EVE General Discussion

I could retort, but blue lists...

1. Trollceptros stop existing. While people can easily contest so they risk losing their ship far more than they currently do. This encourages people to want to take sov when they choose to attack it.
2. This give an improved benefit to people's heavily used systems and it further increase the bar for entry. A single player arriving doesn't require immediate response but can be used to begin staging.
3. This reduces the amount of troll pilots with the whack-a-mole tactics we currently see, where they want to get defenders out but run away. This means that it not only costs but requires you to go and repair before repeating the process without waiting out the timer.

That's about the best you're getting because they're pretty self explanatory and to be quite honest irrelevant since CCP will do what CCP wants to do.

Well goonswarm fits their mascot (Bee) Lol because bees by themselves are only an annoyance until you squash it :-) but when bees swarm they are dangerous. Point being they know they are only dangerous in large overwhelming fleets ! By themselves they are another -hit against the Kb (squashed) bug :-)

I'll give it a try.

1) Trollceptors are bad. There are a bunch of reasons why but perhaps the most 'visible' reason is that they can avoid any actual confrontation, anytime, anywhere and still be as effective at the sov game as any other ship, which I guess is alright because CCP said they didn't want limitations but the boring truth is that we (the players) need limitations, otherwise we'll be bored shitless by the 'most effective' methods that us silly human beings always revert to using.
We need you to dictate us a meta, not let us come up with one =p

Anecdotal evidence? I was in a trollceptor fleet to go and sovlaser a bunch of buildings 3 regions away purely to **** off the people there. We ran a trollceptor fleet to defend out stuff, purley to **** off the other guys.
What am I getting at here? We're flying a ship that's good at pissing people off because pissing people off is a good way to win a war. It's an efficient way. It's what humans do!
See? We need you to tell us how to do it. We need you to figure out how to have fun for us because we wont do it on our own.

Solution? Limitations, yes, I know, bad word, but if you want to force us to have fun, you need to do it.

2) Defense indexes are a bit meh at the moment. They are numbers that increase the amount of time it takes for an attacker to capture stuff. Good enough, I guess. It certainly provides an advantage but contrary to the amount of mind numbingly boring activities you have to submit yourself to in order to get any of this... You get the idea.
Defense indexes are high in places that get a lot of traffic, that was the intention and that is working and maybe we are at fault for trying to hold on to our colours on the map.

Anecdotal evidence? I went ratting for a while. It was terrible. I was going to mine as well but luckily, someone blew up my ship before I got there.

Solution? Dare I say, bonuses to ship's parameters? More speed, better resists, that kind of thing =x It would do something for the next point on my list as well but it also has a chance to be abused and be very overpowered.

3) A reason to actually have sov.

Right now, the only people who supposedly have fun with fozziesov (Sorry, Aegis Sov) are those who do not really want any sov for themselves. If sov were a thing that meant anything beyond colours on Verite's influence map, maybe it would give more of an incentive to go for sov, try to hold sov and actually put some effort behind attacking it, defending it and you get the idea.

Alternatively... screw it all! Yes, make quality of space dynamic. Make asteroid belts disappear, make rats move away if a system/constellation/region is farmed to Narnja and back. That would force people to move around if they want to keep doing what they're doing. This is probably too much like a new sov system altogether and would require a lot of tweaks and changes to the rest of Eve to prevent everyone from just going to space that does not change. Also, this may be too much of a wormholer approach to the empire building that sov seems to be supposed to be.


I have seen a little bit of it but on a large scale, there does not seem to be much of a difference. Maybe, once all current 0.0 players get bored enough to log in for sovgames in their current state, new and fresh alliances can come in! Maybe that is the change you need.. maybe you just need to ban everyone who is in an alliance with more than 500 people and then wait and see what happens.

Essentially. I really hated the Myogi when I got it but then I started liking it a lot before I got the Kongo and now I am absolutely in love with it!

There are too many quotes in this post, so I am going to continue without a quote.

Has your corporation or alliance's playstyle been radically altered by fozziesov?

As opposed to before Aegis Sov or 6 months ago? Compared to before the update, no, not really. Compared to 6 months ago, yes. We're not flying ships across half of 0.0 anymore to have big wars. You know, the unbearable 10% TiDi slideshow kind of situations that are hailed as the biggest online battles by all kinds of media that might not even have anything to do with video games.

Phew, done. I think this was the longest post I ever typed up, except for that one time where I tried to make a suggestion about a working bounty system with purchaseable killrights and hitmen and space assassinations and whaaa!
I hope it wasn't too much bullshit :3

The problem is that shooing away ships is counter to conflict. Any mechanic which pushes against conflict is going to be bad. People will naturally do the minimum they can with boring mechanics.

True, but upsizing the ships is a good way of ensuring people want to fight rather than just sail off at several km/s the moment someone starts warping towards them. Additionally cruisers tend to be more willing to engage. I'd even suggest that a T2 variant of a cruiser have an additional high slot and bonuses and fitting reductions for the entosis link.

They do, but there's to reason not to make sure that attackers need to bring more to be considered a threat. As it is now a single frigate needs just as rapid as response as a fleet.

I doubt they are intended as they break the #1 goal of the new sov system, which is "As much as possible, ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved". Aside from that, burning out links gives a penalty for choosing to disengage prematurely.

Exactly, and I'm not just saying that because of your excellent choice of corp/alliance

The blind defenders of Fozzie simply refuse to understand what the dislike is about, they keep projecting, thinking it's about fear of losing imaginary space, or 'trollcetors'. As annoying as those are, they aren't the big deal.

The big deal is that the system is some low sec BS imposed on what is supposed to be "epic space opera" space. Its like taking the original Star Wars movies and removing all the capital ships and X-wings and Tie fighters and the Millennium Falcon and telling people "be happy, you still have Ewoks and snow speeders!". My pet name for this crappy system is "why did I leave lowsecSov".

I wonder if discussion here is getting confused between what Sov ultimately should be, and discussion on just these recent changes. Know what I mean?

Lucas took the commendable plunge and came forward with three concise points, and also remarkably, explanations for each of them as he saw them, as to what he sees as wanting changed fromnthis last iteration going forward.

Could you perhaps take a few minutes and do the same?
Would again add structure and substance to the discussion, as specific to this last change as pertinent to this thread.

By all means, if you have ze Final Solution to all Sov issues, append that to it also.




For contrast, your views also as an active participant would be welcome in what you see as good/bad about the changes, and where you would want to see those going from here. Could you try to compile an itemized and numbered list of those?

Personally, I couldn't possibly care less if they removed them.
Just refund all of the minerals, BPO/research cost, and hull/fit specific SP.
I'd never need to buy another ratting carrier again.

I think those would be fair in principle.

for 1) I would prefer the low side in isk loss / investment required though, to keep barriers to entry lower.

for 2) Could this be tied to the Defensive Index in an inverse manner? Low activity spawns a lot, High activity spawns less?

for 3) this seems reasonable

in addition:

4) I like the idea of requiring more simultaneous active Entosis links to challenge Sov in a higher Defensive Index system.