These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

SOV tearing down the old.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#261 - 2013-11-01 06:12:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
lmao. No you don't have to do any of that. Stop making up excuses.


You just told me I did, right after I told you that your suggestions would lead to the flaming death of T2 and T3 industry. I'll bold, italic, and underline it so you won't miss it.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
So you add a new POS module...


Liar.

As for the other two, yes, you have advocated for removal of API key notifications for timers. Probably in this very thread. You have also advocated for a complete rework of the sov system to deliberately benefit you.

Your self serving motivations are clear for all to see who have eyes. As is your general awfulness. This makes twice now I have had to go 4th grade style to your suggestions. The first was when you tried to propose that timers be doubled to 48 hours instead of 24, which has to be up there in the 10 stupidest things I have ever seen proposed on Assembly Hall.

How about instead of acting like a fourth grader you don't. Also when someone says "so you add" thats not referring to YOU specifically.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#262 - 2013-11-01 06:34:54 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Also when someone says "so you add" thats not referring to YOU specifically.


Good heavens you're dense. And you wonder why I think I have to go 4th grade on you all the time.

I know what you meant. You meant CCP needs to add a module that does that. They need to add it to fix the problem created by your suggestion in the first place.

It's ridiculous. You have fixes for fixes for fixes for something just because you personally dislike it.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#263 - 2013-11-01 06:41:14 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
lmao. No you don't have to do any of that. Stop making up excuses.


You just told me I did, right after I told you that your suggestions would lead to the flaming death of T2 and T3 industry. I'll bold, italic, and underline it so you won't miss it.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
So you add a new POS module...


Liar.

As for the other two, yes, you have advocated for removal of API key notifications for timers. Probably in this very thread. You have also advocated for a complete rework of the sov system to deliberately benefit you.

Your self serving motivations are clear for all to see who have eyes. As is your general awfulness. This makes twice now I have had to go 4th grade style to your suggestions. The first was when you tried to propose that timers be doubled to 48 hours instead of 24, which has to be up there in the 10 stupidest things I have ever seen proposed on Assembly Hall.

always have more timers

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#264 - 2013-11-01 06:46:38 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Gosh I wonder why that's happening... could it be.... caps, jump bridges, trivial force projection...

So the solution is to make it take 6hrs for a small gang of people to kill that same structure....

You need to think about this for a minute. If you want to help smaller entities, you need to develop a change/mechanic that fcks over large entities without significantly screwing over the little guy. Nerfing jump drives hurts EVERYONE, and it hurts the little guy way more than the big guy.

It doesn't hurt the little guy. The little guy doesn't have caps halfway across the galaxy. The little guys caps are in his POS if he even has caps. Also I'm not talking about jump freighters or other industrial ships, nor am I saying that they shouldn't be able to use jump bridges. I'm talking about supercaps, dreads and carriers.


Onictus wrote:

We grind Delve in two weeks with bombers......you keep crying about force projection, but I only saw a titan twice in that period.

Even without JBs the large coalitions will **** in your wheaties

Wow you took Delve, an empty region after Test ran away, with SB. I'm sure if you had wanted to and were insane you could have done it with ibises in that situation.


Per usual you completely missed the point.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#265 - 2013-11-01 06:49:07 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Gosh I wonder why that's happening... could it be.... caps, jump bridges, trivial force projection...

So the solution is to make it take 6hrs for a small gang of people to kill that same structure....

You need to think about this for a minute. If you want to help smaller entities, you need to develop a change/mechanic that fcks over large entities without significantly screwing over the little guy. Nerfing jump drives hurts EVERYONE, and it hurts the little guy way more than the big guy.

It doesn't hurt the little guy. The little guy doesn't have caps halfway across the galaxy. The little guys caps are in his POS if he even has caps. Also I'm not talking about jump freighters or other industrial ships, nor am I saying that they shouldn't be able to use jump bridges. I'm talking about supercaps, dreads and carriers.


Onictus wrote:

We grind Delve in two weeks with bombers......you keep crying about force projection, but I only saw a titan twice in that period.

Even without JBs the large coalitions will **** in your wheaties

Wow you took Delve, an empty region after Test ran away, with SB. I'm sure if you had wanted to and were insane you could have done it with ibises in that situation.


Per usual you completely missed the point.

to be expected

we also used them in fountain, pl had fun waiting to hotdrop those

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#266 - 2013-11-01 09:41:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Onictus wrote:

Per usual you completely missed the point.

to be expected

we also used them in fountain, pl had fun waiting to hotdrop those

I didn't miss the point. I ignored it because it was fallacious. Mopping up test remains != taking over someones space when they're actively defending.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#267 - 2013-11-01 09:52:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Onictus wrote:

Per usual you completely missed the point.

to be expected

we also used them in fountain, pl had fun waiting to hotdrop those

I didn't miss the point. I ignored it because it was fallacious. Mopping up test remains != taking over someones space when they're actively defending.



So you missed Fountain then? We ground most of that in bombers as well, the big stuff didn't come out until TEST was broken.

Even then it wasn't really TEST that we had to deal with, we saw much more of N3.
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#268 - 2013-11-01 10:23:21 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Where timers are necessary (and they are necessary) there should be room for human error in setting them

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, but I was wondering if you would go more in depth on why timers and maybe other things should be subject to human error? The pros and cons as you see it.


Sure, although I thought this was the least controversial of the suggestions.

Right now a defender always gets to choose the time of engagement. One of the nice parts of the old POS system was you could force them to defend outside of their comfort zone using a number of methods. You could attack at a time or place they weren't expecting and get a badly stronted tower. You could repeatedly reinforce lots of towers to make the defender either burn out their current logistics people or recruit new ones (who might be incompetent or untrustworthy) and you could kite a tower, choosing to leave your capital fleet at risk for longer in exchange for a more favourable timer. Smart, bold or persistent attackers should be able to get an engagement time more to their liking and that can't happen while setting a defending timer is almost infallible. Hence the need for the possibility of human error.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#269 - 2013-11-01 11:27:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Yeep wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Where timers are necessary (and they are necessary) there should be room for human error in setting them

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, but I was wondering if you would go more in depth on why timers and maybe other things should be subject to human error? The pros and cons as you see it.


Sure, although I thought this was the least controversial of the suggestions.

Right now a defender always gets to choose the time of engagement. One of the nice parts of the old POS system was you could force them to defend outside of their comfort zone using a number of methods. You could attack at a time or place they weren't expecting and get a badly stronted tower. You could repeatedly reinforce lots of towers to make the defender either burn out their current logistics people or recruit new ones (who might be incompetent or untrustworthy) and you could kite a tower, choosing to leave your capital fleet at risk for longer in exchange for a more favourable timer. Smart, bold or persistent attackers should be able to get an engagement time more to their liking and that can't happen while setting a defending timer is almost infallible. Hence the need for the possibility of human error.


This is an interesting point, and explains why the fights were more long drawn out affairs and that smaller entities could compete if playing smart, and my objective is simple in all of this, I am looking for ways to make it so that smaller entities have a reason to keep fighting, instead of staring at impossible to take down Sov modules and heading back to hisec. So really it is something that keeps people in 0.0 and trying to keep their space regardless if it is low level ambush and harassment to eventual sov warfare at sov modules that can be taken.

So lets recap and add somethings:

The only thing that will work in my opinion is the following:

1. Create cheap and effective mobile bases - CCP have done this details still awaited
2. Create a way to attack passive moon income, - CCP have done this, may need adjustment
3. Reduce the EHP of sov modules where NPC pirates have not been kept down, will turn off IHUB and also reduces the time taken to online an SBU or have a low start base which increases with investment by the sov owner.
4. Dread cycle reduced to 2 minutes
5. Remove automated mails of stucture/POS attacks
6. Limit the mass that can jump through a cyno
7. Make a portable covert cyno jammer as well as the portable normal cyno jammer
8. Supers and Titans have reduced jump range
9. Sov modules can be subject to hacks to impact their RF timer

Do that and then see how it develops.

I want to see small and medium sized entities back in 0.0 feeling that if they work at it they could take space, holding it, well maybe not long term, but at least will make 0.0 more dynamic.

As for suggesting low sec, hell no, I do not like the restrictions in low sec and the impact on security standings, and I like the option to improve space aka the IHUB.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#270 - 2013-11-01 11:43:53 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Where timers are necessary (and they are necessary) there should be room for human error in setting them

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, but I was wondering if you would go more in depth on why timers and maybe other things should be subject to human error? The pros and cons as you see it.


Sure, although I thought this was the least controversial of the suggestions.

Right now a defender always gets to choose the time of engagement. One of the nice parts of the old POS system was you could force them to defend outside of their comfort zone using a number of methods. You could attack at a time or place they weren't expecting and get a badly stronted tower. You could repeatedly reinforce lots of towers to make the defender either burn out their current logistics people or recruit new ones (who might be incompetent or untrustworthy) and you could kite a tower, choosing to leave your capital fleet at risk for longer in exchange for a more favourable timer. Smart, bold or persistent attackers should be able to get an engagement time more to their liking and that can't happen while setting a defending timer is almost infallible. Hence the need for the possibility of human error.


This is an interesting point, and explains why the fights were more long drawn out affairs and that smaller entities could compete if playing smart, and my objective is simple in all of this, I am looking for ways to make it so that smaller entities have a reason to keep fighting, instead of staring at impossible to take down Sov modules and heading back to hisec. So really it is something that keeps people in 0.0 and trying to keep their space regardless if it is low level ambush and harassment to eventual sov warfare at sov modules that can be taken.

So lets recap and add somethings:

The only thing that will work in my opinion is the following:

1. Create cheap and effective mobile bases - CCP have done this details still awaited
2. Create a way to attack passive moon income, - CCP have done this, may need adjustment
3. Reduce the EHP of sov modules where NPC pirates have not been kept down, will turn off IHUB and also reduces the time taken to online an SBU or have a low start base which increases with investment by the sov owner.
4. Dread cycle reduced to 2 minutes
5. Remove automated mails of stucture/POS attacks
6. Limit the mass that can jump through a cyno
7. Make a portable covert cyno jammer as well as the portable normal cyno jammer
8. Supers and Titans have reduced jump range
9. Sov modules can be subject to hacks to impact their RF timer

Do that and then see how it develops.

I want to see small and medium sized entities back in 0.0 feeling that if they work at it they could take space, holding it, well maybe not long term, but at least will make 0.0 more dynamic.

As for suggesting low sec, hell no, I do not like the restrictions in low sec and the impact on security standings, and I like the option to improve space aka the IHUB.


Nope still sucks
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#271 - 2013-11-01 12:12:17 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Where timers are necessary (and they are necessary) there should be room for human error in setting them

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, but I was wondering if you would go more in depth on why timers and maybe other things should be subject to human error? The pros and cons as you see it.


Sure, although I thought this was the least controversial of the suggestions.

Right now a defender always gets to choose the time of engagement. One of the nice parts of the old POS system was you could force them to defend outside of their comfort zone using a number of methods. You could attack at a time or place they weren't expecting and get a badly stronted tower. You could repeatedly reinforce lots of towers to make the defender either burn out their current logistics people or recruit new ones (who might be incompetent or untrustworthy) and you could kite a tower, choosing to leave your capital fleet at risk for longer in exchange for a more favourable timer. Smart, bold or persistent attackers should be able to get an engagement time more to their liking and that can't happen while setting a defending timer is almost infallible. Hence the need for the possibility of human error.


This is an interesting point, and explains why the fights were more long drawn out affairs and that smaller entities could compete if playing smart, and my objective is simple in all of this, I am looking for ways to make it so that smaller entities have a reason to keep fighting, instead of staring at impossible to take down Sov modules and heading back to hisec. So really it is something that keeps people in 0.0 and trying to keep their space regardless if it is low level ambush and harassment to eventual sov warfare at sov modules that can be taken.

So lets recap and add somethings:

The only thing that will work in my opinion is the following:

1. Create cheap and effective mobile bases - CCP have done this details still awaited
2. Create a way to attack passive moon income, - CCP have done this, may need adjustment
3. Reduce the EHP of sov modules where NPC pirates have not been kept down, will turn off IHUB and also reduces the time taken to online an SBU or have a low start base which increases with investment by the sov owner.
4. Dread cycle reduced to 2 minutes
5. Remove automated mails of stucture/POS attacks
6. Limit the mass that can jump through a cyno
7. Make a portable covert cyno jammer as well as the portable normal cyno jammer
8. Supers and Titans have reduced jump range
9. Sov modules can be subject to hacks to impact their RF timer

Do that and then see how it develops.

I want to see small and medium sized entities back in 0.0 feeling that if they work at it they could take space, holding it, well maybe not long term, but at least will make 0.0 more dynamic.

As for suggesting low sec, hell no, I do not like the restrictions in low sec and the impact on security standings, and I like the option to improve space aka the IHUB.


Nope still sucks


Yep

"Do that and see how ti develops" is a terrible way to evolve a game. The better way is "use your knowledge (gained by years of practical experience) of how players play and what they will and will not accept, and tailor a system around that knowledge". What some people miss is the fact that the past exists, and in that past, things were different, and because of the needs revealed in that past, the present exists in it's current form.

Things changed in the past to mitigate or eliminate some bad things (like for instance the current sov mechanics exist because of the need to deal with game breaking issues like ping ponging, insane pos based structure grinding and the extreme stagnation the old system caused, more extreme than anything seen today). Take away these things that exist now and you risk opening a Pandora's box of preventable bullshit that didn't need to happen.

And yep, it happens that way in real life too, because society's "memory" is short. People see something they think is just incredibly "inequitable" and demand change, it changes (unleashing the BS that it was put in place to curtail in the 1st place) and now this new generation of people are dealing with crap that the last generation did (crap that was already solved lol) for no real good reason.

TL:DR,. people should be less short sighted and naive in what they believe.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#272 - 2013-11-01 12:36:09 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Yep

"Do that and see how ti develops" is a terrible way to evolve a game. The better way is "use your knowledge (gained by years of practical experience) of how players play and what they will and will not accept, and tailor a system around that knowledge". What some people miss is the fact that the past exists, and in that past, things were different, and because of the needs revealed in that past, the present exists in it's current form.

Things changed in the past to mitigate or eliminate some bad things (like for instance the current sov mechanics exist because of the need to deal with game breaking issues like ping ponging, insane pos based structure grinding and the extreme stagnation the old system caused, more extreme than anything seen today). Take away these things that exist now and you risk opening a Pandora's box of preventable bullshit that didn't need to happen.

And yep, it happens that way in real life too, because society's "memory" is short. People see something they think is just incredibly "inequitable" and demand change, it changes (unleashing the BS that it was put in place to curtail in the 1st place) and now this new generation of people are dealing with crap that the last generation did (crap that was already solved lol) for no real good reason.

TL:DR,. people should be less short sighted and naive in what they believe.


Well they are in fact tweeks, not full on adjustments, which is pretty obvious to me.

The current SOV system does actually work, the issue being that there is a huge road block there called important sov timers that are too difficult for the majority of entities at this point in the game, that is where my adjustments are targetted, one can also see that tweeks are often "apply and see", as you refine things, using your experience, this is what I am doing here, this is no revolution, its evolution.

I think you are being very simplistic about the real world issues, its is hugely more complicated than that withthings happening that most people refuse to see, but I have no issues with inequality, as far as I am concerned if people work and earn that moeny then they deserve to spend it, but here is the rub, I can see the difference between that and people rigging the system to keep their benefit/position at the expense of others, and I see that in the real world and I see it in Eve.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#273 - 2013-11-01 12:53:16 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
, this is no revolution, its evolution.




No its just making it more annoying for SOV holders, no more no less.

....all while gaining nothing
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#274 - 2013-11-01 13:37:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Onictus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
, this is no revolution, its evolution.




No its just making it more annoying for SOV holders, no more no less.

....all while gaining nothing



It means that all those poor truesec systems that you never use which are on the edge of your areas of control can be attacked and you will have to defend them, of course its going to annoy you, what it will do is gain additional fights for you and for others, I guess that is not what you want is it, which will annoy you having to defend your area of control, oh the horror of it!

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#275 - 2013-11-01 13:49:53 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
, this is no revolution, its evolution.




No its just making it more annoying for SOV holders, no more no less.

....all while gaining nothing



It means that all those poor truesec systems that you never use which are on the edge of your areas of control can be attacked and you will have to defend them, of course its going to annoy you, what it will do is gain additional fights for you and for others, I guess that is not what you want is it, which will annoy you having to defend your area of control, oh the horror of it!

No, I think he's right. You shouldn't have to be FORCED to do stuff in EvE to hold sov. Sov should be just a given, as long as you can create an alliance and coalition like CFC you should really just be given everything because if you're not you'll "destroy EvE" or "spam lots of siphons" or other really cool stuff.

And like honestly, between sleeping, working, having a life and stuff there really isn't any time to be doing annoying stuff like defending your space or anything like that. We need to be fair after all.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#276 - 2013-11-01 13:55:47 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
, this is no revolution, its evolution.




No its just making it more annoying for SOV holders, no more no less.

....all while gaining nothing



It means that all those poor truesec systems that you never use which are on the edge of your areas of control can be attacked and you will have to defend them, of course its going to annoy you, what it will do is gain additional fights for you and for others, I guess that is not what you want is it, which will annoy you having to defend your area of control, oh the horror of it!




I've been defending my area pretty steadily since august, the hell with making it easy. Mainly because SOV takes a while to build back.

If you want to fight its not like we are hard find form up and and come on down.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2013-11-01 13:58:39 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
, this is no revolution, its evolution.




No its just making it more annoying for SOV holders, no more no less.

....all while gaining nothing



It means that all those poor truesec systems that you never use which are on the edge of your areas of control can be attacked and you will have to defend them, of course its going to annoy you, what it will do is gain additional fights for you and for others, I guess that is not what you want is it, which will annoy you having to defend your area of control, oh the horror of it!

No, I think he's right. You shouldn't have to be FORCED to do stuff in EvE to hold sov. Sov should be just a given, as long as you can create an alliance and coalition like CFC you should really just be given everything because if you're not you'll "destroy EvE" or "spam lots of siphons" or other really cool stuff.

And like honestly, between sleeping, working, having a life and stuff there really isn't any time to be doing annoying stuff like defending your space or anything like that. We need to be fair after all.




What he's not mentioning is that while he wants it to be really easy to come in and ninja cap a system that it takes 3 weeks to build back up the SOV to do usefull things like put in jump bridges and whatnot.
Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#278 - 2013-11-01 14:01:00 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Where timers are necessary (and they are necessary) there should be room for human error in setting them

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, but I was wondering if you would go more in depth on why timers and maybe other things should be subject to human error? The pros and cons as you see it.


Sure, although I thought this was the least controversial of the suggestions.

Right now a defender always gets to choose the time of engagement. One of the nice parts of the old POS system was you could force them to defend outside of their comfort zone using a number of methods. You could attack at a time or place they weren't expecting and get a badly stronted tower. You could repeatedly reinforce lots of towers to make the defender either burn out their current logistics people or recruit new ones (who might be incompetent or untrustworthy) and you could kite a tower, choosing to leave your capital fleet at risk for longer in exchange for a more favourable timer. Smart, bold or persistent attackers should be able to get an engagement time more to their liking and that can't happen while setting a defending timer is almost infallible. Hence the need for the possibility of human error.


This is an interesting point, and explains why the fights were more long drawn out affairs and that smaller entities could compete if playing smart, and my objective is simple in all of this, I am looking for ways to make it so that smaller entities have a reason to keep fighting, instead of staring at impossible to take down Sov modules and heading back to hisec. So really it is something that keeps people in 0.0 and trying to keep their space regardless if it is low level ambush and harassment to eventual sov warfare at sov modules that can be taken.

So lets recap and add somethings:

The only thing that will work in my opinion is the following:

1. Create cheap and effective mobile bases - CCP have done this details still awaited
2. Create a way to attack passive moon income, - CCP have done this, may need adjustment
3. Reduce the EHP of sov modules where NPC pirates have not been kept down, will turn off IHUB and also reduces the time taken to online an SBU or have a low start base which increases with investment by the sov owner.
4. Dread cycle reduced to 2 minutes
5. Remove automated mails of stucture/POS attacks
6. Limit the mass that can jump through a cyno
7. Make a portable covert cyno jammer as well as the portable normal cyno jammer
8. Supers and Titans have reduced jump range
9. Sov modules can be subject to hacks to impact their RF timer

Do that and then see how it develops.

I want to see small and medium sized entities back in 0.0 feeling that if they work at it they could take space, holding it, well maybe not long term, but at least will make 0.0 more dynamic.

As for suggesting low sec, hell no, I do not like the restrictions in low sec and the impact on security standings, and I like the option to improve space aka the IHUB.


10. add a nuke button next to the undock button, pushing it will randomly nuke goons all over new eden

this feature in particular will be refreshing and fun for the playerbase, I highly recommend adding it in the next expansion: Goonidoom

Harry Forever vs. Goonswarm
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#279 - 2013-11-01 14:07:46 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Yeep wrote:
Where timers are necessary (and they are necessary) there should be room for human error in setting them

I'm not saying it is right or wrong, but I was wondering if you would go more in depth on why timers and maybe other things should be subject to human error? The pros and cons as you see it.


Sure, although I thought this was the least controversial of the suggestions.

Right now a defender always gets to choose the time of engagement. One of the nice parts of the old POS system was you could force them to defend outside of their comfort zone using a number of methods. You could attack at a time or place they weren't expecting and get a badly stronted tower. You could repeatedly reinforce lots of towers to make the defender either burn out their current logistics people or recruit new ones (who might be incompetent or untrustworthy) and you could kite a tower, choosing to leave your capital fleet at risk for longer in exchange for a more favourable timer. Smart, bold or persistent attackers should be able to get an engagement time more to their liking and that can't happen while setting a defending timer is almost infallible. Hence the need for the possibility of human error.


This is an interesting point, and explains why the fights were more long drawn out affairs and that smaller entities could compete if playing smart, and my objective is simple in all of this, I am looking for ways to make it so that smaller entities have a reason to keep fighting, instead of staring at impossible to take down Sov modules and heading back to hisec. So really it is something that keeps people in 0.0 and trying to keep their space regardless if it is low level ambush and harassment to eventual sov warfare at sov modules that can be taken.

So lets recap and add somethings:

The only thing that will work in my opinion is the following:

1. Create cheap and effective mobile bases - CCP have done this details still awaited
2. Create a way to attack passive moon income, - CCP have done this, may need adjustment
3. Reduce the EHP of sov modules where NPC pirates have not been kept down, will turn off IHUB and also reduces the time taken to online an SBU or have a low start base which increases with investment by the sov owner.
4. Dread cycle reduced to 2 minutes
5. Remove automated mails of stucture/POS attacks
6. Limit the mass that can jump through a cyno
7. Make a portable covert cyno jammer as well as the portable normal cyno jammer
8. Supers and Titans have reduced jump range
9. Sov modules can be subject to hacks to impact their RF timer

Do that and then see how it develops.

I want to see small and medium sized entities back in 0.0 feeling that if they work at it they could take space, holding it, well maybe not long term, but at least will make 0.0 more dynamic.

As for suggesting low sec, hell no, I do not like the restrictions in low sec and the impact on security standings, and I like the option to improve space aka the IHUB.


10. add a nuke button next to the undock button, pushing it will randomly nuke goons all over new eden

this feature in particular will be refreshing and fun for the playerbase, I highly recommend adding it in the next expansion: Goonidoom


You should form a public fleet, I never got to awox you.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#280 - 2013-11-01 14:14:58 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
, this is no revolution, its evolution.




No its just making it more annoying for SOV holders, no more no less.

....all while gaining nothing



It means that all those poor truesec systems that you never use which are on the edge of your areas of control can be attacked and you will have to defend them, of course its going to annoy you, what it will do is gain additional fights for you and for others, I guess that is not what you want is it, which will annoy you having to defend your area of control, oh the horror of it!

No, I think he's right. You shouldn't have to be FORCED to do stuff in EvE to hold sov. Sov should be just a given, as long as you can create an alliance and coalition like CFC you should really just be given everything because if you're not you'll "destroy EvE" or "spam lots of siphons" or other really cool stuff.

And like honestly, between sleeping, working, having a life and stuff there really isn't any time to be doing annoying stuff like defending your space or anything like that. We need to be fair after all.




What he's not mentioning is that while he wants it to be really easy to come in and ninja cap a system that it takes 3 weeks to build back up the SOV to do usefull things like put in jump bridges and whatnot.


Make it possible, does that scare you? Means you cannot run around New Eden with cheerful abandon...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp