These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1121 - 2015-08-25 12:53:33 UTC
hmm....it doesn't appear to be so much this:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675936/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675935/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675935/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675583/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/

....
....
as it is....

this:
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/

The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530
Black Legion. (2.29%) - 2486
Borderlands Syndicate (6.54%) - 7089
Dank Meme Dominion (5.74%) - 6215
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020
Elite Space Coalition (3.26%) - 3529
Guardians of the Galaxy (7.60%) - 8233
Lethal Ironingboards (0.67%) - 724
Pandemic Legion (4.22%) - 4575
Red Menace (3.36%) - 3637
Stain Wagon (6.54%) - 7090

...so, if this were a team deathmatch on pretty much any shooter (heck, let's just say Dust514, why not, it still exists....right....right?), we are looking at a team of 8 vs a team of 2, and the team of 8 is gloating, taunting, and talking about being bored...just sayin (this last part is for the threads saying stuff about not winning fast enough...or something)
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1122 - 2015-08-25 13:04:11 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
This is the entire point of occupancy based sov. You need to be there to claim it as yours. If you are not there, your claim is void and open to attacks. If you need to get there, you do not occupy it, you only exert an empty claim.
The only issue is that entities like CFC still need more than 1 region to sustain themselves and thus offer such a large attackable surface.
How do you still not understand that this has nothing to do with what we are saying here? For a start, Our space is relatively safe. We're one of the few groups that is actively using their space.

Secondly, the problem isn't that people can take space too easily. One ship SHOULD be able to take an uncontested system, and if it's really uncontested an interceptor IS NOT REQUIRED. You could land a ship with anchor rigs on an uncontested TCU and not worry about it. The reason people want interceptors is for easily attacking, but not taking space that people are using.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
Banishing ceptors from using ELs is not going to give fights. It is, as said, only going to shift the problem from evading fights to not being able to start a fight to begin with.
No it's not. For the most part, interceptors aren't being used to start fights. Fights are being started by combat capable ships. Trollceptors are mostly used for content denial, for evasion, not to start fights.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
If nothing else, the current steamrolling of Providence at least tells that. Making it possible for powerful entities such as CFC (2/5 of the Null population is powerful) to be practically unassailable as any attempt can be easily dealt with, is nothing that should be supported.
We're the best at taking and holding our space. No system is going to suddenly make it possible for a tiny group to destroy our space without also making it ridiculously easy for us to contest theirs. That we triggered 38% of the timers in the highest ADM region in a single day clearly indicates this is the case.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

bigbillthaboss3
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1123 - 2015-08-25 13:07:53 UTC
I do like the idea of battlecruisers / command ships getting a bonus to using the Entosis Link.


Also thanks for the info on 'hiding posts', no more Orca rabblings in the thread. Now everyone just needs to stop quoting his trolling.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1124 - 2015-08-25 13:09:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Harry Saq wrote:
...so, if this were a team deathmatch on pretty much any shooter (heck, let's just say Dust514, why not, it still exists....right....right?), we are looking at a team of 8 vs a team of 2, and the team of 8 is gloating, taunting, and talking about being bored...just sayin (this last part is for the threads saying stuff about not winning fast enough...or something)
And would the solution be to tell the people in the team deathmatch to abandon their team and swap over to another faction to fight, or would the solution be to fix the system so that team sizes were balanced out during matchmaking?

We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so, and we're more than happy to provide feedback on why they failed.

I love how it always falls on us, like we must destroy ourselves and if we choose not to we're evil. I tell you what, as those stats show, we are 38% of the nullsec coalition playerbase. Why don't you put the other 62% together and destroy us.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1125 - 2015-08-25 14:04:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
You cannot balance teams into equal team numbers if one team has already sucked up most of the available players and there's nothing left to put in other teams. You have to destroy yourself in order for a matchmaking to be able to create equal team sizes. However, this can only happen from the players themselves. As long as they only seek safety and stability (read: avoid fights and conflict), this is not going to happen.
There is more than 38% of Null sec under your banner, now that the Drone Land Russians also work closely with you. We are looking at nearly 50% of Null sec working together. I wonder where you want to get the players from for the other team? Besides, if the rest of Null sec banded together, nothing would be gained. 1 half of Null sec (or 2/5, if you will) is already blue and bored so that they need to go to High sec to find "fun"; that the other half also needs to blue up to be able to stand against that is just going to create the same boredom on their side. (Despite me demanding them banding together to get rid of CFC, it's simply not worth it or feasible.)

Interceptors are very well able to start fights and create distraction so that a defender has a harder time. Interceptors are also a valid choice to make taking sov of abandoned space go faster and get uncontested capture events done quicker so that actual content, like roams or camps can take place.

If you'd use your space actively, you would not have a "backyard". You certainly use your space a lot, but as long as you have a backyard, you are too big space-wise.

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.

Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1126 - 2015-08-25 14:26:50 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Citation needed is one of the most stupid thigns you can post on a forum discussion

That is funny considering gewnie named baltec is the most frequent user of that. I was just parodying him.
Other than picking on my parody, any real evidence? No? So you spewed baseless bs and now you derail.

Kagura Nikon wrote:
specially when you are posting with a NPC corp character.

You looking for ad gewnminem too?

Kagura Nikon wrote:
People that are in the sov hodlers corps are the ones that get the bennefit of not needign a citiation, if YOU want to prove otherwise it is up to you to bring proof, because you are not in a position to make anyoen beleive in you when you post from an NPC corp that has no place in sov game.

Confirming sov holder corp members are "special".
But that includes me! Oh snap...

Kagura Nikon wrote:
The fact that you point the 90 dps as even a factor just proves how ignorant of the problem you are, a gunless ship is as dangerous to sov as a a 1 trillion dps ship would be.

Oh my god, that tearnado made me laugh. Tear-nado. See what I did there?
"CCP HALP THERE IS A TRILLION DPS DANGER APPROACHING ME, MY ANU... ahem... SOV IS IN DANGER AND I'M SPECIAL REMOVE HIM NAO".

trollceptor is as much threat to sov as he is to a carrier. Unless you are completely afk for an hour, you lose nothing.

Kagura Nikon wrote:
If you cannot understand that sacrificing a interceptor every few minutes just to anger other players is too effective way of MEta warfare tha do nto generate combat, just play the psycological game, then you do nto deserve new answers.
Trollceptors are just the new version of the "DENY ALL CONTENT"problem of the previous system.
Fozzie, we need content, not trolceptors. Banish frigates from using them and you will achieve it.

[/quote]
"CCP HALP THEY ROAM ME WITH A CEPTOR TO ANGER ME, CALM MY **** NAO"
Entosis ceptor is ~80m. Every few minutes, let's say 10, brings us to 480m an hour.
Someone paying 480m/hour to get a reaction out of you, deserves it.

Trollceptors are just the new version of MAKE BEARS UNDOCK ROAM, you're about to make a deluge warning with your tears about a simple roamer. Aren't you ashamed of yourself?

I believe that'll be 11th repetition in this thread, but it'll be carried out till you understand: Trollceptors cannot claim sov, unless completely uncontested, and if it's uncontested, then it's not yours. Since they cannot claim sov, they are no more than roamers, the only difference being that they now can force you out of your bearhole, stop crying about it, nothing is changed in the way roaming works.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1127 - 2015-08-25 14:29:10 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
You cannot balance teams into equal team numbers if one team has already sucked up most of the available players and there's nothing left to put in other teams. You have to destroy yourself in order for a matchmaking to be able to create equal team sizes. However, this can only happen from the players themselves. As long as they only seek safety and stability (read: avoid fights and conflict), this is not going to happen.
And we're not going to voluntarily cripple ourselves so that you can be balanced without having to figure out how to work with others. That leaves the only viable option to be for CCP to go ahead and do what they have needed to and develop a system where we either choose to dismantle ourselves or benefit less by attacking outside of our size brackets. All the time it's more rewarding and less risk to form together into coalitions, that's what will happen. If not us then someone else.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
There is more than 38% of Null sec under your banner, now that the Drone Land Russians also work closely with you.
It's only for this war, we're not really working together in the normal sense, they simply have a statement to make and assisting in Provi helps them make the statement. It wouldn't be too hard to combine a few groups against us, but the problem isn't just our size, it's our level of organisation and dedication. And of course that most "grr goons" groups who would want to form against us are so high on the autistic spectrum that noone wants to associate with them. *shrug*

Rivr Luzade wrote:
Interceptors are very well able to start fights and create distraction so that a defender has a harder time.
But in general they don't start fights, they are evasion fit. Evading is not fighting. 10 individual ceptors are less distracting than a 10 man cruiser gang.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
Interceptors are also a valid choice to make taking sov of abandoned space go faster and get uncontested capture events done quicker so that actual content, like roams or camps can take place.
They are, but there's no reason to use interceptors. Abandoned space has no defenders, so a battlecruiser would take the space as easily as an interceptor. Most would also be pre-fit for combat as the entosis would go in the utility slot, meaning they can even more quickly get into actual content. The evasion fit interceptor has to go back and ship into a combat ship.

The only reason to use interceptors is to run away from defenders. If you are running away from defenders you weren't attacking uncontested sov.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
If you'd use your space actively, you would not have a "backyard". You certainly use your space a lot, but as long as you have a backyard, you are too big space-wise.
All of our space is our back yard and we do use it actively. I'm not at all worried that we're going to lose space, even less so knowing that most players will opt to go the safe route of using evasion fit interceptors instead of forming a real attack force. My problems with fozziesov are legitimately for the entertainment of the system all round, even if certain people want to claim adamantly that it's for self-preservation. I'm less worried about us losing space than I was in dominion.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1128 - 2015-08-25 15:01:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Harry Saq
Lucas Kell wrote:


We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so, and we're more than happy to provide feedback on why they failed.


This is not a mechanics driven issue anymore, it certainly used to be under dominion, however it is not under Aegus Sov. We are into voluntary boredom territory now, and no mechanic is forcing a circle of "friends" to force march each other (in the form of PAP links) into mining and ratting CTAs in space nobody cares about so it can be bragged that all their indexes are up, and they are better than others. That burnout will be theirs to enjoy, and not the fault of any mechanic that forced those people into those systems.

At this point boredom is a choice, and there are no mechanics that would support, require, or even drive some random percentage of the remaining player base to "rally" themselves to help un-bore those that choose to be bored (remember that whole jump fatigue thing meant to prevent this "coming togetherness" requirement). This is simply the slow very natural transition from mega-coalitions to smaller independent groups, where some are adapting faster than others (in terms of fun and retention sustainability). We are not there yet, and there are plenty of new mechanics that need to be made to further drive this transition, none of which will encourage the continuation of the numbers seen in the charts below:

http://rischwa.net/coalitions/

The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020

Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530

Black Legion. (2.29%) - 2486
Borderlands Syndicate (6.54%) - 7089
Dank Meme Dominion (5.74%) - 6215
Elite Space Coalition (3.26%) - 3529
Guardians of the Galaxy (7.60%) - 8233
Lethal Ironingboards (0.67%) - 724
Pandemic Legion (4.22%) - 4575
Red Menace (3.36%) - 3637
Stain Wagon (6.54%) - 7090
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1129 - 2015-08-25 15:03:38 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
A lot of things over many posts on a lot of pages


For whatever it's worth, I feel you make a compelling case. It's too bad the powers that be didn't listen a bit more closely when setting up these things. I remember it was brought up back then. There has to be a better way to set up this system.
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1130 - 2015-08-25 15:07:07 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
A lot of things over many posts on a lot of pages


For whatever it's worth, I feel you make a compelling case. It's too bad the powers that be didn't listen a bit more closely when setting up these things. I remember it was brought up back then. There has to be a better way to set up this system.

It appears as though these guys found a way:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675936/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675935/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675583/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/
bigbillthaboss3
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1131 - 2015-08-25 15:30:09 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
Khan Wrenth wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
A lot of things over many posts on a lot of pages


For whatever it's worth, I feel you make a compelling case. It's too bad the powers that be didn't listen a bit more closely when setting up these things. I remember it was brought up back then. There has to be a better way to set up this system.

It appears as though these guys found a way:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675936/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675935/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48675583/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/



Congratulations on finding 4 interceptor losses out of the literal hundreds we have thrown out to Entosis. In other words "Trollceptors aren't a problem! They can be killed ~2% of the time!"

Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1132 - 2015-08-25 15:34:44 UTC
These are all pre-speed nerf patch to the dreaded troll ceptor in provi....just a few I gathered:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48665775/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48665948/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668129/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668120/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668115/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668681/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48669543/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674414/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674311/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/

...there are plenty plenty more, but those are just a few of the solo troll kills from a variety of defending type ships. This is a very useful demonstration indeed.

Don't forget this though (when systems start falling as the actual reason):
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/

The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020

Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1133 - 2015-08-25 15:51:43 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
This is not a mechanics driven issue anymore, it certainly used to be under dominion, however it is not under Aegus Sov. We are into voluntary boredom territory now, and no mechanic is forcing a circle of "friends" to force march each other (in the form of PAP links) into mining and ratting CTAs in space nobody cares about so it can be bragged that all their indexes are up, and they are better than others. That burnout will be theirs to enjoy, and not the fault of any mechanic that forced those people into those systems.
It's not "voluntary boredom", it's that the mechanics don't encourage people to do beyond the minimum when interacting with them. Defending is now easier since you only need to defend at preselected times and for attackers it's easier to simply annoy sov holders with frigates in multiple places rather than form up a group capable of actually taking sov to fight in one.

I'm not sure why you think we'll burn out pushing indices though, since we've spent several years forming fleets to fire missiles at structures for several hours which gains us nothing on an individual level. Now we can rat and mine (which many of us choose to do in our spare time anyway) with a full fleet support and a good bit of banter while knowing that it's helping keep our space defended.

Harry Saq wrote:
(remember that whole jump fatigue thing meant to prevent this "coming togetherness" requirement)
No it wasn't, it was to support people using caps to escalate without every battle ending in someone dogpiling the fleet from afar. A supercap pilot in catch shouldn't be worried about a whole fleet jumping across the map from Branch when he chooses to use his ship. "coming togetherness" will always be a desirable factor in MMOs, it's one of the main draws especially in one as socially driven as EVE.

Harry Saq wrote:
This is simply the slow very natural transition from mega-coalitions to smaller independent groups, where some are adapting faster than others (in terms of fun and retention sustainability). We are not there yet, and there are plenty of new mechanics that need to be made to further drive this transition, none of which will encourage the continuation of the numbers seen in the charts below
There's no transition, that's just wishful thinking on your part. The new system makes it even better to form into a mega-coalition than it was before, since any serious groups deploying against one another will be more vulnerable to small groups. While they can get their space back with ease from the smaller groups, it's healthier not to lose it, so non-invasion pacts are preferable at a minimum. With systems now supporting more players, mega-coalitions can be even more tightly grouped, and with staggered timers can ensure the most availability for neighboring alliances to assist where needed.

I doubt CCP even wants to get rid of mega-coalitions to be honest. Consider how much of the game is based around things the mega-coalitions do. I doubt CCP want to get rid of that. They simply want to make enough room for some of the smaller guys to join in a bit, which I'm fine with - if the mechanics are entertaining for all.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

bigbillthaboss3
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#1134 - 2015-08-25 15:56:29 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
These are all pre-speed nerf patch to the dreaded troll ceptor in provi....just a few I gathered:
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48665775/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48665948/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668129/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668120/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668115/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48668681/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48669543/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674414/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674311/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/48674901/

...there are plenty plenty more, but those are just a few of the solo troll kills from a variety of defending type ships. This is a very useful demonstration indeed.

Don't forget this though (when systems start falling as the actual reason):
http://rischwa.net/coalitions/

The Imperium (38.05%) - 41237
Drone Region Federation (12.01%) - 13020

Provi-Bloc (9.72%) - 10530


Half of those aren't even trollceptor fits. Also you don't know how they were killed / where they were killed, quite possible they were sitting afk somewhere not paying attention.

The Imperium only has around 2000< people or so in Provi so your number reasoning is a bit unjustified.
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1135 - 2015-08-25 16:54:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Speedkermit Damo
[quote=Lucas Kell] We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so. [quote]

I think thats the general idea.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1136 - 2015-08-25 16:57:17 UTC
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
We're out there generating content for ourselves because the mechanics failed to do so.
I think thats the general idea.
Erm... no. Game mechanics should at the very least encourage content. Aegis sov actively discourages it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1137 - 2015-08-25 17:16:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
They do not. They give players choices. And players use all the choices appropriately. Unfortunately for you, ceptors are the only way to cause you some headache.

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
#1138 - 2015-08-25 17:41:23 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:

Citation needed (c).


The patch you downloaded with a change specifically aimed at nerfing trollcepers and their t3 counterparts isnt enough for you?

Orca Platypus wrote:

I mean, you can just land on it like you do on a 100MN links T3 except entosis T3 can't just warp away, which is like the only defense link T3 has. So how?


Simple, you build them with the goal of evasion not combat.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1139 - 2015-08-25 17:49:51 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
They do not. They give players choices. And players use all the choices appropriately.
Lol? You think game mechanics aren't there to encourage content? Those choices you have, they have risk reward balances with them and you'll tend to find the ones that reward the most are the ones with the most engagement with others. The problem with Aegis is that it's a bit backwards, the best choice in many cases is evasion and reduced interaction.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
Unfortunately for you, ceptors are the only way to cause you some headache.
Wrong. They're not even the best way to give me some headache. People using them will eventually figure out they do very little and be back here whining for new ways to annoy us. It's a shame CCP don't just work from the feedback they're getting right now telling them it's the case before too many pilots burn out from trollceptoring.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1140 - 2015-08-25 18:04:09 UTC
If they burn themselves out, it's their choice. They are free to use a different ship or approach whenever they want; nothing is holding them back from going for a cruiser and enter the meat grinder. If they do not do this, it's their decision. The current way the mechanics are give you that freedom.

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.