These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Next set of Sov and Capital Movement Iterations

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dreiden Kisada
State War Academy
Caldari State
#41 - 2015-09-11 20:34:45 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
Scatim Helicon wrote:
The reason Interceptors have dominated is because the ability to warp before a hostile lock is possible and simultaneously ignore bubbles is effctively granting yourself a no-PVP flag in what is supposedly a de-restricted PVP environment. That their ability to take sov is being written out is the removal of the cherry on the cake, but they're still dumb and broken.


So your entire complaint is that gatecamps don't work against them, which meant that you couldn't dominate a constellation and prevent all entosis from taking place by holding onto the first choke point you come across with one big blob? The subsequent skirmish warfare that Entosis contests required were my favorite thing about the new sov system. Straight


There was no skirmish warfare with the sov system.

Hostiles show up to sov laser things, some people who want to do pvp try to do pvp. Sov lasering inties run away crowing in local. next day, defenders go sov laser things back the way they were since the "elite pvp" inties from the previous day don't actually want the space.

Any skirmishes that happened would have happened if the attackers had shown up with no sov lasers, since the defenders who engaged do so for fun.

There will not be any more or less bubble camps on chokepoints.
Spookay
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2015-09-11 20:38:34 UTC
Will fatigue accumulate at the same rate?
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#43 - 2015-09-11 20:39:08 UTC
Spookay wrote:
Will fatigue accumulate at the same rate?

Yes. All that got changed was the maximum fatigue you can get.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Alain Colcer
Nadire Security Consultants
Federation Peacekeepers
#44 - 2015-09-11 20:40:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Alain Colcer
Please forbid using entosis links on interceptors, interdictors, Heavy Interdictors, Recons and Stealth bombers.
Crazy Vania
EM Program for Training and Youth
#45 - 2015-09-11 20:40:16 UTC
Once again I'd like to remind CCP that combat entosis solo pilots exist.

I fit an entosis link on my frigs to hopefully kill the responding tackler when he lands. Removing the entolink from interceptors annoys me somewhat as it gives me less choice in ships but I don't really care, the best ship for this role are the pirate frigs anyways.

But that's not what I'm here for: CCP, please, please make the 4000m/s speed cap on the entosis module a "WHEN ACTIVE" debuff... Slow down the ship during the 5m cycle. By doing the current "WHEN FITTED (EVEN OFFLINE)" cap you are killing off a lot of ship fitting options for combat pilots for no reason.

Make the entosis link affect your speed only when the module is cycling. It gives you your intended result without nerfing actual pew pew.
The Slayer
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#46 - 2015-09-11 20:41:58 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
So your entire complaint is that gatecamps don't work against them, which meant that you couldn't dominate a constellation and prevent all entosis from taking place by holding onto the first choke point you come across with one big blob? The subsequent skirmish warfare that Entosis contests required were my favorite thing about the new sov system. Straight Granted, you can still do the same thing by using a Titan bridge, but the threshold for bypassing gatecamps is going up.


I've only been on two or three system defence ops, so sorry if these were not the norm, but the ones I turned up to there WERE no "skirmish warfare" events. MOA would come along in 15 cormorants and try to catch stragglers. Sometimes an inty would wave a sov laser at something then run away when someone got within 50k of him. If the system, as it stands right now, was generating PVP content I would be ALL for it. As it is right now it doesn't generate anything.
Azgard Majik
Ilium Skies
#47 - 2015-09-11 20:42:26 UTC
If you're going to insist on keeping jump fatigue (the worst game mechanic in history), do it in style and make it 1 year maximum recovery timer. That way we can all move back to hi sec and leave the awful sov game play.
Gigiarc
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2015-09-11 20:44:49 UTC
I'm liking these battlecruiser and sov changes. (sexually)
Colman Dietmar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2015-09-11 20:53:40 UTC
Why apply a restriction to a single ship class when you can just set the PG requirement to something like 100?
Enddel Ayere
Warping pandas
#50 - 2015-09-11 20:54:53 UTC
Very sensible change on the ceptors! and also the structure regen makes lots of sense in terms of game mechanics (maybe have a maintenance bots animation to keep the lore... auto repair blabla)

Big smile
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#51 - 2015-09-11 20:56:06 UTC
Colman Dietmar wrote:
Why apply a restriction to a single ship class when you can just set the PG requirement to something like 100?

It'd have to be higher than that. Two T2 MAPCs and a T2 ancillary current router on a crusader had me easily above 100 grid, with two lows and a rig slot left over for reducing my align time to below two seconds.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#52 - 2015-09-11 21:00:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
The Slayer wrote:
I've only been on two or three system defence ops, so sorry if these were not the norm, but the ones I turned up to there WERE no "skirmish warfare" events. MOA would come along in 15 cormorants and try to catch stragglers.

The problem with those seeking to harass the CFC is that there are no peer adversaries with the throw weight to seriously contest you, which is probably why you've never seen anything more than reinforcement timers that go uncontested. I can't imagine it's any fun, but on the plus side, uncontested timers will fix themselves soon.

The Slayer wrote:
Sometimes an inty would wave a sov laser at something then run away when someone got within 50k of him.

They had a speed penalty before, and have a maximum velocity penalty now. You couldn't find anyone who could catch them? What?
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#53 - 2015-09-11 21:05:15 UTC
I'm just going to roll my eyes into the back of my head, but you're just caving to hotdroppers who have nothing to do with their big toys, watch how dropping caps becomes an activity once again on single ships. but oh well

I would like fozzie "the man of all focus rage" to urgently look at the sov system as a whole, for I think its not fair to allow the strategic indice to go to zero when an ihub is attacked and the sov holder still has sov.. this causes a terrible waiting time to deploy jump bridges for troops to assemble and defend their space.

its not fair you're still avoiding whats the purpose of having sov and living out in null sec if the big bad evil can simply come in and hit your ihub knocking off transportation systems for up to 35 days in a matter of a few hours. I also look at the above changes as a PR attempt to regain lost players that fozziesov/ageisov has pushed into leaving the game..

but I'm sure you wouldn't discuss numbers here or in a blog since we're headed to fall now.. perhaps everyone caught the flu and stayed logged off? hmm
Sporx Utensil
Colossus Enterprises
#54 - 2015-09-11 21:07:03 UTC
Colman Dietmar wrote:
Why apply a restriction to a single ship class when you can just set the PG requirement to something like 100?


That severely compromises fits for other ships. I'm glad they didn't do that; although fair enough if what they did pick is a bandaid.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#55 - 2015-09-11 21:07:57 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
I'm just going to roll my eyes into the back of my head, but you're just caving to hotdroppers who have nothing to do with their big toys, watch how dropping caps becomes an activity once again on single ships. but oh well

I would like fozzie "the man of all focus rage" to urgently look at the sov system as a whole, for I think its not fair to allow the strategic indice to go to zero when an ihub is attacked and the sov holder still has sov.. this causes a terrible waiting time to deploy jump bridges for troops to assemble and defend their space.

its not fair you're still avoiding whats the purpose of having sov and living out in null sec if the big bad evil can simply come in and hit your ihub knocking off transportation systems for up to 35 days in a matter of a few hours. I also look at the above changes as a PR attempt to regain lost players that fozziesov/ageisov has pushed into leaving the game..

but I'm sure you wouldn't discuss numbers here or in a blog since we're headed to fall now.. perhaps everyone caught the flu and stayed logged off? hmm


It may behoove you to defend your space. Additionally, it might behoove you to attack the space of those attacking you, as the same rules apply to whomever is attacking you.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
William Ruben
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2015-09-11 21:09:47 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
I'm just going to roll my eyes into the back of my head, but you're just caving to hotdroppers who have nothing to do with their big toys, watch how dropping caps becomes an activity once again on single ships. but oh well

I would like fozzie "the man of all focus rage" to urgently look at the sov system as a whole, for I think its not fair to allow the strategic indice to go to zero when an ihub is attacked and the sov holder still has sov.. this causes a terrible waiting time to deploy jump bridges for troops to assemble and defend their space.

its not fair you're still avoiding whats the purpose of having sov and living out in null sec if the big bad evil can simply come in and hit your ihub knocking off transportation systems for up to 35 days in a matter of a few hours. I also look at the above changes as a PR attempt to regain lost players that fozziesov/ageisov has pushed into leaving the game..

but I'm sure you wouldn't discuss numbers here or in a blog since we're headed to fall now.. perhaps everyone caught the flu and stayed logged off? hmm


says NPC corp alt
Igor Nappi
Doomheim
#57 - 2015-09-11 21:09:52 UTC
CCP caving in to the nullbear whine - the devblog.

Furthermore, I think that links must be removed from the game.
drunklies
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2015-09-11 21:13:44 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
I'm just going to roll my eyes into the back of my head, but you're just caving to hotdroppers who have nothing to do with their big toys, watch how dropping caps becomes an activity once again on single ships. but oh well



Ahh, you hit it exactly on the head. All those thousands of supers and titans, with nothing to do. Only a fool would keep those subbed. CCP is again putting the cart before the horse. Rather then give supers/caps a decent and balanced role to play, they just shot them in the knees, promising a fix Soon TM.

Also, maybe you can put your inner peasant away and realise that capital gameplay might actually be end game play for some.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2015-09-11 21:13:46 UTC
Marcus Tedric wrote:
I'm sad that the fitting restriction is to Interceptors only - it's too trite.

Much more sensible would be to restrict it to Destroyers, perhaps even Cruisers, and above - due to 'size' constraints.


It's not the speed, size, or cost of inties that is the root problem; it's the bubble immunity. There is no need to restrict it from other small/fast ships that are not bubble-immune. Especially not with the capture decay thing coming later...
Traumatica
Perkone
Caldari State
#60 - 2015-09-11 21:17:24 UTC
Really if certain parties spent less time shooting sov structure in interceptors and more time mining or whatever pubbies do for money then maybe they could afford real ships to contest sov with.