EVE Information Portal

When they put a limit on cloaks so you have to at least put in an effort to be at the keyboard for your alts.

This is a direction that is highly favorable to Goonswarm's established modus operendi; bring as big of a death ball as possible and take advantage of superior throw weight to ensure that each objective is achieved. If that's the direction Entosis is going to go, we might as well just throw the sov wands out completely and just go back to Dominion or POS Sov.

If someone doesn't have that kind of mass, skirmish warfare is their only viable option. It would be a tragedy for that option to be lost.

Quote limit.



It is still a hilarious design goal fail.

Tell me, if a minimum align time of 4s and a speed limit of 3k was enforced...what would the problem be?

You should not be able to hide behind anchorables so easily, it is every bit as big a flaw as the current model - except now it is in sov holders favour, so I guess that is ok.....?

I'm still a bit shocked that Entosis link isn't exactly like a Cyno, or at the very least a Siege module.

You light it and it:

A) puts up a beacon (like a cyno)
B) you're sitting there for the duration.

A+B = both very recognizable mechanics already accepted in the game.

Have you considered that many people are interested in the fight and not in the sov/ihubs/whatever ?
Have you considered that, since the nodes will regen, a lot less fights can be expected ?
Have you considered that, since the anom buff, you can park 600 pilots in the same constellation and they all have something to grind, making our current universe way too big for the low population in 00 ?
Have you considered that the game does not need a better, juicer carrot, but on the contrary a lower density of the riches, that would create conflicts after ~4 years of relative peace ?

It is a fair whack before it can be claimed to be lag inducing, as I'm sure you well know.

My point remains, relying on an edge case of lag inducing bubbles and GM hand waving doesn't strengthen your argument.

What should have happened is as I said, minimum align time, lower speed. Debatable sundries would be higher fuel costs and high cycle times (to allow running them down in time).

This swings the pendulum too far back the other way.

The problem is SOV for the average member doesn't offer As much riches as many claim. Hell its why I personally rather rent. I pay less in the long run and short run then I would on Infrastructure and Defense of assets. If I seen a reason to take Sov that outweighed what I made on my FW or Incursion alts.. my corp would not be renting.. but brawling again. As it stands now tho. I can putz around in null and make more Isk per hour in hi-sec or low-sec warfare zones. It's why the majority of pilots across all alliances in all sov areas have Incursion alts. No way am I saying change Faction Warfare or Incursions, I like my isk. But as for Reasons to fight in other regions and take Sov elsewhere. I have no reason to risk my toys for Sov, when I can get the better benefits elsewhere.

The big empires have no reason to kick over each others sandcastles when nothing of Value is sitting in the neighbors yard. Sure you can look at Lowering the density of what is around each Sov area. But it has to be done in a way that would effect the Leadership chains of the large and small alliances - Sov holding or not. Moons at one point drove conflict then they spread the value everywhere. Many suggestions have gone into these forums on how to change wealth redistribution of Sov. Having moons run out, making moons change what you can mine in certain cycles, etc. None of it is anything that would drive anyone to kick a castle over that isn't already well stocked up. Null Sov needs something new built into it to make empires want to go and fight elsewhere. Having something change that is long stocked up would only effect them if those assets were getting destroyed. They still need a reason to Exhaust the stocks. Not sit on them and chuckle buying what they need out of market hubs.

i would never have thought that nullsec will receive timer rollbacks before FW. Kinda funny :)

Massive respect, CCP!

I absolutely hated the first iteration of Aegis Sov and was pretty vocal about the shortcomings. Very happy to see these steps that are in the right direction.

o7

If I may, 5 days may be too soon of a cooldown timer, as we don't want to make weekend hoping a thing. Perhaps 10 days?

Also, perhaps a 50-minute regen timer is too short of a window for the attacker. I think it's fair for the shortest regen window to straddle the shortest vulnerability window possible at highest ADM (so 4 hrs?) so that the attacker has a good chunk of the next vulnerability window to show up in and contest. In other words, make the regen multiple ~0.04x instead of 0.2x for stations, ihubs and TCUs, for example.

Unnecessarily so :) Both figures show the information in the units that is important. I wouldn't want to have to convert to second for the first, or minutes in the second.



Have you considered that everything you are whining about has nothing to do with sov?



Both the items you suggest would roll back power projection limitations, which have been painful but beneficial in my mind. Any thoughts on how you could prevent the rampant power projection issues from before Phoebe, if what you suggest comes to pass?


So lemme get his straight - you want the sov, but you find it too difficult to coast the 20 seconds it would take you to clear the bubbles?