These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Share your experiences with Fozziesov!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grouchy Smurf
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#221 - 2015-08-05 15:53:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Grouchy Smurf
Antylus Tyrell wrote:


Goons, you really should have shed more systems than you did. You should have pulled back to Deklein and let other people move into the areas around you.


But they are not trying to capture the systems. That's the problem. They don't want the space. There are 10 systems in Pure Blind right now that are "neutral" and wait for someone to go and capture the nodes.
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#222 - 2015-08-05 15:54:43 UTC
According to eve offline, approximately this time last year, eve had about 26k folk averaging online while now its down to 21k. The trend of decreasing online activity appears to be continuing despite fozzie sov with 18k over the last 36 hrs, 21k over the last week and 32k over the last 6 mos. While last year there was a summer decline, it was no where near has steep as this year. What ever can be said for fozzie sov, it has proven itself to not be eve Jesus. There has been no significant numbers of incoming folk, at least enough to outweigh the bitter vets it drove off, nor does it appear to have driven large numbers of players from empire to null. In fact, it appears that opinion can be broken down as follows:
(1) the majority of eve folk, i.e. non-null dwellers, who view it as "meh"
(2) null dwellers, who view it as "could be better."

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
Billy Bojangle
Doomheim
#223 - 2015-08-05 15:55:59 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
I doubt that.

None of the necessary skills have requisites, in-fact 2 hours was an over-estimate now that I check.

Lucas Kell wrote:

When a guy in a disposable ship sees that you've had to come out and chase him away, he's having even more fun.

Immaterial to the point that he's no longer a threat to your node.

Lucas Kell wrote:

Remember the problem here is they don't want to sov, so stopping them from entosising isn't a bad thing, it simply means they've wasted your time like they aimed to.

Again, immaterial. It doesn't matter that they don't want sov. just like it doesn't matter that CODE. doesn't want to haul stuff in freighters or mine in highsec themselves. Playstyles meant to destroy and annoy are valid.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#224 - 2015-08-05 16:00:50 UTC
Antylus Tyrell wrote:
Well this thread has convinced me to resub. I need to get into this trollceptor action.
Enjoy mining structures for 0isk/hour!

Antylus Tyrell wrote:
Goons, you really should have shed more systems than you did. You should have pulled back to Deklein and let other people move into the areas around you. Then you could have struck out at your leisure and expanded to a sustainable size in the new system. But you did not and now MOA has the ability to humiliate you at will.
From this alone we can tell you don't know what you are talking about. MOA aren't taking space, you know that, right? The problem isn't that they are so easily taking space, it's that the entire system is insanely boring because it's failing to generate conflict.

Antylus Tyrell wrote:
With this system the future of eve is not megacoalitions with renters who are 3/5ths of a person. It is going to be small alliances eking out their own niche in the galaxy. This is good for everyone.
The future of EVE is always megacoalitions. 2 people are stronger than 1. 10 people are stronger than 2. 1000 are stronger than 10. 50000 are stronger than 1000. No matter what gets done, it will always be beneficial to work with each other for a common goal.

The aim of this change was to lower the bar for contesting sov and condense the bigger coalitions. It's condensed them down pretty well, but lowered the bar too far.

Thanks in advance though for slinging CCP some cash so they can improve on the game once you leave again.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2015-08-05 16:03:51 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

No, I want people who want to actually be involved in sov combat to have to put in a moderate amount of commitment, just like we've had to put in a lot of time, effort and isk to get where we are. A single guy in a frigate should be zero threat to an established coalition. I get that you hate that idea, and think that collaboration is the devil (you think everything's the devil mama) but it's unrealistic to have a whole group of people have to chase down every single disposable ship to prevent their active space being taken. It's the equivalent of an entire army having to take a homeless guy with a slingshot and no pebbles seriously.


I think its unrealistic not to live or have anyone in the system and everything is Hunky Dorry aka zero effort to protect. I give more credit to the attacker than a person that does nothing and expects the system to be protected anyway. A single guy is not a threat to an esatablished coalition! A single guy to an unprotected system should be a threat to a system as is now!
But as I said we dont do single guy cos once the alarm mail goes you guys come in big numbers. I dont see any active space reinforced. Its not happening. I do however see space not active been reinforced thougth which is fare. Eitherway if its active system then its easy to protect. Cloak an arazu and wait for someone to do something to it or get another ceptor and chase him out. If you form up a 20 man gang for one guy its your fault not the one guy. its ineficient specially in protected space. Thats your fault.

Lucas Kell wrote:

I didn't need to whine about no big battles until CCP decided to get rid of them. We had battles, we fought over space, even some of the smaller groups took space. Did the system need improvement? Yes. Did the bar for entry need lowering? Yes. What's happened here is they've dropped the bar on the ground.


I dont disagree you had big and small fights. Thats not in question here . I dont see the bar lowered to the ground. I am pritty sure who ever enters and claim a system will have to brign the barrels to protect after reinforcement or get destroyed in a futile attempt. I dont see the bar lowered here. If you can wistand the heat you will survive if not you wont. It does not changes this at all. It does make space more chaotic. I am for it. I this keeps going i do concider some of thease areas will get populated by entities that can withstand the heat and others will become no mans land and constant pvp action systems. I fully support this.

Lucas Kell wrote:

*cough* Bull *cough*. When yuo're solo you go after ratters and miners. Whenever you go after combat ships it's uncommon to see you alone.


You watch too much propaganda and not enough facts.

Lucas Kell wrote:

That's because you've not had to do it. Surprise surprise, you don't know (or care) what the opposing side of the mechanic is like.


Who said I dont care. But there is a difference between caring and givng you all the advantages. Zero effort to defend a system is not thats not protected or you live in it is not balanced by any means either!

Lucas Kell wrote:

You don't see it reinforced because we live in it and chase off the attackers, that doesn't mean that nobody is coming in with trollceptors causing us to have to waste time chasing around shitfit disposable ships.


It not reinforced cos its not shows. You think we have not been looking what comes out of reinforced? We do more than you think.
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#226 - 2015-08-05 16:05:51 UTC
Antylus Tyrell wrote:
Well this thread has convinced me to resub. I need to get into this trollceptor action.

Goons, you really should have shed more systems than you did. You should have pulled back to Deklein and let other people move into the areas around you. Then you could have struck out at your leisure and expanded to a sustainable size in the new system. But you did not and now MOA has the ability to humiliate you at will.

With this system the future of eve is not megacoalitions with renters who are 3/5ths of a person. It is going to be small alliances eking out their own niche in the galaxy. This is good for everyone.




you are already subscribed or you would not be able to post Blink
Billy Bojangle
Doomheim
#227 - 2015-08-05 16:06:15 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
failing to generate conflict

There is no game mechanic that can generate a meaningful conflict. You're simply trying to blame another lame mechanic for your risk aversion.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#228 - 2015-08-05 16:08:55 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
According to eve offline, approximately this time last year, eve had about 26k folk averaging online while now its down to 21k. The trend of decreasing online activity appears to be continuing despite fozzie sov with 18k over the last 36 hrs, 21k over the last week and 32k over the last 6 mos.
I know right? I find it fun when I log on all of my accounts and make up 0.11% of the logged in population.

Billy Bojangle wrote:
None of the necessary skills have requisites, in-fact 2 hours was an over-estimate now that I check.
You misunderstand. I don;t doubt that a ship capable of disrupting entosis can be trained into that quickly, I doubt that it will end the interceptor player's fun, since you showing up makes him happier. If his goal were to take sov you'd be right, but it's not. His goal is to waste time. Us showing up is op success for him.

Billy Bojangle wrote:
Immaterial to the point that he's no longer a threat to your node.
Yup, he just flies off to the next node and repeats his trolling.

Billy Bojangle wrote:
Again, immaterial. It doesn't matter that they don't want sov. just like it doesn't matter that CODE. doesn't want to haul stuff in freighters or mine in highsec themselves. Playstyles meant to destroy and annoy are valid.
Of course it matters. It's like when kid A flicks his hand in kid B's face to make him flinch. Kid B moves and therefore is not in danger of being hit in the face, yet kid A is having a whale of a time because kid B reacted to him. That's all this is. They don't want sov, they want a reaction. Because the bar for contesting sov is so low, we have to respond or lose the sov, even for just a shitfit interceptor.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Billy Bojangle
Doomheim
#229 - 2015-08-05 16:14:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Billy Bojangle
Quote:
Because the bar for suicide ganking is so low, we have to scout and web or lose the hauler, even for just a shitfit destroyer.

Literally the same arguments risk-averse carebears make about CODE.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#230 - 2015-08-05 16:18:28 UTC
Icycle wrote:
I think its unrealistic not to live or have anyone in the system and everything is Hunky Dorry aka zero effort to protect.
I agree, but we're not talking about empty space, we're talking about space we live in, therefore I stopped reading that entire paragrah of text. Well done for continuing to be ignorant for liek the 7th time.

Icycle wrote:
I dont disagree you had big and small fights. Thats not in question here . I dont see the bar lowered to the ground. I am pritty sure who ever enters and claim a system will have to brign the barrels to protect after reinforcement or get destroyed in a futile attempt. I dont see the bar lowered here. If you can wistand the heat you will survive if not you wont. It does not changes this at all. It does make space more chaotic. I am for it. I this keeps going i do concider some of thease areas will get populated by entities that can withstand the heat and others will become no mans land and constant pvp action systems. I fully support this.
To contest sov, not necessarily take it, but to be a threat we must respond to, you need a shitfit interceptor. That's all. That's as close to the ground as it's realistically feasible to get.

Again, I know you are "for it" because you don't care about gameplay being entertaining, you only care about "grr goons".

Icycle wrote:
You watch too much propaganda and not enough facts.
Lol? We're literally talking about how I'm looking at what's actually happening rather than reading the propaganda your overlord is pushing.

Icycle wrote:
Who said I dont care. But there is a difference between caring and givng you all the advantages. Zero effort to defend a system is not thats not protected or you live in it is not balanced by any means either!
You did. You've made it abundantly clear that all you care about is how easy it is for you to contest sov without having to commit. You don;t care how entertaining the mechanics are nor how balanced they are.

Icycle wrote:
It not reinforced cos its not shows. You think we have not been looking what comes out of reinforced? We do more than you think.
Do you have reading problems or comprehensions problems. If a trollceptor shows up in our system, then we chase him off, it doesn't get reinforced, but we still had to waste our time responding. You know this, this is what you alliance is being instructed to do. How can you possibly not understand what you guys are doing?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#231 - 2015-08-05 16:20:19 UTC
Grouchy Smurf wrote:
Icycle wrote:


The title of the thread is experince of Fozzie sov. Last time i checked fozzy sov is all about sov mechanics and capturing. The only thing you can capture are the stations. Everything else blows up after contested. Whats in Pure Blind? TCUs, IHUBs and stations and POSs. If you have full SRP and you get paind 200m per hour to attack something, I can understand that what we field is disposable for you. I can asure you that for MOA its not. We dont have the luxuries. It does not mean we dont bring out others in the past thought. We do scimies + other often. If you concider a scimi + other cheap, more power to you. Its not for us by any stretch of the imagination.

I oppose to a 1 b isk module cos the modules is very expensive as it is. Your mind set is till that you got to throw a billion to kill a billion. I oppose that mind set. If you are throwing a billion to kill a billion its NOT guerilla warfare. Its a contradiction. Guerilla are fast cheap and nimble. Not expensive and slow. Thats the army!


And everyone likes Fozziesov if we ignore some problems like Trollceptors or raising indexes desperacy. Which are the two topics every debate rotates about within these 11 pages of feedback.

Now, in regards to 1 billion ISK modules, MoA has 1100 members. If you are not willing to send 1 million per member in an attempt to capture space, especially since it's unlikely that you will lose it as we mentioned earlier, then you should reconsider where the money goes. If you can't spend 1 million per member, what makes you think that you will be able to afford TCUs and Industry HUBs when you capture said system?

And stop with that guerilla bullshit. You are not engaged in "guerilla warfare" with the Imperium as you are not damaging our economic infrastructure. KarmaFleet makes more on taxes alone than what you kill in a whole month.
You want more proof that you don't participate in guerilla warfare? Half of Pure Blind is open for a second attack that will flip systems / iHubs and stations to you. Why don't you do it? Dont you want the benefits of your so-called "guerilla warfare" ?

Anyway, to return to the point of this discussion: You don't want 1 billion ISK Entosis links because you know that you won't be able to fly dozens of disposable ships per day just to troll someone. There is simply no other reason.


ps: If you really can't afford 1 billion with 1100 members and 10% tax, I am sure that your directors milk the **** out of your members. You might want to have that checked out.


Can you listen to yourself? Every one send one million isk per person per entosis link per how many in a week?
Whats next? Are you going to ask me to pay rent as well Lol. You can sucker someone into that. Not us.
I dont need to send any isk to anyone just cos you decide to leave something unprotected. Thats your fault. Not mine.

Good, you can get Karma Fleet to keep taxing them. I certainly dont pay any crazy taxes. I would tell Karma Fleet to go where you know. I participate all the time. I two entosis ships and anyone that knows me that can confirm me entosing several and enforcing a few. Just cos you dont know it does not mean it did not happen.

You are funny. You read something but you hear something else. You are like someone I know.
I said I will not pay 1b to fight 1b cos simply you decided that I should pay that cos you think that it makes perfect sence to deploy stuff into a hot area, leave it undefended and expect everything will be ok when one person attack it.

Directors dont milk nothing from me. I dont pay rent, I pay very little tax. I dont even do PI even thought I have several chracaters trained for it Lol
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#232 - 2015-08-05 16:22:03 UTC
Billy Bojangle wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
failing to generate conflict

There is no game mechanic that can generate a meaningful conflict. You're simply trying to blame another lame mechanic for your risk aversion.
Sure there is. Any mechanic that requires you to commit resources worth protecting will generate conflict. That's why the old system generated conflict, because dropping a battleship fleet and SBUs in system was worth protecting. Dropping an interceptor isn't. If the entosis link required a larger, more expensive ship, it would more frequently generate conflict.

Also I've reported your other post for impersonation. Changing quotes to make it look like people have said something they haven't is against the rules.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Billy Bojangle
Doomheim
#233 - 2015-08-05 16:28:22 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
the old system generated conflict

Really? Because the Dominion sov system was universally reviled for not generating conflict either.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#234 - 2015-08-05 16:39:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Billy Bojangle wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
the old system generated conflict

Really? Because the Dominion sov system was universally reviled for not generating conflict either.
Yeah, 'cause there used to be no fights in nullsec and now there are loads, right?

Dominion had problems with conflict where smaller groups had very little chance of getting a foothold, and that's why we were all on board with a revamp to sov than squished us down a bit and made us use our space, but fights did happen. Fights pretty much stopped when power projection did because nobody can be bothered to slowboat 40 jumps to get dropped on by the local defense fleet with no chance of escalation. Fozziesov smashed the final nail into the coffin with the end of the russian war.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Billy Bojangle
Doomheim
#235 - 2015-08-05 16:55:02 UTC
Years vs. months yields a poor sample size for comparison. I think the jury is still out. And there are sov. conflicts, just not in the north where you've got it on lock. Nothing wrong with that. Your kingdom wasn't in peril before and from the sound of it you like it that way and would prefer even less effort be required to retain that space.

Lucas Kell wrote:
Fights pretty much stopped when power projection did because nobody can be bothered to slowboat 40 jumps to get dropped on by the local defense fleet with no chance of escalation. Fozziesov smashed the final nail into the coffin with the end of the russian war.


I think you're confusing jump nerfs with aegis sov. They're separate issues. I too, dislike the fatigue mechanic. The new sov. impact on the Russians just shows how much space they had relative to their ability to defend it with an active player count.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#236 - 2015-08-05 17:03:07 UTC
Billy Bojangle wrote:
Years vs. months yields a poor sample size for comparison. I think the jury is still out. And there are sov. conflicts, just not in the north where you've got it on lock. Nothing wrong with that. Your kingdom wasn't in peril before and from the sound of it you like it that way and would prefer even less effort be required to retain that space.
You would expect people to be shifting for conflict if it was being planned. But there's none of that. Sure, there's some minor fights occurring as there always has and always will be, but nothing really substantial. There's certainly nothing newsworthy coming out of it as of yet.

Billy Bojangle wrote:
I think you're confusing jump nerfs with aegis sov. They're separate issues. I too, dislike the fatigue mechanic.
Not confusing them, just pointing out that prior to them there was plenty of conflict. Seems like we're on a downhill slope.

Billy Bojangle wrote:
The new sov. impact on the Russians just shows how much space they had relative to their ability to defend it with an active player count.
It's not so much the space, it's what happens if you are deployed and a small group shows up in your home. Large scale wars are not so simple to split attention from, so a large war wit h a large opponent leaves them open to attack from behind. Under the old system that wasn't so bad, the attackers had to commit quite heavily and you could pick the important battles. Under the new system attackers need 1 interceptor to attack a capture point. That's all. 1 interceptor. It's a much better plan to simply stop fighting with the other big guy and focus on preventing the little ones doing any serious damage. If the bar were higher there would be less threat of getting simultaneously hit at 100 different places if you deploy, so deployment would seem like a viable option.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Antylus Tyrell
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#237 - 2015-08-05 17:09:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Antylus Tyrell
Lucas Kell wrote:
From this alone we can tell you don't know what you are talking about. MOA aren't taking space, you know that, right? The problem isn't that they are so easily taking space, it's that the entire system is insanely boring because it's failing to generate conflict.


You keep saying the system is boring, but it seems that many in this thread disagree with you, the MOA people seem to be having loads of fun. Yeah, MOA is not taking space... yet.

Lucas Kell wrote:
The future of EVE is always megacoalitions. 2 people are stronger than 1. 10 people are stronger than 2. 1000 are stronger than 10. 50000 are stronger than 1000. No matter what gets done, it will always be beneficial to work with each other for a common goal.

The aim of this change was to lower the bar for contesting sov and condense the bigger coalitions. It's condensed them down pretty well, but lowered the bar too far.

Thanks in advance though for slinging CCP some cash so they can improve on the game once you leave again.



Well if that is the case why don't we all just form one big coalition... "Eve is over, we all won! we all get a participation ribbon in the conquest of the galaxy"

I bring news of freedom Lucas, your alliance does not need to be a goon lapdog anymore. Next time they blow up one of your titans you can show some spine and have a bit of self respect.
Billy Bojangle
Doomheim
#238 - 2015-08-05 17:13:43 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
You would expect people to be shifting for conflict if it was being planned. But there's none of that. Sure, there's some minor fights occurring as there always has and always will be, but nothing really substantial. There's certainly nothing newsworthy coming out of it as of yet.

Given the inertia of the major blocs, it's hard to be surprised that nothing major has come out of it yet.

Lucas Kell wrote:
It's not so much the space, it's what happens if you are deployed and a small group shows up in your home. Large scale wars are not so simple to split attention from, so a large war wit h a large opponent leaves them open to attack from behind. Under the old system that wasn't so bad, the attackers had to commit quite heavily and you could pick the important battles. Under the new system attackers need 1 interceptor to attack a capture point. That's all. 1 interceptor. It's a much better plan to simply stop fighting with the other big guy and focus on preventing the little ones doing any serious damage. If the bar were higher there would be less threat of getting simultaneously hit at 100 different places if you deploy, so deployment would seem like a viable option.


That's a very diplomatic way of saying the Russians don't have enough players to occupy their space. I don't blame them for putting off their slap-fight in order to consolidate, but 1 interceptor isn't what put all their space in jeopardy. The fact they went against the grain and expanded their holdings prior to Aegis was their big mistake. They simply don't have the numbers to hold it.
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
#239 - 2015-08-05 17:16:37 UTC
Grouchy Smurf wrote:
Antylus Tyrell wrote:


Goons, you really should have shed more systems than you did. You should have pulled back to Deklein and let other people move into the areas around you.


But they are not trying to capture the systems. That's the problem. They don't want the space. There are 10 systems in Pure Blind right now that are "neutral" and wait for someone to go and capture the nodes.



That's simply called non-persistent offensive warfare, or more commonly know as "guerrilla warfare".
It is as valid as any other type of warfare.

I'm not sure why players think that guerrilla warfare shouldn't apply to Sov warfare as well.



Note: Non persistent simply means they don't stick around to defend ground, as in what guerilla combatants normally do.
Seven Koskanaiken
Shadow Legions.
SONS of BANE
#240 - 2015-08-05 17:34:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Seven Koskanaiken
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
According to eve offline, approximately this time last year, eve had about 26k folk averaging online while now its down to 21k. The trend of decreasing online activity appears to be continuing despite fozzie sov with 18k over the last 36 hrs, 21k over the last week and 32k over the last 6 mos. While last year there was a summer decline, it was no where near has steep as this year. What ever can be said for fozzie sov, it has proven itself to not be eve Jesus. There has been no significant numbers of incoming folk, at least enough to outweigh the bitter vets it drove off, nor does it appear to have driven large numbers of players from empire to null. In fact, it appears that opinion can be broken down as follows:
(1) the majority of eve folk, i.e. non-null dwellers, who view it as "meh"
(2) null dwellers, who view it as "could be better."


It's not null losing players, it's high sec...

...it's only been on TQ for a few weeks, bang in the middle of summer...

...and it's not even finished yet, there's structures and defences coming that will pretty much solve this trollceptor problem.

Maybe it all should have been released at once, but we are talking about some rinky dink developer run out of an Icelandic garage so it's a miracle it even got this far.