These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dantelion Shinoni
SQUIDS.
#321 - 2015-08-19 11:59:27 UTC
Arkady Romanov wrote:

[...]
Why has CCP decided that the minimum barrier to entry as a Sov holding entity is a 50 mill, T2 frigate?


The intent was good. By allowing all kind of ships to have the Entosis Link you ensured that people from all space could use it. As it is a tool that is supposed to be universal and used to deal with structures all over EVE in the future, it made sense that the most fits should have access to it.

However the problem is that this mechanic also interacts with Sov, and some class of ships are way too toxic to be allowed to mess with Sov. Interceptors Nullification make them a direct candidate for exclusion, Cruisers with 500mn too. But still, despite some ships being way too toxic to have the mechanic, you still need the Link to be available at the Small, Medium, Large, and X-Large scale.

Also, reposting this idea that has been posted on Reddit (I know, I know...) which I think is actually quite good when it comes to solving several problems:

Quote:

Entosis links are a Warfare Link.
Assault Frigates can use Warfare Links now.
Fixed.


Although there is a problem in that T3 cruisers can still fit the module and those can go past bubbles at least a T3 cruiser is a juicy killmail unlike an Interceptor, still another simpler alternative could be:

Quote:

Entosis Links limited to Assault Frigates, BattleCruisers and higher.


I still like the first idea because it would give Assault Frigates the long awaited utility to make them distinct, useful, and no longer obsolete when compared to T3 Destroyers, plus it opens up the possibility of smaller size fleets having access to a viable link ship in the hypothetical scenario where On-Grid Links are a reality. But the second idea makes sure that only ships that have to commit to the grid, due to being slow in general, would be able to contest Sov.

But hey, maybe just having the Link prevents any kind of Nullification and have a speed/align time penalty is the simpler solution.

So yeah you have many components for a solution really:

- Limit the Entosis Link to BC and up while allowing Assault Frigates to use one for S/M-size fleets.
- Make the Entosis Link become a Warfare Link.
- An align time penalty imposed by the Entosis Link.
- Further speed penalties.
- Decouple the Entosis Link from Structure "warfare" and dedicate it to Sov Warfare, asking users to be immobile and committed when contesting Sov.
- Make another kind of Link that can't contest Sov for cases where you need fleets to have flexibility when it comes to engagement.

As long as the link becomes more of a tool of commitment than a tool of trolling, things will get better really fast.
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#322 - 2015-08-19 12:01:18 UTC
I still think that the first reinforcement of a sov structure should require several concurrent entosis cycles (which could be run all at once by a small gang, or one ship can attempt to run several subsequent cycles). This would curb most trollceptor use entirely, while forcing at least an authentic commitment from an enemy.
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
#323 - 2015-08-19 12:02:28 UTC
Nice measured changes to the new Sov.
Also nice to see CCP isn't falling for the shenanigans of late.

Can't wait to see what we have in store for Capital changes.
Andre Lvov
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#324 - 2015-08-19 12:05:01 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Well I await the battle reports of you YOLOing supers around into CFC space then.

There is nothing stopping doing this you but your own trappings of fear.

Note I shall not be holding my breath for this fight, as it will never happen and that has exactly nothing to do with aegis sov and EVERYTHING to do with your own risk aversion winning out over a sense of fun.

You see, you *****, cry, scream and yell like petulant children about these great battles, which if you were so inclined could happen this weekend if you really wanted. But you DON'T really want this and the complaints and parallels have NOTHING to do with the new system.

You're crying because you're too thinly spread and too pigheaded to do anything about it but cry.

The very least you can do, is be honest about it.


You're a liar and a provocateur. Go to ***** .
TigerXtrm
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#325 - 2015-08-19 12:10:06 UTC
Cat silth wrote:
More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not


Okay I don't get this reasoning. Litterally the only difference between shooting and entosising in this game currently is the sound and visual effect of the weapon. When you're sieging a structure with 8 guns you're still orbiting and pressing F1, same as now. If they made the Entosis link make a pew pew sound, would that make it more fun for you? Roll

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Crazy Vania
EM Program for Training and Youth
#326 - 2015-08-19 12:11:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Crazy Vania
Hi. I rarely give feedback here but since I've been greatly enjoying fozziesov so far, and since CCP has done a major effort to listen, why not:

For groups like mine, Fozziesov has been the greatest thing. All the naysayers out there can just die out, I couldn't care less. The amount of PvP we've gotten out of purely entosis trolling is monstruous. We've accidentally acquired 4 stations so far. We've evicted big groups that were too bloated and confident to understand that they were at risk. We've had the best killboard months our "low-sec scrub" pvp group has ever gotten. So my first thingy here is: thank you CCP for fozziesov.

Now for this specific update's feedback: YES PLZ for the node time reduction. One hour nodes were starting to turn us off considerably. You've fixed this.

But on the speed reduction on entosis ship, please, please listen to this: don't make it "WHEN FITTED". Make it "WHEN ACTIVE". You are killing a brand new wave of clever ship fitting if you make it "WHEN FITTED".

Make active entosis links as slow as you want! But don't punish people for merely fitting an entosis link to their ships. Combat Entosis dual purpose fits exist ! And we don't want to slow down just for having the module in one of the highs.

Edit: Yes, I am aware of mobile depots. But try fitting a [mobile depot + entolink + ammo + paste + stront] in a frigate's cargohold.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#327 - 2015-08-19 12:11:27 UTC
Andre Lvov wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Well I await the battle reports of you YOLOing supers around into CFC space then.

There is nothing stopping doing this you but your own trappings of fear.

Note I shall not be holding my breath for this fight, as it will never happen and that has exactly nothing to do with aegis sov and EVERYTHING to do with your own risk aversion winning out over a sense of fun.

You see, you *****, cry, scream and yell like petulant children about these great battles, which if you were so inclined could happen this weekend if you really wanted. But you DON'T really want this and the complaints and parallels have NOTHING to do with the new system.

You're crying because you're too thinly spread and too pigheaded to do anything about it but cry.

The very least you can do, is be honest about it.


You're a liar and a provocateur. Go to ***** .


The only one lying here, is you my friend.

Tell me, what's stopping you dropping supers into CFC space at the weekend?
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Tactical Farmers
#328 - 2015-08-19 12:19:59 UTC
Dantelion Shinoni wrote:


Although there is a problem in that T3 cruisers can still fit the module and those can go past bubbles at least a T3 cruiser is a juicy killmail unlike an Interceptor, still another simpler alternative could be:

it doesn't really matter what ship attacker has if the defender didn't show up
there will be no kill mail either way
Tallardar
Doomheim
#329 - 2015-08-19 12:25:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Tallardar
5pitf1re wrote:
Yep, that's why numbers started dwindling at a disturbing rate ever since fozziesov hit TQ. It must be because it is such a great success and of course all we want is to destroy the game by having the cause of EVE's dwindling numbers reverted.

Hang on, I'm confused now ...


I hate to point out to you Mr. Fivepitfonere, but EVE's subscriber count has been dwindling since well before Phoebe and Fozziesov. The current slump EVE is experiencing, according to Chribba's site, started back in February of 2014 which was the finale of the Halloween War. Following that climax those running the vast rental empires (N3, CFC, PL, & XIX) decided not to risk those empires after this massive war because that'd be bad. Six or so months later after Phoebe was released only one group gave up their rental empire while another crumbled because of the Delve fights and the protecting coalition disbanding. The remaining two are the most vocal of those complaining about the current sov system though and have had a non-invasion pact for at least two years.

At the time of this post, Fozziesov is a total of 1month and 5 days old. It's far from the deathknell of EVE when you take the previous two years and actions of the playerbase and general video game industry into consideration. You're not accounting for the ISBoxer changes to policies that supposedly would kill EVE when those were introduced, nor for the other changes people said would kill the game over the past few years.
JetStream Drenard
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#330 - 2015-08-19 12:26:04 UTC
Syri Taneka wrote:
Amy Garzan wrote:
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:
Reagalan wrote:
Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end.


TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.

system working as intended.


News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?

Think that over.


All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years?

This.

The player base ruined null sec long ago, They intuited that the Goon warfare methods were the most practical way to win sov with the least effort. The players institutionalized the methods that worked the best. All this means is that fighting in null is the most horribly boring, soul destroying thing that ever happens in the game pvp-wise.

That no sane people want to go to null sec to get blue balled or hell blobbed. So daily focused pvp happens everyday in low sec where people go to have fun.

Remove all sovereignty and take their names off the map.
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#331 - 2015-08-19 12:26:50 UTC
Huge changes followed by tiny iterations for 9+ months of a system that is crap.

Never change CCP.

Not today spaghetti.

Seven Koskanaiken
Shadow Legions.
#332 - 2015-08-19 12:27:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Seven Koskanaiken
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
RatKnight1 wrote:
So, we can still fly trollceptors?

Yeah.

A 4km/s speed limit is not enough.

Limit these things to ships that force players to put some skin into the race. On top of this, players in trollceptors can still fly through space while generally being untouchable... sure, they can only go 4km/s, but that still is enough to outrun most combat fit ships in the game.


Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday.

Interceptors online needs to go away.


This was a CSM idea, so blame them.

I'll repeat the points I made at the time about this.

1) An interceptor is already the most likely ship to escape bubbles after nullified T3s. A skilled pilot could already get out of a bubble and escape. So nullifcation was just a gift only to people who can't fly their ships in the first place.

2) The logic was that "ceptors were made to chase and catch things". But the change was made simultaneously with the changes to warp speed. So if a ship and a non nullified ceptor warp together towards a bubble, the ceptor will land long before the ship, and will be at 0km to its prey, and be in a better position to catch than if it skids right through the bubble 80km to the gate. If the other pilot is smart and bounces off a celestial (dscan on narrow angle to starting point will show he's no longer on same trajectory as you) the ceptor can still MWD toward the gate (or backwards+warp if the bubble is > 75km) and be there before the other ship lands from his bounce because of the.....new slower warp speeds.

Add to this they had to nerf agility (which ceptors actually do need to keep point on things) to balance the nullifcation (which they don't need).

It was just dumbing down, plain and simple.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#333 - 2015-08-19 12:33:37 UTC
Andre Lvov wrote:
FOZZISOV It is a big failure CCP Fozzie .
Yup. A colossal failure.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#334 - 2015-08-19 12:34:44 UTC
JetStream Drenard wrote:
Syri Taneka wrote:
All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years?
This.

The player base ruined null sec long ago, They intuited that the Goon warfare methods were the most practical way to win sov with the least effort. The players institutionalized the methods that worked the best. All this means is that fighting in null is the most horribly boring, soul destroying thing that ever happens in the game pvp-wise.

That no sane people want to go to null sec to get blue balled or hell blobbed. So daily focused pvp happens everyday in low sec where people go to have fun.

Remove all sovereignty and take their names off the map.
Lol? How is it more accessible? You might be able to contest it, but you still can't live in it without either renting or blueing, since you'll just get farmed when the larger groups get bored. And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Stay Feral
#335 - 2015-08-19 12:37:29 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Wow this thread is so salty I died of dehydration. Limiting the Entosis to BCs and BSs is bad gameplay, cruisers are often used to control the grid, HACs and pirate Cruisers especially.

3000m/s would control trollceptors while still allowing nano gangs the ability to move around.

Alternatively, why not disallow a ship with an active entosis link from leaving the range of the entosis link? If you can't make an artificial barrier, then cause their ship to explode. Put in some lore about the mind of the capsuleer being seperated from his/her ship when the entosis link is broken.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#336 - 2015-08-19 12:40:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Alp Khan
Eli Apol wrote:
Alphaomega21 wrote:
If you want to truly fix the sovereignty system once and for all remove it completely and base who's name is on the map by the alliance who has the greatest number of pilots out in space. Then you can start working on the problem of making 0.0 worth fighting over. Maybe by buffing moons so alliances can have an income source that is worth taking.


Managed to be funnier than all the CFC salt. Post of the day.


Ah, welcome! We were looking for the clueless highsec salvager to comment on the null sov changes, and you did not disappoint to deliver. Now all we need is a low class wormhole PvE farmer to comment on them as well, because why the hell not?

(For other readers, this person has been talking without a clue re: fozzie sov since it's very early announcement, and if you take a look at his corp history, you'll find out that he is a high-sec salvager)
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#337 - 2015-08-19 12:43:53 UTC
Aldjor Dayman wrote:
Nevil Kincade wrote:
NO FOZZY !

NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

You are being told a fairy tale!
We have taken a couple of systems (and lost them again) but never due to a single 'trolling' ship. This stuff just doesnt happen in reality against an organized alliance/coalition. It always involved fending of ewar and controlling access to the system. Perhaps stalling for time to get the entosis done but ultimately because the defenders CAME IN TOO LATE. And whos fault is that ?

I cant believe you are giving into this whining of people who just DONT WANT TO PVP. You should see the reality of 'Entosis Trolling' with your own eyes before you make such decisions. The defender comes in, jams the Entosis ship and your warm-up cylce goes to **** wasting you 20 minutes. And if you fit a ship to counter that kitsune or falcon by outrunning it they scream "Unfair! Unfair! Fozzy nerf it pleeeease !!!"

What is this bullshit ? Sov defence by crying for nerfs ? And you play along ???

Entosis links seriously need e-war immunity or be able to keep running without a lock-on !

What do you think how many successfull jams a falcon can get off during the warm-up cycle, 20, 200 ? Because thats the amount of Entosis ships you will need in the future to capture a TCU against a defender who is actually on the ball.
And what if you field 20 ECM ships or 100 ? That gets us to a number the server cant even handle.


And how dare those that own sov to define that kiting is not a proper strategy to fight over a system ? They could easily have put on their OWN ENTOSIS onto the TCU and stopped the attackers progress. If they were TRULY holding the field that shouldnt be a problem right ? Our 9k m/s Entosis ships never could stay on grid with an actual force arriving by the way.
Again: Fozzy bro is believing a fairytale.

What was happening the last few weeks was EXACTLY what Aegis Sov was meant to do: Make power blocs realize they cant occupy all the space themselves. They were supposed to feel the pain of an empire overstretch and make a tough call about what space is worth the effort.

THEY WERE MEANT TO LOOSE SPACE ! And not only the part they choose to. Now they are starting to loose their face in being outplayed and loosing Sov so they throw all their political power at CCP. Of course on the cost of the entire player base.

Please grow a spine you lush sack of potatoe meal ... im so ******* disappointed, you were the last hope for content and conflict in Eve.

P.S.
Aegis Sov has made Pure Blind a content garden of even. Sure the Sov holders don't like to get slaughtered in skirmishes now that they are forced upon them but the content generation part of the new system is absolutely working.

Congratz on that part CCP!
Please don't give up. All the criticism is purely political and certainly not about fun and explosion.


Unfortunately this post has no credibility because you come from the bottom of the dumpster.


You realize now in MoA internal forums, you will now be referenced as a Goon alt? :P
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#338 - 2015-08-19 12:44:53 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Reagalan wrote:
The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.


Ah yes. Where goons reigned supreme with the Blob or GTFO tactics on, well on everything. How about no.


I'm sorry as an EX HERO member myself.. an EX fighter Against your Group when I lived in Providence.. You people Blob as much as goons back when you didn't murder your membership numbers with bad ideas. Back when Brave Newbies was a classy and respectable group with great ideologies. Back when every MAJOR power bloc started rolling out their own versions of Brave Dojo because they RESPECT how BNI was handling things. When Powerblocs started changing how they handled things internally into the ways BNI handled them. Lets not Forget the Brave we all knew, Loved, respected, mocked, faught, and cheered forward to great heights.

Brave was becoming Goonswarm 2.0 until you failscaded due to EGO. Hubris led to the downfall of your great alliance, it's many coupes, its abandonment of great corporations, lets not forget about the Internal Destruction of the Hopefully Effective Rookie Organization (H.E.R.O). But let us make no Mistake.. BNI was BLOB or GTFO when it's members Enjoyed logging in.
JetStream Drenard
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#339 - 2015-08-19 12:44:57 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
JetStream Drenard wrote:
Syri Taneka wrote:
All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years?
This.

The player base ruined null sec long ago, They intuited that the Goon warfare methods were the most practical way to win sov with the least effort. The players institutionalized the methods that worked the best. All this means is that fighting in null is the most horribly boring, soul destroying thing that ever happens in the game pvp-wise.

That no sane people want to go to null sec to get blue balled or hell blobbed. So daily focused pvp happens everyday in low sec where people go to have fun.

Remove all sovereignty and take their names off the map.
Lol? How is it more accessible? You might be able to contest it, but you still can't live in it without either renting or blueing, since you'll just get farmed when the larger groups get bored. And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.

You prove my point for me. thank you. How do you stop a null sec from only fighting with a blob. you cant because it is part of their mentality. n+1, yada yada. Null sec needs to feel that it is special, important, relevant. super blobs.

Polarization is human nature of trying to be on a winning team and is only nerfable by putting severe limits on both corp and alliance size, yet there will always be ways around it. Null sec proved for 8 years that it would always find the way around everything to get what they want, and now they cant do it with fozzie sov. Fozzie sov was a good idea that was poorly implemented, even I know that. but it is still a great idea.
Atum' Ra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#340 - 2015-08-19 12:45:13 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
Atum' Ra wrote:
Fozzie is that a joke?
Where the real changes?
The creation of alliance cost 1 billion
One system cost 1 ceptor (about 50 millions)
Where is logic?

in order to be able to contest sov ceptor needs to be in alliance
so the pilot needs to pay same 1b

now when a pilot in said ceptor comes to capture a system that no one turned up to defend, he puts on the field 50m more than defender did.

that's the logic.


Why someone mst create an alliance?
Someone need to get to the alliance! Hi-sec alliace and nothing more!
That char can be an alt of anyone with 1 mil SP
That sound like: " I'm 8 years old I know very much about everything, and now I want to be a president of a small country! Give me please the ability to be! " Shocked

That sov is the benining of the end.