EVE Information Portal

i'll count this as yet another grand example of CCP listening to their players. That jump fatiuge change is exactly what I wanted to read. The 5ly range still burns my buttons but since I'm no longer punished for using my carriers, I'll live with it. And here I thought the September release was just going to be a station shader update. Good job, CCP. Keep it going.

p.s. Since you're listening, bring back the chronicles already. geez.

Or they could remove the ridiculous broken bubble nullification and we wouldn't even need arbitrary restrictions on what can and cannot fit entosis modules.

No it isn't. (It is only a small part of the problem)
The underlying problem with fozziesov is exactly the same as it was with Dominion.
Groups using blob dominance to troll (and try to extort) small sov holders while the big groups still have no reason to fight each other. That is and always will be the problem with, not only sov but nulsec in general.

(blob dominance - massive amounts of supers/capitals, extreme over shipping, huge invulnerable fleets)

Fozzies jump range nerfs played right into the hands of the super blobs. It may take them a little longer to get there but once they arrive - There is NOTHING to counter them. So they gain control of the space (moons etc), without the cost and burden of holding sov.

-- - -- - -- - --
Until moon mining is fixed, nothing else devs attempt matters. You can't fix sov, you won't create real content when there is broken mechanics that are being ignored.

Moon mining in sov space should require sov - This gives groups a reason to fight.
"Lowsec moons will become even more popular, it would unbalance lowsec" - Good, it then allows groups who want to fight for a home in sov the ability and a reason to. Let the large groups who don't want to hold sov fight over a few moons in lowsec - It is after all where 90% of Eve content is generated.

Lastly, now troll ceptors aren't an issue - Remove vulnerability windows.
Keep timers and indexes but allow sov to be attacked (reinforced) and or defended 24/7. If your shite gets RF'd, you can set a timer (within 48hrs of it being RF'd) that suits you to defend it but the initial timer should not be restricted to when you can be there to watch. (Eve by numbers = Limited content)

All you did is make is easier for people who don't care, not to care. You completely misunderstand the problem.

Since you created the mechanics, you should understand that when someone sets a timer, whether that's a solo nobody in an interceptor, or a major alliance, ANYONE can show up for a fight when that timer expires. It doesn't have to be that guy in the solo interceptor. Anyone can. Nobody does. That's your problem. Listen carefully: Nobody cares.

If anyone cared, they'd be showing up to these timers whether they created them or not, but, that would be a waste of time, usually. Because the defender, as often as not, doesn't care. They're not going to show up for a fight, if it actually looks like a fight. Take the sov. What did you achieve? Now you have some sov. Congratulations, but, no fight for you.

Iterating over these mechanics isn't going to make people care about sov again. Stop wasting your energy, and work the actual problem.

Unless CCP make some very drastic changes "if" sov becomes desirable, is far more appropriate.

Sov is worthless because it has nothing to offer you can't get without owning sov.

Anything introduced into EVE by CCP that detracts from a players personal or group content generation ability or extends the required play time with periods of 'Dead Waiting' at this time in the games current critical state is a really bad idea and will not end well, reducing it is not the answer.

The fatigue mechanics have caused serious issues for players over the past months and while the idea behind it might have appeared appealing to some, Overall coupled with past iteration negatives, (Features), going back a long way in EVE this issue has proven to be one step to far for many players.

Good to see Drakes getting some TLC at last though...Maybe whats left of my lot still playing the game will stop moaning about them now.

Fatigue mechanics have not caused any serious issues for players. It may have caused issues to you, because you are terrible at this game, but you cant extend statements like that to "players".

I used jump bridges daily when we still were in TRI, did and still do blops and used one of my caps last night. Jump fatigue has not affected my game experience negatively one bit. Capping the fatigue at 5 days is irrelevant to me, never had more than one day.

Fatigue and activation timers fixed the imbalance of biggest ships being the fastest ones.

For those of us looking at more than the individuals aspect of the Jump fatigue mechanics it was not in reference to any one particular ship flown but to the overall effect it actually had on players, This gave rise to some questions being asked as to why they found them a problem in relation in there day to day EVE activities, the results were revealing as it had ramifications far beyond those intended by CCP, that of restrictions in Power projection, That is unless it was there actual intention.

That the mechanics make no distinction between a Titan down to a Pod in relation to the fatigue acquired is the main issue here and I would suggest that anything below the size of BS and variants be exempt as that may go a long way to removing the current block on player movement in fleets, so removing the perceived reason for loss of player generated content while not actually changing the overall effect of heavy weight power projection reduction the mechanic imparts to the game.

As for it as a feature generating asymmetrical warfare it should be noted that in such a scenario, it is always the winners that win.....The losers always loose, as a concept it will not have the desired effect on EVE even coupled with FozzieSov, Citadels and a Homogeneous Universe, All of which work against the long term future health of the game.