These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#281 - 2015-08-05 21:47:11 UTC
ceptorsov is definitely providing a great deal of "running away with MWD" content

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 ?

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#282 - 2015-08-05 22:36:19 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
ceptorsov is definitely providing a great deal of "running away with MWD" content


Why is it that i can open the map, find any sov holder you can name, fly there and get into a fight any time of day or night, yet those of you that live there claim that you cannot find good fights and fozziesov is to blame?

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#283 - 2015-08-05 22:44:07 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

Null was boring BEFORE this change.
No it wasn't, and it certainly wasn't this boring. Seriously, actually try out the mechanics.
[/quote]

I have (before and after). I do find myself logging in to my null characters a bit more now. We obviously have very different playstyles/definitions of fun. That's fine. That's obviously part of the game. I find massive 4000 person fights boring. tidi, no control over what you are doing, mindlessly following orders, those aren't GFs to me. We can disagree on that. That's the beauty of a sandbox.

Lucas Kell wrote:

It may be there plan but it's clearly not working.


If sov null is having this much trouble defending their space, it's clearly working as intended.

Lucas Kell wrote:

No, it hasn't created fights because attacker don't need to actually commit anything.

We can easily do it, but it's insanely boring to repeatedly do so. You're literally stating there "babysit your structures". WTF do you think video games are for? Win or lose, the mechanics are supposed to be entertaining. I seriously can't understand how you guys can sit there basically willing the game to die.


How many times do I have to say the same thing? Shrink your sov to areas you can control.

Yes, I'm absolutely saying babysit your structures. They are your structures. You choose to own space, deal with the consequences.

This is why you have alts. Are you saying you have all of your accounts running 100% of the time? You can't stay alt tabbed with an alt while playing on your main?

Babysitting your structures (ie, taking care of space you control) comes with the package. If you are in a WH, you keep an alt sitting on any incoming hole alt tabbed to listen for WH activations. Do you complain that you have to 'babysit your hole'? No, you realize you have to put in more effort to live in higher reward areas of space.

Look, I hear what you're saying, but it's obvious at this point that we don't agree and most likely never will. People of a certain playstyle love this, people of another hate it. We can agree to disagree on this, and see what happens. If the collective playerbase decides to change it, then fine! I will happily adapt to whatever changes CCP makes (even if I don't agree with them), just as I've done for years. That kind of adaptation is part of EVE. Why don't you do the same for now? have a recruiting drive to get newbies to babysit for you (100 mil ISK as a reward for a month old player to sit on a structure goes a long way) so that you can get out and attack back.

Get creative, figure out how to counter this. You know, like you should in a sandbox.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#284 - 2015-08-05 22:55:56 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
I have (before and after). I do find myself logging in to my null characters a bit more now. We obviously have very different playstyles/definitions of fun. That's fine. That's obviously part of the game. I find massive 4000 person fights boring. tidi, no control over what you are doing, mindlessly following orders, those aren't GFs to me. We can disagree on that. That's the beauty of a sandbox.
Lol, that's the beauty of the sandbox, yet you seem to be claiming that objectively sov was terrible and is now good, even though most people disagree.

Sonya Corvinus wrote:
If sov null is having this much trouble defending their space, it's clearly working as intended.
Sov null isn't having trouble though, is it? Defending is a problem. Not being bored to death by these whack-a-mole mechanics is. That's a clear example of mechanics done wrong.

Sonya Corvinus wrote:
How many times do I have to say the same thing? Shrink your sov to areas you can control.
Lol? How many times do I have to say the same thing? The problem is not that it is difficult to defend, it;s that it's ******* boring to defend and that attackers have to commit nothing of value to attack. That's a recipe for lack of content. Defenders don't want to do any more than the minimum because the mechanics suck ass, and attackers refuse to engage because they don't have to commit to troll sov. It has nothing to do with shrinking sov.

Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Yes, I'm absolutely saying babysit your structures. They are your structures. You choose to own space, deal with the consequences.

This is why you have alts. Are you saying you have all of your accounts running 100% of the time? You can't stay alt tabbed with an alt while playing on your main?
And that is why your opinion is void. This is a video game and it's designed for entertainment. It's not a second job. Holding sov should not mean people have to sit in space twiddling their thumbs. Neither should it mean mechanics designed around leaving alts sitting around. You're literally suggesting that CCP design their game to e boring specifically to bore sov holders.

I'm sure we could sit around and figure out how to make broken mechanics work, but it's much better for CCP to make them less terrible, and based on the volume of negative feedback that's going to happen sooner rather than later.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Salvos Rhoska
#285 - 2015-08-05 22:58:41 UTC
Adapt.

Stinks of ulterior and vested motives in here.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#286 - 2015-08-05 23:09:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
If CCP would just get rid of structure bashing then we would fight !

CCP gets rid of structure bashing.....

If CCP would only take highsec minerals and give them to us so we could do industry locally, then we would fight !

CCP transfers highsec ore to nullsec....

If CCP would just get rid of fozziesov then we would fight !

CCP contemplates getting rid of fozziesov......

nullsec: HILARIOUS we didnt even have to adopt a new lame excuse and CCP is failing for it again !
Anyways, everything will be back to business as usual in a month, dont worry guys, we got this.

Later:

If CCP would just buy us all pink ponies, then we would fight !

If CCP would just buy us all cookies, then we would fight !

If CCP would just......

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#287 - 2015-08-05 23:31:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Lucas Kell wrote:
Lol, that's the beauty of the sandbox, yet you seem to be claiming that objectively sov was terrible and is now good, even though most people disagree.


sov WAS terrible. It let 1/4 of the null universe to set each other to blue and easy mode through the game. Where is the fun in that?

Quote:

Sov null isn't having trouble though, is it? Defending is a problem. Not being bored to death by these whack-a-mole mechanics is. That's a clear example of mechanics done wrong.


It was having a lot of trouble. So many blues, and so few people to fight. Set CFC to grey and see how many fights you get. Not that you will ever do that. null alliances are a poison to GFs

Quote:

Lol? How many times do I have to say the same thing? The problem is not that it is difficult to defend, it;s that it's ******* boring to defend and that attackers have to commit nothing of value to attack. That's a recipe for lack of content. Defenders don't want to do any more than the minimum because the mechanics suck ass, and attackers refuse to engage because they don't have to commit to troll sov. It has nothing to do with shrinking sov.


and it wouldn't be boring if you didn't control so many systems that were unused. Question, how many systems does SMA have now where there are less than five people active in?

Looking for an exact number

Quote:

And that is why your opinion is void. This is a video game and it's designed for entertainment. It's not a second job. Holding sov should not mean people have to sit in space twiddling their thumbs. Neither should it mean mechanics designed around leaving alts sitting around. You're literally suggesting that CCP design their game to e boring specifically to bore sov holders.

I'm sure we could sit around and figure out how to make broken mechanics work, but it's much better for CCP to make them less terrible, and based on the volume of negative feedback that's going to happen sooner rather than later.


And this is why no one takes you seriously. Entertainment isn't closing your eyes and pressing F1 when an FC tells you to. null is already people sitting in space twiddling their thumbs. red shows up? warp to the POS and twiddle your thumbs.

You seem to want all of the benefits of null with none of the responsibility that comes from owning your own space. You chose to own sov. put up the numbers to defend it. If you don't want to take the responsibility to own space, don't live in sov null. period.

Also, the fact that I can say "we should agree to disagree" and you come back with "your opinion is void" instead of being intelligent enough to realize there are multiple playstyles in the game tells me a bit about you mate....Are you capable of realizing not everyone thinks the way you do?


EDIT: Lucas, at this point I'm going to choose to end the conversation. We will never see eye to eye, and until you realize playstyles other than your own (and your playstyle and opinions are 100% valid in this sandbox) are valid, I can't take you seriously in any way, shape or form. If you are able to say the same about how I EVE, I will respond. Until then, I won't. Until that happens, any conversation here is nothing but a waste of time.

o7
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#288 - 2015-08-05 23:53:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
sov WAS terrible. It let 1/4 of the null universe to set each other to blue and easy mode through the game. Where is the fun in that?
Sov didn't "let" people blue each other, that's what MMOs do. People can choose to collaborate. And that's still happening now.

And the fun of the old sov was in the masses of fights.

Sonya Corvinus wrote:
It was having a lot of trouble. So many blues, and so few people to fight. Set CFC to grey and see how many fights you get. Not that you will ever do that. null alliances are a poison to GFs
LOL. This is always the complaint from you types. Like we should just cease working with friends to create some artificial content because the systems built around it are growing increasingly terrible. You're so adamant that we should be force to play your way.

Sonya Corvinus wrote:
and it wouldn't be boring if you didn't control so many systems that were unused. Question, how many systems does SMA have now where there are less than five people active in?
Yes it would! No matter how active the system, chasing a disposable ship designed to evade is boring. Firing a ******* mining laser at a structure is boring.

And I don't know, and don't really care how many systems we have with or without people. It's irrelevant because I'm not talkign about unused systems. I couldn't give a crap if an unused system could be taken by a goddamn rookie ship, but for attacking active systems the mechanics need to be less boring and require commitment. At this point it's fairly obvious you're intending not to understand why the current system sucks, you're just gonna keep going "grr sov holders" and supporting dumb changes that make the game less appealing.

Sonya Corvinus wrote:
And this is why no one takes you seriously. Entertainment isn't closing your eyes and pressing F1 when an FC tells you to. null is already people sitting in space twiddling their thumbs. red shows up? warp to the POS and twiddle your thumbs.
Lol, no null is like everywhere else. We are mining, ratting, fighting. Sitting and looking at a structure is bad game design.

Sonya Corvinus wrote:
You seem to want all of the benefits of null with none of the responsibility that comes from owning your own space. You chose to own sov. put up the numbers to defend it. If you don't want to take the responsibility to own space, don't live in sov null. period.

Also, the fact that I can say "we should agree to disagree" and you come back with "your opinion is void" instead of being intelligent enough to realize there are multiple playstyles in the game tells me a bit about you mate....Are you capable of realizing not everyone thinks the way you do?
No I don't, I want attackers to have to commit to their attacks. I'm not demanding we maintain our sov uncontested, I just don;t think a disposable solo ship should be able to threaten sov. There's multibox sov assaults going on. Sov is an alliance level activity. Solo players should not be able to contest sov in a disposable frigate.

I don't really care if you want to get your word in the tell me to agree to disagree. I'm fully aware there are multiple playstyles, as are most of the sov holder you hate. Don't forget, we were all fully on board for drastically altering sov so that occupancy was required, the space held was shrunk and that smaller groups should have a fighting chance. Now that the system is full tit the other way and solo players can harass thousands of players with a simple frigate, you want to keep it as is, because it serves you better. All we want is it to be balanced in the middle.



- "EDIT: Lucas, at this point I'm going to choose to end the conversation. We will never see eye to eye, and until you realize playstyles other than your own (and your playstyle and opinions are 100% valid in this sandbox) are valid, I can't take you seriously in any way, shape or form. If you are able to say the same about how I EVE, I will respond. Until then, I won't. Until that happens, any conversation here is nothing but a waste of time."

The hypocrisy of this statement does not go unnoticed.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#289 - 2015-08-06 00:31:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Lucas, give me a direct answer:

Does anyone whose playstyle doesn't match 100% to yours have a say in EVE? Yes or no. I said you playstyle is 100% valid (even if I don't agree with it personally). Would you say the same for mine? Or is it

"anyone who EVEs differently than Lucas is an idiot"

Look forward to your oh so intelligent reply
Scalding Holland
Doomheim
#290 - 2015-08-06 00:33:43 UTC
All sovereignty changes CCP have introduced since POS claimship have ruined this game. EVE has some realism under POS warfare. This nonsense with anomalies and beacons popping up for us to sit around hours to capture is killing the game.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#291 - 2015-08-06 00:38:34 UTC
Billy Bojangle wrote:
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.


Quoting for mother kitten truth.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#292 - 2015-08-06 00:47:29 UTC
Billy Bojangle wrote:

You mean to tell me 40 guys in interceptors can't be driven off by 1% of your active pilots staying behind? Come on man, the numbers here aren't a huge secret.


They don't even need to drive them off. They just need to put elinks on their ratting ishtars and then actually look at their afk client once every 10 minutes to see if they need to warp somewhere in their ratting system to run a defensive elink for 20 mins. They never even have to use a gate. Pretty sure they could even update their afktar bots to handle it.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#293 - 2015-08-06 02:03:25 UTC
Grouchy Smurf wrote:
Billy Bojangle wrote:

DBRB spent months grinding structures in stealth bombers, but all of a sudden this is too tedious and of no strategic value?


Spent months grinding structures back when they could escalate to fights.



I have begun to see a pattern. Apparently the map the rest of us use that tells you exactly where all the nullsec alliances are, you know the ones you claim to want to pick fights with, well it appears that you guys out in nullsec dont know how to use said map.

Therefore, im letting you know now that im running a, 'pvp for noobs' seminar and im inviting all of nullsec that doesnt know how to use the game map, just how to use that map to pick fights with your neighbors.

And as a gesture of good will from your friends in highsec, the seminar is FREE !

In week one we cover: opening your map (i know it sounds all techy and stuff but trust me in just a week's time you'll be opening that map like a pro!)

In week two we cover: how to find an enemy to fight in nullsec.

In week three we wrap up with: how to get into your ship and get into that 'big' fight you seem so eager to find.

Again, totally free! so tell all your nullsec buddies to stop on in for your free seminar, ooh its going to be exciting, just think of all the big fights you'll get into, has you salivating, am i right!

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#294 - 2015-08-06 02:25:02 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
ooh its going to be exciting, just think of all the big fights you'll get into, has you salivating, am i right!

I take it your definition of big fight is 40 dudes poking at each other in shitfit T1 hulls, as that's about all you get when you actually invade anyone who isn't The Imperium, unfortunately. I assure you, our sigs have tried, and the shows of resistance are sad at best, and outright pathetic at worst.

"Something something muh killboard efficiency. Stop feeding them kills guys. Srs, dock up and they'll go away in a couple of days."

And they're right, we will, because seriously, **** node lasering.
Falin Whalen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#295 - 2015-08-06 05:31:14 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Stinks of ulterior and vested motives in here.

God damned, my irony meter went supernova.

"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka 

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#296 - 2015-08-06 05:52:17 UTC
Falin Whalen wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Stinks of ulterior and vested motives in here.

God damned, my irony meter went supernova.


I'm only still reading this thread for the projection and the tinfoil. It's honestly funny at this point.

"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
#297 - 2015-08-06 06:19:49 UTC
Lol "big fights"

TWO interceptors running away. Plus a griffin.

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 ?

Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#298 - 2015-08-06 06:25:25 UTC
Well, 15 pages in now, and you are all probably starting to suffer from some form of deficiency. Don't fear, for I have what you crave. No, its not electrolytes, its better, its.... Narwhaledge! Take a break and let your brain drink deep of the Sea Unicorn!



Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#299 - 2015-08-06 06:44:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Lucas, give me a direct answer:

Does anyone whose playstyle doesn't match 100% to yours have a say in EVE? Yes or no. I said you playstyle is 100% valid (even if I don't agree with it personally). Would you say the same for mine? Or is it

"anyone who EVEs differently than Lucas is an idiot"

Look forward to your oh so intelligent reply
Of course they do. That's evidenced by how I supported the sov changes in the first place, even though it's a nerf to my playstyle to help a different playstyle. The problem is it's gone way too far, and people who are blinded by "grr goons" are happy to watch the game be destroyed as long as it make ore playstyle boring.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Salvos Rhoska
#300 - 2015-08-06 08:04:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Falin Whalen wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Adapt.

Stinks of ulterior and vested motives in here.

God damned, my irony meter went supernova.


I'm only still reading this thread for the projection and the tinfoil. It's honestly funny at this point.


Natural in EVE that everyone argues from the perspective of their own advantage.
Thats what the forum minigame is all about!

Nonetheless, the simple adage: "adapt", is always applicable.

One doesnt have to like it and one can lobby for change, but thats the where the bottomline is drawn that distinguishes between entitled whining and HTFU/dealing with it.

Its pretty funny that organisations of thousands are players with all their vast resources, huge expanses of space, and centuries of collective experience are whining that:
"Plz, CCP! A single disposable frigate is trolling and annoying us! Make it stop!"