These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance

First post First post First post
Author
Leisha Miranen
Doomheim
#641 - 2015-03-09 20:05:37 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
[quote=Acuma]If a single inty can take sovereignty uncontested, it's probably an unused system the defender shouldn't have sovereignty over anyways....working as intended? How far can one inty go in 12 minutes when they are alerted to you RFing?


Or more likely they've just logged on in their TZ on the other side of the world with five other buddies and the rest of eve is super quiet. I've been through some of the busiest areas of null in the middle of the night and not seen a soul.

Not because it's unused space, but because human beings need sleep so we don't die \o/
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#642 - 2015-03-09 20:05:43 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
i move to another objective

Good, meanwhile I recap this one at upto 4x the speed because of my defensive indices.

So you're against a 4x timer as well remember?

okay? i am still out there generating timers, demanding a response while not being actually catchable while you have to recap, find where I am, and waddle your ass out there with your crappy warp speed
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#643 - 2015-03-09 20:06:29 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
i move to another objective

Good, meanwhile I recap this one at upto 4x the speed because of my defensive indices.

So you're against a 4x timer as well remember?

okay? i am still out there generating timers, demanding a response while not being actually catchable while you have to recap, find where I am, and waddle your ass out there with your crappy warp speed

And each of your little 1/4 of the time it takes a defender timers means you're wasting 4x as much of your own time as you are of a defenders?

1337 trolling Roll

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#644 - 2015-03-09 20:06:44 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smileBig smile I'm sorry, WHAT?
Okay, I'll be gentle. Let me refresh your memory.
Quote:
I'll quit yanking your chain now, because yes, you make it easy.

However you posted this...

Quote:
because if we can reduce the headache for us and make the system actually livable for people who are not us we achieve what we in the biz like to call "objective benefit"

we can occasionally get what we want without it necessarily coming at the expense of everyone else, weird as it is to see written
End Quote


I will be the first to state that on a very LARGE number of occasions Goons have spoken out against certain mechanics and proposed changes even with those changes might have benefited them (or at least hurt them less extensively than others) if they felt those changes would harm the game overall.

And on those many, frequent, occasions I applaud you... often adding my personal support when you were being dismissed by most as merely trolling or seeking to feather your own nest.

I'll also state that I'm not fond of how frequently cepters will be used to troll sov if left as things are now. I much prefer it require at least a little more commitment (not much though). Ceptor hunting is just an irritating way to spend time.

However, the plus side of easily being able to take sov from someone if they can't put up at least a token resistance (one ship per contested unit) is huge... in fact, it is necessary. Finding the correct balance point is the tricky part.

However, if you continue to pose your arguments as :

We want good fights.
Using ceptors doesn't generate good fights.
Using ceptors against us won't work.
If we take YOUR sov we'll use ceptors, because otherwise there would be a good fight...

Then you'll continue to look silly and self serving.

Other entities, large and small, are well able to defend sov assets from mass ceptor sperges... assuming they haven't bitten off more sov than they can hold. You have zero advantage in that department.

I'm quite sure you can cover more territory than most anyone else, and you well deserve that... but don't try to convince folks that your ceptor spam will be a threat to anyone other than those that bite off more sov than they can cover.

Your main threat to other peoples sov is your main combat fleet, as it should be. Ceptor spam is relatively meaningless for anyone but other large entities that over reach themselves.


How you could possibly, conceivably, believe that the main point of that post was that you just claimed?

I suppose if I were a typical anti-goon poster hell bent of disagreeing with everything you say you could certainly jump to that conclusion. However, that's not the case. I'm often firmly on your side.

I'm pointing out that this time around, you are purposefully (and obviously) trying to convince people that this won't harm you nearly as much as it will harm others. That's hogwash and you know it.

It's not a good mechanic as is, I heartily agree... but your current line of argument in this is ****-poor and you aren't helping your cause.

nah, it's exactly as I said

here's the operative point of your post

Quote:

However, if you continue to pose your arguments as :

We want good fights.
Using ceptors doesn't generate good fights.
Using ceptors against us won't work.
If we take YOUR sov we'll use ceptors, because otherwise there would be a good fight...

Then you'll continue to look silly and self serving.


that is the part where you call me a hypocrite because i and mine clearly want "good fights"

then there's a line about holding more sov than you can control which is too nebulous to actually be an argument because who decides how much sov is too much to hold

so yeah not convinced

So, the one quip in there that you can argue against is your focus.
Meanwhile the rather obvious statement about holding sov in more territory than can be covered is "too nebulous "?
You can do far better than this, perhaps you should let Baltec1 take over... he's a lot better at this and actually thinks about what he's saying first.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Acuma
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#645 - 2015-03-09 20:06:57 UTC
Leisha Miranen wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
[quote=Acuma]If a single inty can take sovereignty uncontested, it's probably an unused system the defender shouldn't have sovereignty over anyways....working as intended? How far can one inty go in 12 minutes when they are alerted to you RFing?


Or more likely they've just logged on in their TZ on the other side of the world with five other buddies and the rest of eve is super quiet. I've been through some of the busiest areas of null in the middle of the night and not seen a soul.

Not because it's unused space, but because human beings need sleep so we don't die \o/

But you have a 4 hour window set by the defender to do this.....who cares if you fly around a trollcepto when it can't even activate the link on anything?
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#646 - 2015-03-09 20:07:15 UTC
i am running out of ways to describe the central point of an interceptor not being able to be caught and forcing a disproportionate response to its efforts

hope you guys are ready for even more repetitive posting than we already have
Leisha Miranen
Doomheim
#647 - 2015-03-09 20:07:25 UTC
Acuma wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
both of these suffer from the problem where the ship attacking the interceptor is somehow able to keep the interceptor inside of its optimal at any point

interceptors get to, y'know, move, especially when they see long range turret ships on dscan

eft warrioring is nice and all but attacking ships that politely sit inside a turret wielding ship's optimal just doesn't happen when the targeted ship can move freely

I just sit at zero and sensor damp you...you lose lock and your cycle is reset whilst mine, being at zero, continues ticking. I have no need to chase you.

i move to another objective

So you lose, and will lose again to another frigate or inty. You will continue this game of flying around accomplishing nothing for hours on end.....congrats, you won eve.


Umm......aint nothing gon' catch a good inty pilot who doesn't want to be caught, save for an insta-locker on a gate (which then only has a 50% chance since it's down to server tick at that scan resolution).
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#648 - 2015-03-09 20:08:02 UTC
i feel that the unassailable correctness of our position is well illustrated by how even the most fervent the sky is red posters in this thread cannot come up with a situation where the interceptor is actually at risk and instead rely on pretending that interceptors can't change systems

when your entire defense is that "well of course you can't kill the interceptor but you can force it to spend thirty seconds moving to another objective" you're sort of conceding that you have no good points to make
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Mordus Angels
#649 - 2015-03-09 20:08:05 UTC
fleet report of what the current SOV meta creates....

http://scanner.black-legion.us/index.php?ino=161760

it just rolled thru our home system of 5z and RF'd a bunch of structures a few min ago.

how is that meta anymore unfair than the fear of troll ceptors? and the possible new SOV mechanics that are being discussed?

at the end of the day..the old mechanics must die , and new ones at least given a chance...

If these large groups are as good as they say they are , they should be able to withstand anything... so why even worry?



Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#650 - 2015-03-09 20:08:31 UTC
I would love to see the Entosis Link fit on Battlecruiser hulls or Above only, because of (made up) lore reasons Cool

But then you have to balance SB's beforehand and ignore the opponents of cloaky ships can no longer decloak ships crowd.

source: https://www.pandemic-legion.com/forums/showthread.php?16868-CCP-Announce-EVE-Online-Apocrypha-1-1-deployment-Thursday-16th-April-2009

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#651 - 2015-03-09 20:08:50 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Promiscuous Female wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:

185 Dps instantly applied at that range to a moving target at 5km/s says no.

Am I winning thread now?

Edit: For that matter, a loki can get 2.4k alpha at 110km that will track a sebo fit malediction perfectly at that range.


Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:

1 bil to you if you link me a lone ceptor fit to lock to 250km (and that fit isn't shopped).

Soooo much ignorance of basic mechanics in this thread.

obviously i can't do 250km, nor did i ever state that you could

you don't need to lock to 250km to be effective

a malediction's 110km is plenty of buffer

4x countered (still got rigs, highslots and a lowslot to spare)

http://i.imgur.com/eyMzXd8.jpg


both of these suffer from the problem where the ship attacking the interceptor is somehow able to keep the interceptor inside of its optimal at any point

interceptors get to, y'know, move, especially when they see long range turret ships on dscan

eft warrioring is nice and all but attacking ships that politely sit inside a turret wielding ship's optimal just doesn't happen when the targeted ship can move freely

re: the maulus, great, you stopped one RF event, interceptor disengages and uses its superior warp speed to get to another one

The eagle has a 50-150km engagement range with thorium. Load Javelin and you can hit him down to 20km. Less then that and you have to deal with drones, webs, scrams, and medium neuts. That's a total engagement profile from 0 to 150km against your 110km-locking sebo fit malediction. Done.

Oh and the maulus? The maulus keeps you damped to **** at ANY range you can lock at and kills you with frigate turrets, or better yet, warrior II's (if you get within 45km) which you won't be able to lock because damps.

But you're CFC, you should know all about that from F*** You Fleet.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#652 - 2015-03-09 20:08:51 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
i move to another objective

Good, meanwhile I recap this one at upto 4x the speed because of my defensive indices.

So you're against a 4x timer as well remember?

okay? i am still out there generating timers, demanding a response while not being actually catchable while you have to recap, find where I am, and waddle your ass out there with your crappy warp speed

And each of your little 1/4 of the time it takes a defender timers means you're wasting 4x as much of your own time as you are of a defenders?

1337 trolling Roll

considering that i don't have to stay on grid for the entire 10 minutes by choosing to abandon the objective and disengage in at worst 2 minutes to continue poking while you have to stay there for longer, yes, i am wasting a shitload more time of yours than I am mine
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#653 - 2015-03-09 20:08:56 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
i move to another objective

Good, meanwhile I recap this one at upto 4x the speed because of my defensive indices.

So you're against a 4x timer as well remember?

okay? i am still out there generating timers, demanding a response while not being actually catchable while you have to recap, find where I am, and waddle your ass out there with your crappy warp speed

Sigh.

Or they plant a disposable alt in a crappy tanked Cruiser at each sov structure and promptly ignore you.

Rough huh?

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#654 - 2015-03-09 20:09:15 UTC
"having to risk a single ship will be an insurmountable risk for us" - moa, npc characters, etc

if risking a single ship to try to place sov in reinforced is too big a risk for you even highsec isn't for you, it's time to move back to wow
Acuma
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#655 - 2015-03-09 20:10:41 UTC
Leisha Miranen wrote:
Acuma wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
both of these suffer from the problem where the ship attacking the interceptor is somehow able to keep the interceptor inside of its optimal at any point

interceptors get to, y'know, move, especially when they see long range turret ships on dscan

eft warrioring is nice and all but attacking ships that politely sit inside a turret wielding ship's optimal just doesn't happen when the targeted ship can move freely

I just sit at zero and sensor damp you...you lose lock and your cycle is reset whilst mine, being at zero, continues ticking. I have no need to chase you.

i move to another objective

So you lose, and will lose again to another frigate or inty. You will continue this game of flying around accomplishing nothing for hours on end.....congrats, you won eve.


Umm......aint nothing gon' catch a good inty pilot who doesn't want to be caught, save for an insta-locker on a gate (which then only has a 50% chance since it's down to server tick at that scan resolution).


Umm....so a good inty pilot is going to spend hours and hours a day just warping around accomplishing nothing but retreating. Who cares, eventually that will become mind numbingly dull and the attacker will go back home......since it only takes one inty to counter them.
Alavaria Fera
Imperial Shipment
#656 - 2015-03-09 20:11:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
MASSADEATH wrote:
fleet report of what the current SOV meta creates....

http://scanner.black-legion.us/index.php?ino=161760

it just rolled thru our home system of 5z and RF'd a bunch of structures a few min ago.

how is that meta anymore unfair than the fear of troll ceptors? and the possible new SOV mechanics that are being discussed?

at the end of the day..the old mechanics must die , and new ones at least given a chance...

If these large groups are as good as they say they are , they should be able to withstand anything... so why even worry?

But you live in npc, not sov space? Wait are you crying because things in your home are being shot?

You definitely want to troll sov, not hold it.

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 ?

Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#657 - 2015-03-09 20:11:45 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
considering that i don't have to stay on grid for the entire 10 minutes by choosing to abandon the objective and disengage in at worst 2 minutes to continue poking while you have to stay there for longer, yes, i am wasting a shitload more time of yours than I am mine

No, you'd have to stay on grid 40mins if you wanted to RF a single structure in a well defended system. And you'd get countered in the 38th minute by an EWAR frig at zero who'd then just sit there for 10.

Epic trolls m8, you sure showed them.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Tycho VI
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#658 - 2015-03-09 20:13:02 UTC
Freelancer117 wrote:
I would love to see the Entosis Link fit on Battlecruiser hulls or Above only, because of (made up) lore reasons Cool

But then you have to balance SB's beforehand and ignore the opponents of cloaky ships can no longer decloak ships crowd.

source: https://www.pandemic-legion.com/forums/showthread.php?16868-CCP-Announce-EVE-Online-Apocrypha-1-1-deployment-Thursday-16th-April-2009



yeah i more or less imagine entosis being a medium of boarding the structure with stormtroopers....and frigates have just a couple ppl on them :P

lore wise
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#659 - 2015-03-09 20:13:35 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
The eagle has a 50-150km engagement range with thorium. Load Javelin and you can hit him down to 20km. Less then that and you have to deal with drones, webs, scrams, and medium neuts. That's a total engagement profile from 0 to 150km against your 110km-locking sebo fit malediction. Done.

Oh and the maulus? The maulus keeps you damped to **** at ANY range and kills you with frigate turrets, or better yet, warrior II's (if you get within 45km) which you won't be able to lock because damps.

But your CFC, you should know all about that from F*** You Fleet.

http://i.imgur.com/BubJvXa.png

oh yeah that is some sick damage at 150km mmhrm
davet517
Raata Invicti
#660 - 2015-03-09 20:13:42 UTC
John McCreedy wrote:

I don't know about you but the average player plays around 3-4 hours a day during the week. Your alliance is going to set the vulnerability window to the time you play Eve. I'm going to sit there in my cloaky interceptor. Am I there to annoy you? Or am I there to reinforce your sov? You can't probe me out because I'm cloaked. You can't stop me because I'm interdiction nullified. Do you want to take the chance I can reinforce G-E? More importantly, does Brave?


You get a notice if your sov's being attacked. The whole point of this is to live in the systems that you claim. Don't live there, don't claim it. If you do live there, you don't need to camp because of one cloaky neut. If the alarms go off, respond.

Lots of red-herrings flying around here, but, nobody wants to address the elephant in the room. It's renters, mostly. Renters whose "defense" is to safe up when neuts enter system. Not to mention, shall we say, "auto-renters" that are programmed to do so. Ever lead a roaming gang through the south only to encounter system after system with one nullified tengu that warps to a POS when you enter? Mr. Dave has. It's pretty sad.

Systems that are actually occupied and used by people who can fight will have no issue here. This PR blitz is, at least to a large degree, to try to protect absentee landlord income streams.