These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenshae Chiroptera
#1641 - 2015-03-16 16:29:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Veskrashen wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
SOV is stagnant because Low Sec is not the next step from High Sec and a viable place to grow alliances to the point they can challenge Null alliances.

Hint: Folks in lowsec generally want little to nothing to do with owning sov, see it as it's own endgame, and don't have any desire to be a place to grow more nullbears.
Hint: Low Sec numbers are tiny and they can all be catered for in "War Frontier" systems.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1642 - 2015-03-16 16:34:21 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Veskrashen wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
SOV is stagnant because Low Sec is not the next step from High Sec and a viable place to grow alliances to the point they can challenge Null alliances.

Hint: Folks in lowsec generally want little to nothing to do with owning sov, see it as it's own endgame, and don't have any desire to be a place to grow more nullbears.
Hint: Low Sec numbers are tiny and they call all be catered for in "War Frontier" systems.


Both correct. Been saying it for a while, null sec and low sec attract different types of players (in many ways, Low Sec PVErs are different from nul PVErs, those low sec guys are crazy brave, I see probes on scna in null I'm warping so they can't find my escaltion while the low sec cats are looking for a fight lol).

This is why I think retrofitting a 'low sec style' system that encourages small gangs and solo and tiny-fast subcapitals to the detriment of organized fleets and Capitals is a mistake. In other words, "yo CCP, why you get low sec all up in my null sec?" lol
Exigo Venamis
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1643 - 2015-03-16 16:36:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Exigo Venamis
I'm a noob and don't have any sov experience, but it seems to me that being able to flee after using the entosis is wrong. Using it should keep the ship in grid for a considerable amount of time, especially with interceptors. Risk vs reward. I don't think ceptors should be banned from using it, because it's still a viable strategy to have a small gang of ceptors bypass a gate camp and attempt to draw a fight, but they shouldn't be able to flee at will after activating the link. My 2 isk.
Blastil
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#1644 - 2015-03-16 17:02:40 UTC
Yroc Jannseen wrote:
Blastil wrote:
has anyone considered the possiblity of using scripts to allow people to choose what kind of engagement they will have, but that this will impose some kind of restriction on your Entosis link?

It could for example be like a sensor damp, where you choose between scan res and range.

It could work something like this:

Entrenchment Script: Exchanges range for speed, causing the entosis linking ship to be a long-range, but slow moving target.
Skirmish Script: Exchanges speed for range, forcing your ship into a closer range engagement but with minimal or no speed penalty.
No Script: Gives a mixture of both speed loss and range.

This lets you certainly have trollceptors, but only if you're willing to sit still at long range, or be really fast, but within a reasonable engagement range (20-40 KM sounds good to me). It also lets you decide to use plenty of reasonable strategies, and even be flexible in deployment without allowing game breaking mechanics. But generally speaking I would like the Entosis link to be a commitment, kind of like a warp disruption sphere. I think that if you want it to be a fighting mechanic, you need to make the link be like any of the other commitment mechanics. Once that link goes hot, you have to sit out the timer, and wait for whatever happens to happen.


Someone else did bring up scripts, but not in this exact way I believe.

I think this is interesting, exact numbers of course might be off, but something along these lines does add choice and flexibility. I don't think this solves trollceptors. Activating the module should have a base speed penalty or upper speed limit that scripts then work on top of.


obviously CCP Fozzie is the master at charts and tables, but I think that in general the idea is sound in giving Entosis links negative effects for activation that can be changed through scripts.

I'm curious though about the statement why this wouldn't solve the problem with troll ceptors? After all, the bigest problem with troll-ceptors is that they're hard to kill when the link is active (their mobility off the field is irrelevant). and can be kiting out at 150 KM with no real penalty. But if you had say a 5 min activation timer which you couldn't cancel and you were forced to go even 50% slower at 150 KM, even the fastest of interceptors would be easily caught by cruisers or even some T1 frigates with afterburners. if you force them to close range for the e-link, then they're more than welcome to go 4km/s, as long as my light missiles or warriors can catch up to them, they're toast.
Phil Maken
Caecus Indespectus Invisibilis
#1645 - 2015-03-16 21:12:20 UTC
Make the Entosis Link usable on gates in 0-Sec, and add a X second local delay for the gate or the pilot going though the gate on successful activation.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1646 - 2015-03-16 21:51:18 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
In other words, "yo CCP, why you get low sec all up in my null sec?" lol

If getting some lowsec all up in their nullsec gets the average line pilot out in space on a regular basis, risking life and limb, creating a vibrant maelstrom of destruction on a daily basis - as opposed to folks playing DOTA while AFKtaring and waiting for a ping - then I think that's an excellent goal for CCP to shoot for.

You're right. Lowsec pilots are fundamentally different than the average nullbear. We don't take our personal security for granted, we don't rely on passive bubblecamps for defense, we don't assume a "reputation tank" will keep our assets safe from harm, we PvE in PvP fit boats. Nullsec could use a shakeup, and if its pilots become less risk averse pansy fleetbears reliant on a supercap umbrella and "reputation tank" then the entirety of EVE will probably be better off for it.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
#1647 - 2015-03-16 21:51:22 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Null anom income is good but anoms (which should have never been press-ganged into being the center of the Dominion systems upgrades scheme) are predictable , soloable and semi-afkable. That means you end up with people afk ratting with Ishtars and other ships making less than what they would make playing actively OR playing outside of null (every combat pve way to make isk above what null anoms generates requires the player to be at the keyboard and playing).



I think changing how anoms work in all space should be one of the key parts of Phase 3. I am hoping that CCP will make anoms have a randomness that makes them difficult to solo or AFK. If I were CCP I would have a random chance of a burner mission difficulty NPC ship in the missions, make the AI smarter, increase the payouts and loot tables and make the entire anom more random instead of a static set of ships and layout that can be googled easily.

Null makes lots of ISK but other parts of the game where risk is higher and the work load is lower can make more and I think that is kind of broken. Moon profits and renter profits should trickle down more but there should also be more line member accessible content that is fun, difficult and profitable to encourage pilots to play where they live instead of going to other parts of space to make ISK. Being able to solo or AFK anything more difficult than a L3 HS mission is bad and should be fixed.

Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
Blastil
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#1648 - 2015-03-16 22:02:36 UTC
Phil Maken wrote:
Make the Entosis Link usable on gates in 0-Sec, and add a X second local delay for the gate or the pilot going though the gate on successful activation.


The mobility outside of the any site where the E-link is used is irrelevant. unless you nerfed interceptors out of existance, you'd still have problems with their ability to evade capture on gates. Besides, it does you no good to have e-linking interceptors if you have to fight, since they're made of paper and prayers, and cost almost as much as a HAC hull.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1649 - 2015-03-16 22:12:32 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
In other words, "yo CCP, why you get low sec all up in my null sec?" lol

If getting some lowsec all up in their nullsec gets the average line pilot out in space on a regular basis, risking life and limb, creating a vibrant maelstrom of destruction on a daily basis - as opposed to folks playing DOTA while AFKtaring and waiting for a ping - then I think that's an excellent goal for CCP to shoot for.

You're right. Lowsec pilots are fundamentally different than the average nullbear. We don't take our personal security for granted, we don't rely on passive bubblecamps for defense, we don't assume a "reputation tank" will keep our assets safe from harm, we PvE in PvP fit boats. Nullsec could use a shakeup, and if its pilots become less risk averse pansy fleetbears reliant on a supercap umbrella and "reputation tank" then the entirety of EVE will probably be better off for it.


That's just the useless and common low sec chauvinism that isn't helpful. Every time there is a change to null there are ignorant outsiders who spew their prejudices across the discussion. The funny thing is tha tit's those ignorant outsiders who end up catching hell (kind of like the wormhole types who cheered at the jump changes but didn't realize that their money making wormholes just became travel routes...).

Wouldn't it be funny is part of fall of of FW2.0SOV was more and more null bears flooding low sec because holding sov sucks now lol. See y'all soon.
Miner Hottie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1650 - 2015-03-16 23:03:20 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
In other words, "yo CCP, why you get low sec all up in my null sec?" lol

If getting some lowsec all up in their nullsec gets the average line pilot out in space on a regular basis, risking life and limb, creating a vibrant maelstrom of destruction on a daily basis - as opposed to folks playing DOTA while AFKtaring and waiting for a ping - then I think that's an excellent goal for CCP to shoot for.

You're right. Lowsec pilots are fundamentally different than the average nullbear. We don't take our personal security for granted, we don't rely on passive bubblecamps for defense, we don't assume a "reputation tank" will keep our assets safe from harm, we PvE in PvP fit boats. Nullsec could use a shakeup, and if its pilots become less risk averse pansy fleetbears reliant on a supercap umbrella and "reputation tank" then the entirety of EVE will probably be better off for it.


Beats chest about being space brave compared to average null sec memeber and being prepared to lose his ships, all from the safety of an NPC station which can't be conquered, can't be bubble camped and can never be properly hell camped. You then spout about defensive bubbles. Wow, talk abouy living in the past, Fozzie fixed that when he gave inties bubble immunity. Back to low sec with you and your opinions son.

It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1651 - 2015-03-16 23:12:23 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Veskrashen wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
In other words, "yo CCP, why you get low sec all up in my null sec?" lol

If getting some lowsec all up in their nullsec gets the average line pilot out in space on a regular basis, risking life and limb, creating a vibrant maelstrom of destruction on a daily basis - as opposed to folks playing DOTA while AFKtaring and waiting for a ping - then I think that's an excellent goal for CCP to shoot for.

You're right. Lowsec pilots are fundamentally different than the average nullbear. We don't take our personal security for granted, we don't rely on passive bubblecamps for defense, we don't assume a "reputation tank" will keep our assets safe from harm, we PvE in PvP fit boats. Nullsec could use a shakeup, and if its pilots become less risk averse pansy fleetbears reliant on a supercap umbrella and "reputation tank" then the entirety of EVE will probably be better off for it.


That's just the useless and common low sec chauvinism that isn't helpful. Every time there is a change to null there are ignorant outsiders who spew their prejudices across the discussion. The funny thing is tha tit's those ignorant outsiders who end up catching hell (kind of like the wormhole types who cheered at the jump changes but didn't realize that their money making wormholes just became travel routes...).

Wouldn't it be funny is part of fall of of FW2.0SOV was more and more null bears flooding low sec because holding sov sucks now lol. See y'all soon.



You seem bitter.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#1652 - 2015-03-17 00:06:24 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
You're right. Lowsec pilots are fundamentally different than the average nullbear.


If by different, you mean having better income and no responsibilities to defend space, then yes, different is a good word.

It's altogether loopy that people have FW alts to make themselves cash when their mains are in null. I don't get the hate - FW gives lowsec people a good, consistent income stream to support continued ship loss. Shouldn't nullsec also offer competitive bottom up income to sustain losses? It should strike any thinking person as odd that people would rather have an alt in FW to make money to sustain nullsec ship losses than actually use the space where they live.

Remote income sourcing is the bane of content in this game.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#1653 - 2015-03-17 00:26:26 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Veskrashen wrote:
You're right. Lowsec pilots are fundamentally different than the average nullbear.


If by different, you mean having better income and no responsibilities to defend space, then yes, different is a good word.

It's altogether loopy that people have FW alts to make themselves cash when their mains are in null. I don't get the hate - FW gives lowsec people a good, consistent income stream to support continued ship loss. Shouldn't nullsec also offer competitive bottom up income to sustain losses? It should strike any thinking person as odd that people would rather have an alt in FW to make money to sustain nullsec ship losses than actually use the space where they live.

Remote income sourcing is the bane of content in this game.



This is very true and I cannot "+1" it enough.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1654 - 2015-03-17 02:37:56 UTC
Miner Hottie wrote:
Veskrashen wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
In other words, "yo CCP, why you get low sec all up in my null sec?" lol

If getting some lowsec all up in their nullsec gets the average line pilot out in space on a regular basis, risking life and limb, creating a vibrant maelstrom of destruction on a daily basis - as opposed to folks playing DOTA while AFKtaring and waiting for a ping - then I think that's an excellent goal for CCP to shoot for.

You're right. Lowsec pilots are fundamentally different than the average nullbear. We don't take our personal security for granted, we don't rely on passive bubblecamps for defense, we don't assume a "reputation tank" will keep our assets safe from harm, we PvE in PvP fit boats. Nullsec could use a shakeup, and if its pilots become less risk averse pansy fleetbears reliant on a supercap umbrella and "reputation tank" then the entirety of EVE will probably be better off for it.


Beats chest about being space brave compared to average null sec memeber and being prepared to lose his ships, all from the safety of an NPC station which can't be conquered, can't be bubble camped and can never be properly hell camped. You then spout about defensive bubbles. Wow, talk abouy living in the past, Fozzie fixed that when he gave inties bubble immunity. Back to low sec with you and your opinions son.

As if you can make them leave?

Please, interdiction nullified platforms for sov lasers, it's you who will be leaving null sec

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 ?
davet517
Raata Invicti
#1655 - 2015-03-17 03:05:51 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:


It's altogether loopy that people have FW alts to make themselves cash when their mains are in null. I don't get the hate - FW gives lowsec people a good, consistent income stream to support continued ship loss. Shouldn't nullsec also offer competitive bottom up income to sustain losses? It should strike any thinking person as odd that people would rather have an alt in FW to make money to sustain nullsec ship losses than actually use the space where they live.

Remote income sourcing is the bane of content in this game.



No, it's not loopy, and it's always been that way. Before there was anything but missions and mining in high sec people still had high-sec alts to make cash. Nullsec mirrors the "trickle down economics" of the real world. A few guys at the top get rich from passive income. The "middle class" just gets by, but, they're happy being middle class if they get to have a tag that gives them bragging rights.

People who have that joiner mentality but are still a little self-interested have always had alts on the side so that they could profit from play time that was not subject to CTAs, the ambitions of their bosses, and reversals of fortune, and probably always will. If you took all of the passive income sources away - e.g. made renting out space and holding large numbers of moons impractical, the most likely outcome would be rising taxes. The folks who make it to the top will still want to get rich for their trouble.
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#1656 - 2015-03-17 05:26:15 UTC
davet517 wrote:
Vic Jefferson wrote:


It's altogether loopy that people have FW alts to make themselves cash when their mains are in null. I don't get the hate - FW gives lowsec people a good, consistent income stream to support continued ship loss. Shouldn't nullsec also offer competitive bottom up income to sustain losses? It should strike any thinking person as odd that people would rather have an alt in FW to make money to sustain nullsec ship losses than actually use the space where they live.

Remote income sourcing is the bane of content in this game.



No, it's not loopy, and it's always been that way. Before there was anything but missions and mining in high sec people still had high-sec alts to make cash. Nullsec mirrors the "trickle down economics" of the real world. A few guys at the top get rich from passive income. The "middle class" just gets by, but, they're happy being middle class if they get to have a tag that gives them bragging rights.

People who have that joiner mentality but are still a little self-interested have always had alts on the side so that they could profit from play time that was not subject to CTAs, the ambitions of their bosses, and reversals of fortune, and probably always will. If you took all of the passive income sources away - e.g. made renting out space and holding large numbers of moons impractical, the most likely outcome would be rising taxes. The folks who make it to the top will still want to get rich for their trouble.


Why should we make our own taxes ourselves instead of just renting it to serfs to rat for us?

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
Jenshae Chiroptera
#1657 - 2015-03-17 05:38:45 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
In other words, "yo CCP, why you get low sec all up in my null sec?" lol
If getting some lowsec all up in their nullsec gets the average line pilot out in space on a regular basis, ...
Low Sec is barren, so many systems so few players .... how can it be good to make Null Sec more like that?

The general response seems to be this:

Attention "We have no reason to keep SOV. So, we abandon it, go to NPC Null or Low Sec, control moons from there and burn everyone else." Attention

From what I am seeing, Goons are preparing for this and relishing it. A lot of their indy pilots are getting shot enroute to go "bank" assets in Low and High Sec stations.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1658 - 2015-03-17 06:31:58 UTC
Funny, Jen, your sig about hills and magnifying glasses and all I could think was that CCP is going to have fanfest to celebrate an eclipse

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1659 - 2015-03-17 07:30:50 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
From what I am seeing, Goons are preparing for this and relishing it. A lot of their indy pilots are getting shot enroute to go "bank" assets in Low and High Sec stations.

I hadn't heard about this. They're idiots.

Name and shame.

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 ?
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1660 - 2015-03-17 10:05:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Speedkermit Damo
Jenn aSide wrote:
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Dras Malar wrote:

Fozzie says people are making, and I quote, "****-tons" of isk in ratting anomalies, therefore, everthing is fine.


Come on now, hands up everyone that's making tons of isk ratting in nullsec, where are you all?

Botters don't count Fozzie.


It's not just botters, null anom isk making is superior to everything else in one aspect: Instant isk, no hauling, no converting stuff. The real problem is that people with high end knowledge can make way way more elsewhere which defeats the need for those same higher end PVErs to "live' in null. Thus the Rental Desert null became.

Null anom income is good but anoms (which should have never been press-ganged into being the center of the Dominion systems upgrades scheme) are predictable , soloable and semi-afkable. That means you end up with people afk ratting with Ishtars and other ships making less than what they would make playing actively OR playing outside of null (every combat pve way to make isk above what null anoms generates requires the player to be at the keyboard and playing).

The irony is that the same broken anoms system that kills the motivations for people to really live in null generates so much semi-passive/semi-afk liquid isk (again from ships like Ishtars) that it makes it look like null is this super lucrative place to actually live when in fact it's a renters desert that alliances lend out while line members go make REAL isk elsewhere like in incursions or wormholes or Faction warfare.

Fozzie talking about how much isk null generates suggests he doesn't understand the real issue. Null needs a new "Center of PVE isk making" activity that requires players to be at the keyboard, doesn't spew liquid isk into the economy and that scales so that people who get better at using the system can make more money than 'normals' (like how people who know how to blitz missions can make more than the average casual mission runner).

Anomalies should not be removed but rather decoupled from the systems upgrades scheme and should go back to being a deplete-able resource (like they are still in wormholes) so that if people still want to farm anoms and DED escalations from anoms they can, but they have to fly around a constellation looking for them. Making systems into "anomalie farms" was one of the dumbest things CCP ever did.

Of course the above will be misconstrued by the "don't touch my high sec mission income" crowd as some from of ploy/conspiracy by nullbears to get CCP to give us more isk lol.


Much of nullsec is so ******, you can fly through system after system and not see a single anom worth running. I've lived in Providence, Stain, Venal and Curse. The only region with plentiful worthwhile anoms was Stain. When I lived in Venal, mission-running was much more worthwhile than rating ever could be.

The real isk to be made is in exploration or running dedspace sites.

Personally I no longer bother doing any PvE whatsoever anymore because the experience is so unbearable. I'd rather pay real money and sell a plex every few months to avoid any PvE.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.