These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Fozzie Sov - A potential nerf to trollceptors.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Josef Kennet
Deep Space Conquerors
Goonswarm Federation
#21 - 2015-07-29 17:32:02 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Josef Kennet wrote:
Make entosis for capitals only. If you cannot by a carrier you probably shouldnt waste A LOT of other players time.


Sov holders having to defend against all challengers both small and large was the idea behind fozziesov. The large entities in the game brought this on themselves when they made informal agreements of non-aggression. If nulllsec had lived up to the dream of eve and fought and tried to eliminate their neighbors instad of making nullsec into 'landlords and farmers in space' then this woud not have been necessary.

Small, poorly funded groups, having a chance to fight the big boys is what fozziesov us about and should be encouraged not artificially nerfed because it is actually working and you dont like it.


The answer is: there is no fight at all.
1 ceptor just entosis all systems into 1 reinforce again, again, again and again. He do not want this systems and dont fight for them.
This system is nice only to troll somebody.

And still if small alliance takes some space its just a matter of time when the big one will fly in and take it back. Or just fun troll them in the same way. No one (from small alliances) will move their assets in null (because they will lose it to another pair of trollcepors).

So, what we have in the end:
- no fights (especially large ones which are for me the best part of the game)
- a lot of annoying gameplay for the defenders even if the attacker dont want to take sov.
- for now there not to many people in null and will be even less

CCP should look into something different: some space should be good for living and holding and fighting of LARGE alliances and some other shouldnt be.
And the last one: why new (and not so new) players will move to null if they can make more ISK on hi-sec incursions and the only fun in null is trying to catch trollceptors?
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#22 - 2015-07-29 17:38:23 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Your definition of "fight" is too limited.


Anything that breaks up the mindless AFK ratting/mining of the blue doughnut is a positive in my mind. Anything that makes null more dangerous/unpredictable again is a good thing right now.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#23 - 2015-07-29 17:48:14 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
Yeah we did all see this coming.

How about having just the initial entosis required to be performed by minimum 5 attackers? This means small gangs can still reinforce stuff, it just eliminates the potential of one trollceptor running amok.


The issue isn't really one trollceptor running amok, it's that the offense does not really have to commit to the fight. There is no real penalty for initiating the Entosis. There is no penalty for flying off grid. There is no penalty for failing to show up to offensive timers. The offense can still blue ball as much as they want, while the defender cannot ignore any threats if they want to keep their space.

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

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#24 - 2015-07-29 18:47:29 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
If the indexes are low what are you doing with that space? Not much apparently.

Nobody is making you go rep the structures you cant be bothered to care about. Working as intended.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#25 - 2015-07-29 18:58:44 UTC
why are people not just putting a couple of kill-ships on their Ihubs during vulnerability window?

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#26 - 2015-07-30 04:06:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Josef Kennet wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Josef Kennet wrote:
Make entosis for capitals only. If you cannot by a carrier you probably shouldnt waste A LOT of other players time.


Sov holders having to defend against all challengers both small and large was the idea behind fozziesov. The large entities in the game brought this on themselves when they made informal agreements of non-aggression. If nulllsec had lived up to the dream of eve and fought and tried to eliminate their neighbors instad of making nullsec into 'landlords and farmers in space' then this woud not have been necessary.

Small, poorly funded groups, having a chance to fight the big boys is what fozziesov us about and should be encouraged not artificially nerfed because it is actually working and you dont like it.


The answer is: there is no fight at all.
1 ceptor just entosis all systems into 1 reinforce again, again, again and again. He do not want this systems and dont fight for them.
This system is nice only to troll somebody.

And still if small alliance takes some space its just a matter of time when the big one will fly in and take it back. Or just fun troll them in the same way. No one (from small alliances) will move their assets in null (because they will lose it to another pair of trollcepors).

So, what we have in the end:
- no fights (especially large ones which are for me the best part of the game)
- a lot of annoying gameplay for the defenders even if the attacker dont want to take sov.
- for now there not to many people in null and will be even less

CCP should look into something different: some space should be good for living and holding and fighting of LARGE alliances and some other shouldnt be.
And the last one: why new (and not so new) players will move to null if they can make more ISK on hi-sec incursions and the only fun in null is trying to catch trollceptors?


"I dont like it; therfore, it isnt valid game play", doesnt cut as a reason for nerfing someone elses game play.

Making the game annoying for others is a cherished EVE tradition and if you cannot deal with this in your gaming, leave EVE.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#27 - 2015-07-30 06:56:59 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
If you have a system where you can't quickly mount a defense against someone, do you really deserve to have that system?

Working as intended. Only keep the systems you can ACTUALLY defend.

What is your take on the idea that you only reinforce systems you can ACTUALLY attack?

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#28 - 2015-07-30 08:11:47 UTC
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
Yeah we did all see this coming.

How about having just the initial entosis required to be performed by minimum 5 attackers? This means small gangs can still reinforce stuff, it just eliminates the potential of one trollceptor running amok.


A minimum concurrent connection size is probably not a bad way to deal with it. Any serious offence would carry many links anyway even if just inside a carrier or whatever.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#29 - 2015-07-30 08:13:15 UTC
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
If you have a system where you can't quickly mount a defense against someone, do you really deserve to have that system?

Working as intended. Only keep the systems you can ACTUALLY defend.

What is your take on the idea that you only reinforce systems you can ACTUALLY attack?


How hard do you think it is to walk in to an abandoned warehouse and declare yourself its current occupant?
Lu Ziffer
Balanced Unity
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2015-07-30 08:20:50 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
How hard do you think it is to walk in to an abandoned warehouse and declare yourself its current occupant?

Very easy but it does not matter if your neighbour is a bored PVPer with to much ammo who just could not be bothered to put a flag on the warehouse.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2015-07-30 08:31:08 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
FT Diomedes wrote:
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
Yeah we did all see this coming.

How about having just the initial entosis required to be performed by minimum 5 attackers? This means small gangs can still reinforce stuff, it just eliminates the potential of one trollceptor running amok.


The issue isn't really one trollceptor running amok, it's that the offense does not really have to commit to the fight. There is no real penalty for initiating the Entosis. There is no penalty for flying off grid. There is no penalty for failing to show up to offensive timers. The offense can still blue ball as much as they want, while the defender cannot ignore any threats if they want to keep their space.


Why are more people not just using cyno alts?

Why are people not occupying the systems they own at prime time so interlopers are instantly seen?

Why are they not ignoring it until the near end of the cycle to burn it's fuel, then pop out with an alt and roll it back 3x faster than they sat there?

These are (mainly) serious questions. Especially the last one as with indexes up it takes you a fraction of the time to undo their work.

I was in CVA space recently in their window and it was so active it was unreal. Local like high sec in EVERY system, noone was trollceptoring there.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2015-07-30 10:49:34 UTC
Just add multipliers to the entosing speed. Simple that open up space for fozzie to balance it in detail

For example.. frigates take 2x normal time... battlecruisers 40% less. Just an example.. omg we suddenly found a role and reason for people to fly battlecruisers!!!

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Hogeron Amelan
Marquie-X.
#33 - 2015-07-30 12:28:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Hogeron Amelan
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Just add multipliers to the entosing speed. Simple that open up space for fozzie to balance it in detail

For example.. frigates take 2x normal time... battlecruisers 40% less. Just an example.. omg we suddenly found a role and reason for people to fly battlecruisers!!!



That was part of the idea to limit Entosis Links to BC and BS only.
The idea behind FozzieSov was to move sov warfare from structure shooting and Capital-Mass Blobbing to actual activity of the sov demanding party (attacker or defender).
So what was the intention in general? On one hand to reduce server lags on 500+ Capital fights by simply making them less or almost unviral to own or take sov. On the other hand it was to give all partys the possibility to actualy fight in a battle conflict to gain sov, or in other words, to find out who has the actual military superiority over the thing. That definately does not include randomly entose systems and structures without the intention to take them.

So ONE POINT was not implemented yet (or ignored) in the Sov Mechanics, that is:
With the actual mechanism you are able to take away systems from the military superior side in the area WITHOUT having the INTENTION of HOLDING the sov (over a serious amount of time). This is absolute nonsence. So to fix that, the sov attacker must be made commited to the action of taking sov. For example, by the loss of a centain value like a fleet in combat or even the one entosing ship (1-2 stationary guns like on a pos maybe?) in case when the military superior force seriously intends to hold the system. Now only the sov holder is actually made to fight for his systems. Attackers can take away sov-structures without commitment too easily. That is the imbalance now.
As long as this issue is not fixed, there will me permanetly troll-entosis fleets generating ghost fight-timers where one side blue-balls the other.
If you dont understand this point, and are a 0.0 Sov holder, you will soon...
Feyrin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2015-07-30 12:43:46 UTC
Prior to the release on Fozzie sov, someone posted and I appologize for not crediting as I cant find the original post, a excellent solution to alleviate this issue. They called it entosis shock a 10 second imobilize effect when you snap the entosis link. Makes troll ceptors slightly more catchable and doesnt mean having to add arbitary restrictions.
Hogeron Amelan
Marquie-X.
#35 - 2015-07-30 14:22:04 UTC
Feyrin wrote:
arbitary restrictions.


Cant fly a Drake??

A snap wont change anything btw, 'cause you get the message that a structure is being attacked AFTER the warmup-cycle, what is even more bulls***.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#36 - 2015-07-30 16:34:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
afkalt wrote:
Why are more people not just using cyno alts?

The interceptor ran off at 4km's or something and then I was fatigued

Hogeron Amelan wrote:
So what was the intention in general?

...

That definately does not include randomly entose systems and structures without the intention to take them.

Eh, why not, trolling sov until the owners all give up sure sounds like it would ~shake up sov~~

Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Anything that breaks up the mindless AFK ratting/mining of the blue doughnut is a positive in my mind. Anything that makes null more dangerous/unpredictable again is a good thing right now.

Anything?

Huh, I'm reminded of the magic lever in jita that drops sov in nullsec whenever it's shot at. Installed in the monument.

It definitely shook up sov

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 ?
Tappits
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#37 - 2015-07-30 16:57:55 UTC
I can fix this super easy.... REMOVE T1 ENTOSIS LINKS FROM THE GAME....

Ok thanks.
Feyrin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2015-07-30 17:25:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Feyrin
Hogeron Amelan wrote:
A snap wont change anything btw, 'cause you get the message that a structure is being attacked AFTER the warmup-cycle, what is even more bulls***.


Well the capture timer after the warmup is dependent on the index.

Defending an index of 1 is pretty hard but isn't that the idea?

All a snap addresses is using very fast nano-ships to speed off into the distance when a hostile lands on grid, effectively bypassing the restriction on being able to warp while the entosis link is active. It doesn't particularly adversely affect T2 links or the use of any other tactic that this one and simply increases the risk of using trollceptors as a tactic to a point where hopefully the benefit is more accurately balanced by the risk.
Aramis Rosicrux
Ordo Rosa Crux Templaris
#39 - 2015-07-30 17:38:27 UTC
Hogeron Amelan wrote:
It would already fix it a bit when you restrain Entosis Links to Battlecruisers and Battleships and their T2 aquivalents only. This will make a sov-attack serious buisness to both sides.

For the idea of FozzieSov was to give sov tho those who actuialy have the military power and activity in the area to hold it, small roaming gangs like Ceptors and Nano-Cruisers are definately no military power to seriously hold sov and therefor just meta. Seriously you can't expect an alliance to ninja-form everytime a troll-ceptor goes suicide-entosing to drag a fleet out.




Hogeron is absolutely correct. Letting individuals sneak in and disrupt your timers in ten minutes really breaks it all.

Inteceptors just makes it easy for the trolls.

Support Space Science!! Join the Planetary Society!

planetarysociety.org

==============

About Aramis Rosicrux

My EveBoard Signature PNG
Hogeron Amelan
Marquie-X.
#40 - 2015-07-30 17:59:46 UTC
Feyrin wrote:


Defending an index of 1 is pretty hard but isn't that the idea?


This is correct, but incomplete.This is the idea, but is is differnet when you have 50 systems attacked simultaniously of an Index of, lets say, 1.9 - 3 without any further porpose by the attackers to take it but just to anoy the owners.

Taking a system at index 1 with an Interceptor or a battlecruiser makes no difference for both sides, when the attackers do not defend at all and the attackers intend to hold it, that is not the point..