, but I believe I that goal isnt a good goal to have.

People dont want an actual fight, they want to show up and massacre their opponents or run away which is the cause for all of this frustration and these super risk averse fleets. This has always been the case, and the new sov system is just the latest way these people are baiting fights.

Contesting sov should be just that, an actual attempt to contest sov, not just an attempt by a roaming group to bait a quick fight, or troll the holding alliance with uncatchable ships never truly meant to contest the space. In light of that philosophy, I suggest the following three changes

1. Change the entosis link to a 5 minute (300 second) duration.
2. Change Mass Increase on the entosis link to 7,500,000 for the T2 and 1,000,000 for the T1
3. Change the range of the T2 entosis link to 225 km

These three small changes will make disengaging from a fight far more difficult and I believe they will result in better fights and fewer troll attempts.

Thoughts?
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Tactical Farmers
#233 - 2015-08-19 07:09:56 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Warmeister wrote:
troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
...
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.

While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing.
This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.
People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin.

i didn't say null sec is not worth living in. you don't see people evacing their assets and dropping sov, so obviously it is worth it. especially considering the stupid amount of money people make from rental empires and the fact that there are people willing to pay that money.

what i said is that people capture sov but don't intend to live in it. the sole purpose of it is so they can see a big spot on the map with their name so when someone comes and tries to take it away from them, instead of showing up to protect this space, they cry to CCP about broken mechanics.

SpaceSaft
Almost Dangerous
Wolves Amongst Strangers
#234 - 2015-08-19 07:11:47 UTC  |  Edited by: SpaceSaft
I'm not exactly sure why the entosis modules need these crazy ranges but w/e.

The real issue is that you're basically fighting your other game mechanics. The only way to deal with gate camps is jump, mwd trick and cloak, hope they don't lock you at all, or to fly an interceptor.

That situation means ceptors have to be hard to catch close up.

The new sov situation is the opposite, you can sit anywhere in a very large radius, removing the spatial constraint you had previously, but ceptors and other fast ships are still allowed to do be in this situation.

That's only a problem because there is simply no way to catch up to someone like that at all. It's also true for a sov node 'fight' but the problem originates in the basic design of combat that you can't engage someone faster than you if he doesn't want to fight.

You have the same problem with various fast cruisers that are effectively too fast to be probed down. If they want to troll you, in your system, for indefinite amounts of time, they can. No restrictions. Same applies to afk cloakers.

There are no choke points inside systems or here on sov node grids, there is no fuel they could run out of thus removing their advantage, there is no way to outplay someone going faster than you or cloaking at all, ever, in any way, with any ship or module or gun or number of people.

THIS actual issue, I'd very much like to see solved and I'd be very curious to see your ideas and solutions to it, but I don't think you're going to touch it, because sov is the priority right now and I'm sure there are like 10 other things going on too.

Good luck!

PS: gates have the condition that you have no intel of the other side as well, that's contributing to the whole thing.
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#235 - 2015-08-19 07:19:35 UTC
Remove it from ceptors all together.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#236 - 2015-08-19 07:24:17 UTC
"The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" "

Finally! Something some of us having been asking for as long as it was possible.

More penalties for fast stuff, no useless penalty for everyone including slow doctrines.

You should reduce the limit to 3k5 though in my opinion. 4k cannot even be reached by all inties.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#237 - 2015-08-19 07:25:39 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Galphii wrote:
Consider prohibiting microwarpdrive use while entosis links are running

I like this.
4km/s hard limit seems really random to me. What next? 100k EHP hard limit for T3 cruisers? 150km drone control range? 500 GJ/s capacitor regen when in triage?

Implying arbitrary limit prohibiting usage of buffer mods on T3s / DCLs / cap rechargers with triage would be better (which is what quoted idea amounts to when analogy with your examples is drawn).
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#238 - 2015-08-19 07:28:08 UTC
Looks like Fozzie SOV is here to stay.

Good luck to CCP and everybody involved. Hope it all works out in the end.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Tish Magev
Pyke Syndicate
Solyaris Chtonium
#239 - 2015-08-19 07:29:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tish Magev
Well that was a waste of a wall of text.

Literally changes nothing.

I can't believe that ANY null sec dwelling player/corp/alliance/coalition likes FozzieSov, or finds it generates content in anyway, in fact I'm pretty sure they don't.

Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.

All the best CCP, let's see how much (positive) media attention EvE gets when no one's fighting anymore.

EvE, your PvP content isn't good enough to be ignoring the mass-PvP element of the game, this isn't WOW.

All nullsec alliances should just go back to highsec, cos well there isn't any content in null anymore anyway, let the scrubs that think fozziesov is a good idea deal with it for a while.
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Tactical Farmers
#240 - 2015-08-19 07:34:06 UTC
Tish Magev wrote:

Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.


yeah, and before fozziesov there were sov wars left right and center, right? Roll