EVE General Discussion

Still, when there was no risk involved , it didnt stop anyone form sov grinding :D

Tell me more about sov war, NPC corper.
If you think this is the first politically unsavory decision made by a nullsec leader masked by 'it's the game mechanics' fault', think again.

There's a big difference between sov grinding against the clowns in Cobalt Edge (or any other small group we've invaded recently) and the HBC.

Against lesser entities, we could afford to deploy large numbers of mostly unsupervised dreads and supers to grind the structures down--in effect bypassing the worst elements of the sov grind.

If the CFC fought the HBC, neither side would have that luxury--it would be back to the bad old days of shooting structures in subcapitals as the hours stretch into days and the days into weeks. Nobody wants to do that anymore.

i disagree, but saying "changes" rather than anything specific doesn't leave much room for me to say more than that.
not that i really care what happens to sov, i just find it amusing the amount of tinfoil flying around and people just seem unwilling to accept that a bad system is bad.

Thats cool, I wasnt actually referring to any specific changes, just saying in general that any change helps the big guy most or hurts the big guy least (I think thats even a law around here on the forums?
You say bad system, I say system twisted to its current state by player-generated content.

Agree with OP.

Also this whole infinity source of isk suck hard , tech moons produce more isk than alliances needs, here enough isk to bulid few titans per month in fact these capitals supply never move to battle, i dont know where all these titans are because we got 400 of them few years ago and now probably even more... Sov and moons mechanic need big cut.

Also CCP are responsible for this ****, they ignore every importand aspect of game since years, while they focus on shiny usseles things.

CCP stop discuss with CSM and stop waiting for thier (i want this or maybe this) you are responsible for your product.

You do what's known as the Ninja AFK.

You simply take the risk of getting your ship popped and podded whilst you do ironing / exercise / cook your breakfast / shower / get 40 winks (with your headphones on, of course).

You'll be surprised how often you get away with it.

A related issue, which some have touched on, is the ease of power projection. It is impossible to contest any part of the HBC or CFC without having to fight the entirety of said coalition at once. There is no attacking some system in the far north without having to consider the fact that in the far south, everyone can be there within a few minutes.

Remember, crossing the entirety of the map from one extreme to the other is trivial if you have the cynos and fuel already staged and even setting those up is easy.

What if we just make all of nullsec crap? Then we'd have tons of CVAs living in terrible space. Also, increase the structure shooting to provide stability in the sovereignty system.

Smaller alliances won't need to move their capital assets as far as the bigger alliances will, thus nerfing "projection" in the form of cyno delays, shorter ranges, higher fuel consumption, limits to capacity of a single cyno, etc will just encourage larger alliances to keep multiple sets of ships lying around for their fleets to reship into as a means of evading per-hull timers. Changes to cyno travel such as spool up times are only to address the issue of "hot dropping", not as a means for restricting "force projection". A spool up time of a minute would only delay the arrival of a fleet from North to South by about four to five minutes, in a game where reaction time is measured in hours.

The main thing that does and will hurt smaller alliances is the ability for larger alliances to batphone their pilots and have 1000 people in fleet with a few hours notice. That is to say, the same thing that has always been the case which is the game of N+1.

A Faction Warfare style system of hull-restricted bunker encounter sites would allow alliances to tune their defenses to particular ship sizes (more bunker for smaller ships, or fewer bunkers for larger ships, for example) and provide active engagement for sovereignty warfare rather than the passive affair that is parking a hundred dreadnoughts in siege and blapping for hours.

The force with the greater numbers will still have the numerical advantage, but the home team will have the shortest distance to send their reinforcements.