These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Please reduce the number of SOV timers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#441 - 2016-04-04 13:08:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
Ah, there's your problem. You've overextended and can't defend all your space, so it gets taken from you.
This has been said and debunked multiple times. Please go back and reread the thread and let me know once done. Ta.

To be honest, so far the only thing that was established is that you are uncomfortable defending your space. Current levels of offensive action aside (anyone would be in trouble in such situation), I don't think that your ability to keep space under your flag in the long run means that your are not overextending. I was under impression that doing so comfortably would be a sign of "proper" size. Which of course is inversely proportional to amount of people you pissed off enough that they drop anything fun they were doing and go camp/sovlaser your systems instead.

I give you that this means not making determined enemies is a better solution than any current sov mechanics, but then again, this comes down to what to use as a baseline for what sov holder should get.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#442 - 2016-04-04 13:10:31 UTC
Aiwha wrote:
Its literally the case. Saying "that's not the case" doesn't suddenly make it not true that any interceptor can catch a T1 frigate, and most of them can pretty easily whelp an entosis fit one. Hell, you don't even need to catch it, a beam slicer can just orbit it at 20k and melt it without even bothering for tackle.
I'm sure an interceptor can take down a T1 frigate, and I'll let you know just as soon as I'm in that circumstance, until then it's as helpful as saying "if the enemy has a loaf of bread on his face he can't fight you anyway".

Aiwha wrote:
We've invested time and money into making your lives miserable. Its working. Blame your leaders for making so many enemies.
Why would I blame my leaders? I like having lots of enemies. What I hate is having to waste time mining structures because CCP thought it would be a great idea to guarantee that sov holders can do nothing but spend all day gridning ADMs and firing a sov laser. I was in favour of full occupancy based sov, where living in your space meant you kept it but fighting other players directly is how you took it and defended it. This rubbish they've put in instead is dire. You may not believe that but even CCP do, which is why they've already scrapped it from citadels.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#443 - 2016-04-04 13:16:05 UTC
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
To be honest, so far the only thing that was established is that you are uncomfortable defending your space. Current levels of offensive action aside (anyone would be in trouble in such situation), I don't think that your ability to keep space under your flag in the long run means that your are not overextending. I was under impression that doing so comfortably would be a sign of "proper" size. Which of course is inversely proportional to amount of people you pissed off enough that they drop anything fun they were doing and go camp/sovlaser your systems instead.
It's a simple case of numbers, when you have over a thousand enemies drop into your space and you have a 150 man fleet to defend, it's not overextension if you lose space. If we were overextended we wouldn't be able to defend against even a balanced attack, which clearly we were able to do. It's pretty simple to understand, if you have 1000 people in a single system and a 2000 man fleet flies in and roflstomps you, you didn't lose because you were overextended.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#444 - 2016-04-04 13:16:54 UTC
Gregor Regulus wrote:
Zappity wrote:
Dark Lord Trump wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Except this isn't true, since all it takes is flying in and triggering timers forcing the defender to respond until the windows get wide enough that they can't stop them all.

Lucas Kell wrote:
stop them all



Ah, there's your problem. You've overextended and can't defend all your space, so it gets taken from you.

I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. Even if they consolidated to a single null constellation I doubt they’d be able to defend against the current opposition.


There will be no place for them to hide. Plans are already being made about who will live in deklein, fade, branch etc. Trust me there is tons of interest for occupying the north. After we take all their space we will camp their low sec staging every day until their alliance shrinks to a level that we find satisfactory.

The goons will only exist as a form that we allow.

Royal Amarr Institute is really scary Ugh

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#445 - 2016-04-04 13:19:39 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's a simple case of numbers, when you have over a thousand enemies drop into your space and you have a 150 man fleet to defend, it's not overextension if you lose space. If we were overextended we wouldn't be able to defend against even a balanced attack, which clearly we were able to do. It's pretty simple to understand, if you have 1000 people in a single system and a 2000 man fleet flies in and roflstomps you, you didn't lose because you were overextended.

I specifically said "Current levels of offensive action aside". I fully understand that under current circumstances sov will be lost no matter the mechanics behind it.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#446 - 2016-04-04 13:32:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiwha
Lucas Kell wrote:
Aiwha wrote:
Its literally the case. Saying "that's not the case" doesn't suddenly make it not true that any interceptor can catch a T1 frigate, and most of them can pretty easily whelp an entosis fit one. Hell, you don't even need to catch it, a beam slicer can just orbit it at 20k and melt it without even bothering for tackle.
I'm sure an interceptor can take down a T1 frigate, and I'll let you know just as soon as I'm in that circumstance, until then it's as helpful as saying "if the enemy has a loaf of bread on his face he can't fight you anyway".

Aiwha wrote:
We've invested time and money into making your lives miserable. Its working. Blame your leaders for making so many enemies.
Why would I blame my leaders? I like having lots of enemies. What I hate is having to waste time mining structures because CCP thought it would be a great idea to guarantee that sov holders can do nothing but spend all day gridning ADMs and firing a sov laser. I was in favour of full occupancy based sov, where living in your space meant you kept it but fighting other players directly is how you took it and defended it. This rubbish they've put in instead is dire. You may not believe that but even CCP do, which is why they've already scrapped it from citadels.




No, its like saying rock beats scissors, then you insist that is not true. I'm gonna assume TMC is going to put out an article soon about how terribly under-powered interceptors are after that 12b interceptor whelp.




Lucas Kell wrote:
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
To be honest, so far the only thing that was established is that you are uncomfortable defending your space. Current levels of offensive action aside (anyone would be in trouble in such situation), I don't think that your ability to keep space under your flag in the long run means that your are not overextending. I was under impression that doing so comfortably would be a sign of "proper" size. Which of course is inversely proportional to amount of people you pissed off enough that they drop anything fun they were doing and go camp/sovlaser your systems instead.
It's a simple case of numbers, when you have over a thousand enemies drop into your space and you have a 150 man fleet to defend, it's not overextension if you lose space. If we were overextended we wouldn't be able to defend against even a balanced attack, which clearly we were able to do. It's pretty simple to understand, if you have 1000 people in a single system and a 2000 man fleet flies in and roflstomps you, you didn't lose because you were overextended.




You lost because you made 1000 enemies.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#447 - 2016-04-04 13:32:48 UTC
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's a simple case of numbers, when you have over a thousand enemies drop into your space and you have a 150 man fleet to defend, it's not overextension if you lose space. If we were overextended we wouldn't be able to defend against even a balanced attack, which clearly we were able to do. It's pretty simple to understand, if you have 1000 people in a single system and a 2000 man fleet flies in and roflstomps you, you didn't lose because you were overextended.

I specifically said "Current levels of offensive action aside". I fully understand that under current circumstances sov will be lost no matter the mechanics behind it.
So then why is it overextension? What exactly do you class as overextension? The thing is the guy you are jumping in to defend is blaming the entire situation as it is on overextension, but I'm just not seeing it. Seeing it from the inside what I have seen is an absolutely ludicrous amount of structure mining and very little in the way of engaging gameplay. I mean if this is what it's going to be like going forward, I can't see many people opting to live in sov space once they've been attacked a couple of times.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#448 - 2016-04-04 13:36:33 UTC
Aiwha wrote:
No, its like saying rock beats scissors, then you insist that is not true. I'm gonna assume TMC is going to put out an article soon about how terribly under-powered interceptors are after that 12b interceptor whelp.
I'm not saying t's not true, I'm simply saying it's not pertinent to the current situation since they aren't using scissors. You're saying "An interceptor can defeat a T1 frigate, therefore the fact that there are hundreds of nodes to fire a laser at every day is no longer boring, even though T1 frigates aren't what are generally being used". It makes no sense.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#449 - 2016-04-04 14:24:01 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Aiwha wrote:
No, its like saying rock beats scissors, then you insist that is not true. I'm gonna assume TMC is going to put out an article soon about how terribly under-powered interceptors are after that 12b interceptor whelp.
I'm not saying t's not true, I'm simply saying it's not pertinent to the current situation since they aren't using scissors. You're saying "An interceptor can defeat a T1 frigate, therefore the fact that there are hundreds of nodes to fire a laser at every day is no longer boring, even though T1 frigates aren't what are generally being used". It makes no sense.



You don't have to sov mine the nodes. They'll automatically win for the defender after 1H30M. So you just have to fly around killing people doing the entosis work. If you put half the effort you put whining on the forums into defending your space, maybe Bastion and LAWN wouldn't be homeless right now.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#450 - 2016-04-04 14:29:24 UTC
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#451 - 2016-04-04 14:33:19 UTC
Aiwha wrote:
You don't have to sov mine the nodes. They'll automatically win for the defender after 1H30M. So you just have to fly around killing people doing the entosis work. If you put half the effort you put whining on the forums into defending your space, maybe Bastion and LAWN wouldn't be homeless right now.
Roll Now you're just being ridiculous. Yeah, we'll just let the nodes idle, that's sure to win. I get that you like the mechanics being in your favour, so I can see why you're getting so defensive over the idea of CCP actually fixing them, but those of us that actually like to enjoy the game can see that they are pretty dire. Remember, you only like them because you don't actually want to hold sov. If you did I guarantee after a few serious attacks you'd be jumping right on the same bandwagon.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#452 - 2016-04-04 14:57:41 UTC
Aiwha wrote:
You don't have to sov mine the nodes. They'll automatically win for the defender after 1H30M. So you just have to fly around killing people doing the entosis work. If you put half the effort you put whining on the forums into defending your space, maybe Bastion and LAWN wouldn't be homeless right now.

...and SMA...and FCON...and TNT...and RAZOR

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Andrew Urbina
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#453 - 2016-04-04 15:05:39 UTC
Pandemic Horde is recruiting.
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#454 - 2016-04-04 15:08:00 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Aiwha wrote:
You don't have to sov mine the nodes. They'll automatically win for the defender after 1H30M. So you just have to fly around killing people doing the entosis work. If you put half the effort you put whining on the forums into defending your space, maybe Bastion and LAWN wouldn't be homeless right now.
Roll Now you're just being ridiculous. Yeah, we'll just let the nodes idle, that's sure to win. I get that you like the mechanics being in your favour, so I can see why you're getting so defensive over the idea of CCP actually fixing them, but those of us that actually like to enjoy the game can see that they are pretty dire. Remember, you only like them because you don't actually want to hold sov. If you did I guarantee after a few serious attacks you'd be jumping right on the same bandwagon.



I literally hold sov right now.

So does The Culture. We actually fight each other over sov on a semi-regular basis. Because we're not ****.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Mario Putzo
#455 - 2016-04-04 16:09:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Lucas Kell wrote:
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
To be honest, so far the only thing that was established is that you are uncomfortable defending your space. Current levels of offensive action aside (anyone would be in trouble in such situation), I don't think that your ability to keep space under your flag in the long run means that your are not overextending. I was under impression that doing so comfortably would be a sign of "proper" size. Which of course is inversely proportional to amount of people you pissed off enough that they drop anything fun they were doing and go camp/sovlaser your systems instead.
It's a simple case of numbers, when you have over a thousand enemies drop into your space and you have a 150 man fleet to defend, it's not overextension if you lose space. If we were overextended we wouldn't be able to defend against even a balanced attack, which clearly we were able to do. It's pretty simple to understand, if you have 1000 people in a single system and a 2000 man fleet flies in and roflstomps you, you didn't lose because you were overextended.



Seems odd to hear a CFC member complain about overwhelming numbers. Why just over 6 months ago CFC was employing this exact same tactic in Providence to "prove" to CCP that an overwhelming force could just take what they wanted with impunity....then they proceeded to get roflstomped out by ProviBloc over 2 weeks. Difference of course being ProvidBloc actually actively defended their space against the CFC where as CFC is just abandoning regions en mass then whining about it later.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#456 - 2016-04-04 16:17:12 UTC
Aiwha wrote:
I literally hold sov right now.

So does The Culture. We actually fight each other over sov on a semi-regular basis. Because we're not ****.
Hold it simply because it's available no doubt. And no, if you fight each other on a regular basis and have made not steps towards actually defeating each other you're either specifically aiming not to involve sov mechanics (thus proving the point that they are boring) or you are in fact ****. I'm actually betting it's the former.

Mario Putzo wrote:
Seems odd to hear a CFC member complain about overwhelming numbers. Why just over 6 months ago CFC was employing this exact same tactic in Providence to "prove" to CCP that an overwhelming force could just take what they wanted with impunity....then they proceeded to get roflstomped out by ProviBloc over 2 weeks. Difference of course being ProvidBloc actually actively defended their space against the CFC where as CFC is just abandoning regions en mass then whining about it later.
Hey, don;t get me wrong I've got nothing against overwhelming numbers, and I have no problem losing space to a bigger group rolling in, I just disagree with the notion that losing space is proof of being overextended, and I wish the game was entertaining when defending a region rather than being force to mine structures rather than just fight. Sov should be a byproduct of playing the game and fighting each other, not a fixed, timer based mechanic.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#457 - 2016-04-04 16:28:03 UTC
M-O was massively entertaining because you contested it; almost won too. The reason you're all bored now and crying about it, is because you won't come out to play.

Naturally station spinning is boring.
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#458 - 2016-04-04 16:28:09 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Aiwha wrote:
I literally hold sov right now.

So does The Culture. We actually fight each other over sov on a semi-regular basis. Because we're not ****.
Hold it simply because it's available no doubt. And no, if you fight each other on a regular basis and have made not steps towards actually defeating each other you're either specifically aiming not to involve sov mechanics (thus proving the point that they are boring) or you are in fact ****. I'm actually betting it's the former.

Mario Putzo wrote:
Seems odd to hear a CFC member complain about overwhelming numbers. Why just over 6 months ago CFC was employing this exact same tactic in Providence to "prove" to CCP that an overwhelming force could just take what they wanted with impunity....then they proceeded to get roflstomped out by ProviBloc over 2 weeks. Difference of course being ProvidBloc actually actively defended their space against the CFC where as CFC is just abandoning regions en mass then whining about it later.
Hey, don;t get me wrong I've got nothing against overwhelming numbers, and I have no problem losing space to a bigger group rolling in, I just disagree with the notion that losing space is proof of being overextended, and I wish the game was entertaining when defending a region rather than being force to mine structures rather than just fight. Sov should be a byproduct of playing the game and fighting each other, not a fixed, timer based mechanic.



We got paid to stop fighting each other and come **** on you. Which we gladly took because we both despise your leadership. After we roll you we'll probably get back to slapping each other silly. Again, this all comes down to you getting dogpiled because your coalitions diplomacy is absolute ****.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#459 - 2016-04-04 16:49:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Aiwha wrote:
We got paid to stop fighting each other and come **** on you. Which we gladly took because we both despise your leadership. After we roll you we'll probably get back to slapping each other silly. Again, this all comes down to you getting dogpiled because your coalitions diplomacy is absolute ****.


Our diplomacy isn't any more **** than some of your bigger "allies". The main difference is that they gave up their territories last year without even trying to defend it once in Aegis sov, because like us, they already knew the new system would be kind of terrible, and unlike us they don't have the perseverance to even try.
Akballah Kassan
Flames Of Chaos
Great Wildlands Conservation Society
#460 - 2016-04-04 17:44:33 UTC
Waded through this thread and I'd had my own thoughts.

Our Alliance entosis things to provoke fights. Before everybody dog piled into fighting The Imperium/CFC we rarely got a decent fight because Goons would just drop Super caps on us, to which we have no counter. They never looked for fun fights and to be fair if that's how they roll and their line members are happy with that then I can't complain.

Imperium was vastly over extended and even Mitten's acknowledges this. Whilst I can understand his call to fall back (a bit like the USSR did in WW II) it must be disheartening to other alliances knowing 'their' space is probably gone forever.

Since the great war has kicked in we have had some great little fights with Imperium over sov in Pure Blind and because they are too scared now to drop supers (or if Mittens is to be believed it is a tactic to deny content) we have actually managed to take four systems! Now I'm not naive enough to believe we could ever hold it if things revert to previous conditions but the target is there for Imperium to attack but they won't - they are just hoping blue balling will bore people into defeat.

As for SMA, the same O.P is crying on another thread about the threat from a lone entosising Condor, explaining how they all have to dock up, wait for an FC to form a fleet to go and kill the menace! If one entosising Condor is such a threat no wonder your empire is crumbling!

As for the actual sov mechanics - sov-wanding isn't the best game play but it's better then the old super blob wins sov we had before. Also, nothing will stop boredom and burn out being a tactic used in sov warfare no matter what system you use. Nobody is going to suicide fleets against an enemy they know they can't beat and attackers who don't get a fight will have to put up with the boredom that entails.

Finally, Lucas's complaints about nobody being able to go on deployment any more because they have to constantly defend their own space - surely that's a good thing? Why should you be able to go on vacation to kick over somebody else's sand castle, safe in the knowledge your own sand castle is safe while you do it?