These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#401 - 2015-08-19 14:35:03 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
*MoA claims that the broken changes which allowed sov trolling without commitment and being able to avoid a fight is great for PvP
*Then another MoA guy comes in and chimes about how being unable to run from a fight and getting required to commit in sov warfare is bad

10/10 comedy


The whole gewn-n-pets coalition crying in admittance of being unable to defend against solo frigs.

10/10 salt.
John Wolfcastle
Mining and Industry Society.
#402 - 2015-08-19 14:41:14 UTC
It's probably going in the right direction, yet I think entosis still needs to be a bit more restricted. Just a little bit, don't know, ... something.
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#403 - 2015-08-19 14:42:29 UTC
Tallardar wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur.


Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway.


This is a bit inaccurate. "Fleet Fights" aren't just Asakai and BR-5 type deals, plenty of fleet fights involve only sub caps, and plenty happened over the coure of the last year. The Mittani website and EVE news detail those kinds of fights all the time.

I've been in only 2 mid sized scraps since Aegis began (one involving my old alliance INIT fighting my new alliance lol). And that's it, the rest have been "Aegis style bullshit Nibble fights" (that phrase shall be copyrighted soon lol). I still find it odd that (from my perspective as someone who likes fleet fights) CCP could take a system of occasional fair sized to big fights and make them less occasional lol.
ISD Buldath
#404 - 2015-08-19 14:46:53 UTC
Quote:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.

CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, “outing” of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.

Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.


We are watching this closely. Keep it nice and clean, stay civil.

~ISD Buldath

Instructor King of the Forums! Knight of the General Discussion

Support, Training and Resources Division

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE-Mails regarding forum moderation.

Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#405 - 2015-08-19 14:47:43 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Icycle wrote:
I think 4k m/s is very little. I mean the average frigate that I see that are used to catch entosis ships does about 7 or 8k m/s. They use a local booster tengu. It means entosis ships will be practically always get caught with this changes. Whatever happened to give it a chance or one should not be able to catch everything they see? I would request to give it more speed. Twise as slow is really slow imo.
While I don't agree that these changes will cause that, that should be the case. The whole point of the entosis modules is it's supposed to show you have control of the grid. If you are firing the laser then "get caught" when trying to run away, you obviously don't have that. You should bring a sizable enough force to realistically contest sov. That's how conflict is driven.


There is nothing no where it says you have to have control of grid. Also you cant have control of grid if you are runing! lol
Therefore you dont have control of grid Blink

Conflict is not driven by force alone but also by will power! Conflict can be driven when outnumbered. All you got to do is strike fast when or where not expected. If thats not conflict, I dont know what is...

I am laughing cos this is the begining of the nerfs before it goes back to the same old story. I would love to see how thye are going to solve this blue donut cos thats whats killing this game and not sov or jump fatigue. Simply no one wants to fight super and titans in a blob plus tidi. P


JiN Azuma
KILL Corp
#406 - 2015-08-19 14:50:35 UTC  |  Edited by: JiN Azuma
Orca Platypus wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
*MoA claims that the broken changes which allowed sov trolling without commitment and being able to avoid a fight is great for PvP
*Then another MoA guy comes in and chimes about how being unable to run from a fight and getting required to commit in sov warfare is bad

10/10 comedy


The whole gewn-n-pets coalition crying in admittance of being unable to defend against solo frigs.

10/10 salt.


The complaints are about a lack of fun.

The space is defensible like you said, hostiles land on grid and trollsepter runs away to the next system. That isn't being contested. This isn't new with fozzie sov, you did that anyway.

The problem is, playing cat and mouse against a nullified cloaking nanoship that is designed to be immune from PVP is not fun. This is a computer game that is meant to be above all else enjoyable to play.

I would say most of the eve community enjoys eve for this reason, sure you have groups like MOA who play for other reasons like being rejected by the goons and vowing vengeance against them like a angsty teenager by weaponizing boredom, and if that's how you get your kicks then good for you. But it is bad for the game.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#407 - 2015-08-19 14:51:08 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:
You should bring a sizable force to contest sov - totally agree. However, the definition of sov has changed to occupancy. To bring down an occupied sov, the sizable force is needed. Bringing down an uncontested sov shouldn't require such force.
And it won't. Uncontested sov is by definition uncontested. It won;t matter if you bring a frigate or a carrier, if it's uncontested there will be no opposition. If people show up and you "get caught" then it wasn't uncontested, and if you didn't bring enough to fight then you obviously didn't want it anyway.

Warmeister wrote:
the drop was end of may, not beginning. are you implying it took eve community a whole month to read it and decide they aren't going to play?
Not the whole community, but yes, people don't always make knee-jerk reactions. Some of us are still undecided now.

Warmeister wrote:
point 3 actually a very good indicator, as you can see that once the new sov was released and people actually got to play it, they didn't quit as a result of it. if fozziesov was responsible for the drop in may, i would expect even bigger drop after the thing actually got released and people got to to play with it and figured they don't like it.
There is a continued decline in players. After a change as big as Fozziesov I'd expect to see a dramatic uptick in players as people return to check it out. That there has been no upwards momentum at all and a continue slow decline is an indication to me that it failed to achieve what it intended to.

Warmeister wrote:
also there is #4 that i have mentioned before - we don't even know if the drop is in the null sec population, other areas, or across the board.
Absolutely, but we can certainly speculate. There's definitely been a 16% decrease in ships exploding in nullsec since june and an 11% decrease between last august and this august. Dotlan can show that much.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Wolfensrevenge
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#408 - 2015-08-19 14:53:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Wolfensrevenge
Now that I really think about the problem without ships being locked on grid there will never be an escalation worth while...Ships that are locked on grid will provide escalation and promote fights lock the ships on grid according to their entosis range. Problem solved fun fights INC. That way someone has a reason to field a tanked ship and a reason to bring a fleet to defend it.

I think that would be a great solution at this point and provide a lot of content for everyone involved and if a node is being captured allow an opponent entosis to stalemate it locking both ships on grid until the link is deactivated promoting escalation on both sides or do just like the alliance torny if a ship leaves the max range of the entosis then Boom you are now flying a pod.

These changes would make the risk vs reward worth while on both sides.

"Two men enter one man leaves" Welcome to the THUNDER DOME BABY !
Captain ObviousS
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#409 - 2015-08-19 14:54:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain ObviousS
I'm still in the fence about this crap. Love reading the tears though. :)
Kalen Pavle
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#410 - 2015-08-19 14:56:28 UTC
I have an idea I both hate and really like.

For initial reinforce only: ADM increases the number of active entosis links necessary to reinforce something by 1 for each level. Spawned command nodes would still only require 1 link per. Initial reinforcement should require a committed attack, not just one ******* flying through.

On the same note, I agree that entosis links should not be able to be fit on anything that's nullified. Not just removing nullification while fit, but actively prohibited. Somethingsomething the neural interface of the entosis link uses the same circuitry that nullification uses #lore.
Marcus Covinus
The Blood Ankhs
#411 - 2015-08-19 14:58:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Covinus
It's hilarious to continue to watch groups like MOA chestbeat like an ape about how great the new sov system is when all they do is troll the system with no intention of actually holding any sov.

I repeat my earlier statement.

Entosis Link should have the following side effects while active.

1) Ship cannot move for the duration of the cycle
2) Ship cannot receive remote assistance for the duration of the cycle.

And the Entosis Link should be limited to cruiser or larger hulls. Force them to put at least a little isk on the field.

Now for those who say

Quote:
A solo ship on the grid has won the field


Then you should have no problem waiting defenseless while your cycle for a warm-up and a capture takes place. I mean you have all your friends there to defend you after all.
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#412 - 2015-08-19 15:03:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Icycle
i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed! I got caught by one like this. I was doing just over 4k m/s...How is ok?
Wolfensrevenge
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#413 - 2015-08-19 15:11:43 UTC
Icycle wrote:
i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed!



I agree I hate restristions but if your going to have risk something needs to be done if you lock the ship on grid that would fix the problem then a defender could start a counter entosis to stalemate locking the troll ship on grid in turn you or another ship could then have the option of running it down and killing it or waiting for reinforcements to come. The attacker cannot leave the grid until the node is captured one way or another and same for the defender its a fight and once you get in the ring your committed.

Two ships enter 1 ship leaves.
Lime Ijonen
In Dock We Trust
#414 - 2015-08-19 15:11:45 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The mass penalty is being replaced with a "speed limit" to 4000m/s.


So any links, implants, boosters, bonuses, overheat, whatever being applied to entosis ship won't break this limit too?
aussieftw
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#415 - 2015-08-19 15:11:51 UTC
Thank you CCP, you are on good way. But 4000m/s speed for entosis ship is still too much i think. Attackers should fight if they want sov, not run around like rabbits.
Tallardar
Doomheim
#416 - 2015-08-19 15:15:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Tallardar
aussieftw wrote:
Thank you CCP, you are on good way. But 4000m/s speed for entosis ship is still too much i think. Attackers should fight if they want sov, not run around like rabbits.


One might say they're flying around something like a swarm of bees, amirite?
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#417 - 2015-08-19 15:19:31 UTC
Wolfensrevenge wrote:
Icycle wrote:
i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed!



I agree I hate restristions but if your going to have risk something needs to be done if you lock the ship on grid that would fix the problem then a defender could start a counter entosis to stalemate locking the troll ship on grid in turn you or another ship could then have the option of running it down and killing it or waiting for reinforcements to come. The attacker cannot leave the grid until the node is captured one way or another and same for the defender its a fight and once you get in the ring your committed.

Two ships enter 1 ship leaves.

Not sure if its a troll or not...
Wolfensrevenge
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#418 - 2015-08-19 15:23:30 UTC
aussieftw wrote:
Thank you CCP, you are on good way. But 4000m/s speed for entosis ship is still too much i think. Attackers should fight if they want sov, not run around like rabbits.



Two ships enter 1 ship leaves.
Wolfensrevenge
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#419 - 2015-08-19 15:31:22 UTC
Icycle wrote:
Wolfensrevenge wrote:
Icycle wrote:
i would like to mention someting into record that has not been addressed in while.
How is it ok to nerf entosis ships to do 4k m/s but its ok for pilot in a dramil or daredevil do 13k m/s? There is something really wrong there. And thats not the fastest speed!



I agree I hate restristions but if your going to have risk something needs to be done if you lock the ship on grid that would fix the problem then a defender could start a counter entosis to stalemate locking the troll ship on grid in turn you or another ship could then have the option of running it down and killing it or waiting for reinforcements to come. The attacker cannot leave the grid until the node is captured one way or another and same for the defender its a fight and once you get in the ring your committed.

Two ships enter 1 ship leaves.

Not sure if its a troll or not...



The only thing thats a troll around here is this sov mechanic and risk free timer generation and node capturing.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#420 - 2015-08-19 15:33:17 UTC
Marcus Covinus wrote:
It's hilarious to continue to watch groups like MOA chestbeat like an ape about how great the new sov system is when all they do is troll the system with no intention of actually holding any sov.


I too, have noticed that the only people who are happy about this are those who have no intention of ever holding sov, and are only cheering for punitive mechanics against those who do. Why they're even part of the discussion, I do not know.

It's pretty telling of the system in general. But CCP never did learn to take into account where feedback is coming from.

For me, the really funny part is how literally all of this was foreseen in the first three pages of the entosis announcement, but was ignored in the flood of "grr nullsec" drooling. That's genuinely hilarious.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.