These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#841 - 2015-08-21 08:19:14 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Roll These ceptors are not uncatchable... There are several ships that can easily catch them, among others Dramiels, Garmurs and other ceptors. You just need to be there in time. If you have to go several jumps to get to the attacked system, you are not doing it right.
In the time it takes a response ship to arrive on grid the trollceptor will be most of the way off the grid and moving at ludicrous speed. Anyone caught in a trollceptor got caught because they are terrible at EVE.


Confirming peoples skills at eve will make their ship fly faster than the 4km/s hard cap. Roll


2/10
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#842 - 2015-08-21 08:22:05 UTC
We should go back to the early speculation about siphons and need to just sit and watch your structure float in space

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#843 - 2015-08-21 08:24:44 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Confirming peoples skills at eve will make their ship fly faster than the 4km/s hard cap. Roll

And that is exactly the reason why hard caps are bad mkay.
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#844 - 2015-08-21 08:40:48 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
You realise that these nodes aren't in anoms, right? Nobody is spending their playtime sitting idly watching a node, so whatever the case, you have to "show up" to defend it. Interceptors are used because trolls are attacking active sov, waiting for someone to respond then running away as fast as they can. #It's got nothing to do with them wanting to attack undefended sov, that's why there are systems with no owner right now, because they don;t want to sov, they want the response. They want to waste people's time getting them to chase round their uncatchable ships.

i fully realise what new sov is like.
for the record, i spent the whole duration of duality playtest on duality doing it, while your coalition leader led his players to play some zombie game, and the leadership actively discouraged players from participating. or at least that's what the few players from your coalition told us to explain their lack of numbers.

i find the existence of the systems without owners quite acceptable, as it means no one needs it. i also find the tactics of burning sov to the ground without capturing it a perfectly valid game play, as well as harassment of sov.

now i also noticed that you started to contradict yourself. on one hand you are saying that ceptors are attacking active sov, on another you are saying that they disappear as soon as defenders enter local. to me it means you aren't talking about active sov in the latter case.


Lucas Kell wrote:

And I suggested a method of preventing trollceptors without a killmail. That said, why when you opt to contest sov should you need to put NOTHING on the line? You're single handedly attacking an entire solar system, asking you to put your ship down as collateral is not really that much.

and i suggested a method of preventing trollceptors without killmail and without having to exclude them from sov warfare but you seem to be repeatedly ignoring that. putting your ship down as collateral isn't exactly nothing. you also put down your effort which can be wasted by any hostile simply appearing in local.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#845 - 2015-08-21 08:44:12 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Since that's what's generally occuring. They use an inty so they can run away when defenders show up. How about CCP make it so the entosis link explodes if you move away from the target while it's active, so you cost yourself the entosis link and a trip back to station each time you run away. There you go, no free killmail.

they shouldn't

however i think you and I have different definitions of 'active sov'.

to me 'active sov' is the one where defenders don't have to make an effort to 'show up' during their vulnerability window.
they are either already there, or moving through the system on the regular basis as part of their normal activities.

now the length of the vulnerability window, the times it takes to RF something or to capture the nodes is something i think should be fine tuned based on player feedback. as well as what happens with the nodes no one bothered to cap/defend.

but i strongly object to crippling ships further than they already are by the current entosis 'perks', just for the sake of rewarding defenders with guaranteed kill mail for showing up.





What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#846 - 2015-08-21 08:49:29 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?

i'm not going into this again, read me previous posts, you'll find an answer to your question there
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#847 - 2015-08-21 08:59:47 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?

i'm not going into this again, read me previous posts, you'll find an answer to your question there


Unlikely.

The point of the sov shakeup was to make us all more active, kill the mega blobs and make the whole process more fun. Running around in ships built for avoiding fights while sporting the jesus laser is even less fun than grinding entire regions of abandoned structures.

Personally I would just disallow entosis links on anything smaller than a cruiser.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#848 - 2015-08-21 09:05:45 UTC
And effectively remove any opposition to any sovholder with at least some level of power? Great idea.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#849 - 2015-08-21 09:09:36 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
And effectively remove any opposition to any sovholder with at least some level of power? Great idea.


Yep, nobody ever manages to get cruisers into dek to **** around with our stuff.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#850 - 2015-08-21 09:13:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#851 - 2015-08-21 09:19:32 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Warmeister wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So why should they also be able to contest active sov in any ship they like, risk free? Since that's what's generally occuring. They use an inty so they can run away when defenders show up. How about CCP make it so the entosis link explodes if you move away from the target while it's active, so you cost yourself the entosis link and a trip back to station each time you run away. There you go, no free killmail.

they shouldn't

however i think you and I have different definitions of 'active sov'.

to me 'active sov' is the one where defenders don't have to make an effort to 'show up' during their vulnerability window.
they are either already there, or moving through the system on the regular basis as part of their normal activities.

now the length of the vulnerability window, the times it takes to RF something or to capture the nodes is something i think should be fine tuned based on player feedback. as well as what happens with the nodes no one bothered to cap/defend.

but i strongly object to crippling ships further than they already are by the current entosis 'perks', just for the sake of rewarding defenders with guaranteed kill mail for showing up.





What makes you think you should be able to attack sov with effectively zero risk?


What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#852 - 2015-08-21 09:22:21 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere.


Given the number of ratters that die getting in and attacking things is no issue.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#853 - 2015-08-21 09:27:31 UTC
Attacking a ratter and killing it is hardly comparable to sitting on a structure with no means of getting away if defenders appear.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#854 - 2015-08-21 09:29:03 UTC
Aiyshimin wrote:


What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?


That's what is happening right now. We did say this would become cepters trolling sov and CCPs own data shows that people using cepters and other avoidance fitted ships are the norm.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#855 - 2015-08-21 09:29:50 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Considering the lack of timers in that region, no one manages to get anything in that region to screw with your stuff sufficiently. With ceptors out of the equation, it becomes even less likely that anybody manages to get into that region and screws with your stuff. Anywhere.


:|

If you're unable to mount an offence at any level above frigates maybe you shouldn't be trying to take sov.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#856 - 2015-08-21 09:31:30 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Attacking a ratter and killing it is hardly comparable to sitting on a structure with no means of getting away if defenders appear.


What makes you think attacking sov should not involve shooting the people defending their space or them being able to shoot you?
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#857 - 2015-08-21 09:37:18 UTC
I have not indicated such. While a ceptor can run away from unprepared or falsely prepared defenders, it has no means of warping away for a certain period of time and it can in fact be caught by other ceptors and some other ships. I have said that before. Attacking a ratter, on the other hand, gives the attacker total freedom of engagement and disengagement because they are not leashed to a structure.

Please do not try to turn around words into things I do not say. Much appreciated.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#858 - 2015-08-21 09:39:36 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Aiyshimin wrote:


What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?


That's what is happening right now. We did say this would become cepters trolling sov and CCPs own data shows that people using cepters and other avoidance fitted ships are the norm.


Please have the decency to not call trolling "attacking" sov. You can not take a system with ceptor unless defenders allow it to happen. And now you see the point- its not the role of game mechanics to defend systems for you.

Not a single system worth **** has been taken so far without a fleet fight.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#859 - 2015-08-21 09:45:39 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
I have not indicated such. While a ceptor can run away from unprepared or falsely prepared defenders, it has no means of warping away for a certain period of time and it can in fact be caught by other ceptors and some other ships. I have said that before. Attacking a ratter, on the other hand, gives the attacker total freedom of engagement and disengagement because they are not leashed to a structure.

Please do not try to turn around words into things I do not say. Much appreciated.


Cepters fitted for speed will always outrun cepters fitted for combat. You are very much defending the use of uncatchable ships for attacking sov. Attackers having to fight to take sov is not a bad thing.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#860 - 2015-08-21 09:49:38 UTC
Aiyshimin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Aiyshimin wrote:


What makes you think that you would be able to attack sov effectively zero risk?


That's what is happening right now. We did say this would become cepters trolling sov and CCPs own data shows that people using cepters and other avoidance fitted ships are the norm.


Please have the decency to not call trolling "attacking" sov. You can not take a system with ceptor unless defenders allow it to happen. And now you see the point- its not the role of game mechanics to defend systems for you.

Not a single system worth **** has been taken so far without a fleet fight.


The bulk of timers have been caused by avoidance fitted ships. That shows we have a problem.