These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#721 - 2015-08-11 15:59:42 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
For me at least, it's got nothing to do with getting rid of you guys. Hell, losing two Jags on the Harpyfleet to your Cerbs the other night was actually pretty fun. Funny enough, there was no entosis garbage, nor uncatchable doctrines involved on either side of the fight.
Are you seeing what the actual problem in here? It's not Goons. It's not MOA. It's this AIDS that's being passed off as a sov revamp, paired with interceptors.


Oh yeah, I am sure it does nothing to do with us guys! I mean why else would you be asking for it? I mean you seem to be asking for a change to something without any clear reason to ask for...I am looking around and really strongling to find another cause for the request of this change. The only other I can think of is Black Legion and Out Of Sight how usually base themselves out of Venal. Which are big enemies also and happen to live in null NPC stations deep inside CFC space. Sorry but I just cant belive it without a reasonable explanation for this Lol
Its not part of the thread title also and yet its here. I can see a new thread been created after this with this request thought Lol
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#722 - 2015-08-11 16:05:51 UTC
Falin Whalen wrote:
Why should you get a free ride in unassailable stations, you should defend your home and stuff just like we do, or move to somewhere that you can more easily defend from the big bad meanies out to get little old you. Your whole argument screams with what amounts to, "Sauce for the goose is (not) sauce for the gander."


It's a balance of risk vs reward. There's less risk in living out of an NPC station in null because it can't be destroyed, but there's less reward as well since NPC systems tend to be very ISK-poor and can't be upgraded with IHubs. In our home system in Syndicate we might get a DED site or combat anom every couple days, for example. Like lowsec, the draw of NPC null is simply the enjoyment of PvPing. Unlike lowsec though, PvP in NPC null doesn't have to concern itself with sec status, sentry guns, reds and the like - everything is a potential target. Plus with bubbles, billion+ ISK pods are a lot less common making for a tiny bit more level playing field.
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#723 - 2015-08-11 16:09:08 UTC
Icycle wrote:
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
For me at least, it's got nothing to do with getting rid of you guys. Hell, losing two Jags on the Harpyfleet to your Cerbs the other night was actually pretty fun. Funny enough, there was no entosis garbage, nor uncatchable doctrines involved on either side of the fight.
Are you seeing what the actual problem in here? It's not Goons. It's not MOA. It's this AIDS that's being passed off as a sov revamp, paired with interceptors.


Oh yeah, I am sure it does nothing to do with us guys! I mean why else would you be asking for it? I mean you seem to be asking for a change to something without any clear reason to ask for...I am looking around and really strongling to find another cause for the request of this change. The only other I can think of is Black Legion and Out Of Sight how usually base themselves out of Venal. Which are big enemies also and happen to live in null NPC stations deep inside CFC space. Sorry but I just cant belive it without a reasonable explanation for this Lol
Its not part of the thread title also and yet its here. I can see a new thread been created after this with this request thought Lol

Erm, it would actually hit us when we go on deployments that rely on NPC stations at the start of the campaign. It's a change that would affect anyone who ever uses them (nearly everyone in null) and is about the only way I can think of to encourage defense of NPC null stations that are being used as staging points, instead of just docking up and spouting "lol nyanya can't get me nerds" in local.
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#724 - 2015-08-11 16:20:33 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
Icycle wrote:
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
For me at least, it's got nothing to do with getting rid of you guys. Hell, losing two Jags on the Harpyfleet to your Cerbs the other night was actually pretty fun. Funny enough, there was no entosis garbage, nor uncatchable doctrines involved on either side of the fight.
Are you seeing what the actual problem in here? It's not Goons. It's not MOA. It's this AIDS that's being passed off as a sov revamp, paired with interceptors.


Oh yeah, I am sure it does nothing to do with us guys! I mean why else would you be asking for it? I mean you seem to be asking for a change to something without any clear reason to ask for...I am looking around and really strongling to find another cause for the request of this change. The only other I can think of is Black Legion and Out Of Sight how usually base themselves out of Venal. Which are big enemies also and happen to live in null NPC stations deep inside CFC space. Sorry but I just cant belive it without a reasonable explanation for this Lol
Its not part of the thread title also and yet its here. I can see a new thread been created after this with this request thought Lol

Erm, it would actually hit us when we go on deployments that rely on NPC stations at the start of the campaign. It's a change that would affect anyone who ever uses them (nearly everyone in null) and is about the only way I can think of to encourage defense of NPC null stations that are being used as staging points, instead of just docking up and spouting "lol nyanya can't get me nerds" in local.


Yeah I can see that been an issue specially since you dont live in NPC regions. While your enemies do.
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#725 - 2015-08-11 16:27:28 UTC
You're the only ones who actively contest us while living permanently in NPC null. The others use it as a staging point at times (much like we do). As such it doesn't shock me that you wouldn't like the idea. I spent two weeks based out of an NPC null station in Curse recently, so yeah, it would affect me as well. I'm not sure what you believe, but we have SIGs all over Eve at any given time, and a lot of them base out of where?
Yeah.
NPC null stations.
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#726 - 2015-08-11 16:30:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Icycle
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
You're the only ones who actively contest us while living permanently in NPC null. The others use it as a staging point at times (much like we do). As such it doesn't shock me that you wouldn't like the idea. I spent two weeks based out of an NPC null station in Curse recently, so yeah, it would affect me as well. I'm not sure what you believe, but we have SIGs all over Eve at any given time, and a lot of them base out of where?
Yeah.
NPC null stations.



Very easy to find out. Since this does not belong on this thread as its a completelly different topic, why dont you create a thread with your idea and post it there and lets see who like it and who dont... I still think this is outside the scope of this thread. Lets not polute this topic with this.
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#727 - 2015-08-11 16:33:31 UTC
Again, we agree.
I'm not even sure how in the hell this topic came up, honestly. Can't be arsed to read back and find out, as it is pretty irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Jalon Sabir
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#728 - 2015-08-11 16:39:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Jalon Sabir
Checking the doorbell when people keep trolling it is annoying, and sometimes you think well, why do I even have the doorbell. But I assure you, nobody is frightened of the children that are doing this doorbell ringing and it is not interesting, give it a while, and the "aggressors" will get bored of this too.

Make them bring something big to the door and this will be a workable if still flawed system.

Noone minds when people bring a gang or fleet into our space, that's fun, but a single interceptor that runs away...come on.
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#729 - 2015-08-11 17:03:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Falin Whalen
Eli Stan wrote:
Falin Whalen wrote:
Why should you get a free ride in unassailable stations, you should defend your home and stuff just like we do, or move to somewhere that you can more easily defend from the big bad meanies out to get little old you. Your whole argument screams with what amounts to, "Sauce for the goose is (not) sauce for the gander."


It's a balance of risk vs reward. There's less risk in living out of an NPC station in null because it can't be destroyed, but there's less reward as well since NPC systems tend to be very ISK-poor and can't be upgraded with IHubs. In our home system in Syndicate we might get a DED site or combat anom every couple days, for example. Like lowsec, the draw of NPC null is simply the enjoyment of PvPing. Unlike lowsec though, PvP in NPC null doesn't have to concern itself with sec status, sentry guns, reds and the like - everything is a potential target. Plus with bubbles, billion+ ISK pods are a lot less common making for a tiny bit more level playing field.

I find it funny that you mention risk-reward. You hardly "risk" anything playing DingDongDitch with trollceptors, and vociferously demand to be rewarded with the fall of a huge coalition. Not to mention overplaying the 'victim' card, "Poor, plucky, little [insert irrelevant entity here], being besieged by big bad Goonswarm."

You are the ones who decided to base out of where you are now. It's like you moved next door to Delta Tau Chi Fraternity House, and are complaining that they play loud music, throw wild parties, and constantly trample on your petunias. Sure you like to roll the drunkards next door for their pocket money, but your poor petunias.

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

Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#730 - 2015-08-11 17:36:51 UTC
Falin Whalen wrote:
Eli Stan wrote:

It's a balance of risk vs reward. There's less risk in living out of an NPC station in null because it can't be destroyed, but there's less reward as well since NPC systems tend to be very ISK-poor and can't be upgraded with IHubs. In our home system in Syndicate we might get a DED site or combat anom every couple days, for example. Like lowsec, the draw of NPC null is simply the enjoyment of PvPing. Unlike lowsec though, PvP in NPC null doesn't have to concern itself with sec status, sentry guns, reds and the like - everything is a potential target. Plus with bubbles, billion+ ISK pods are a lot less common making for a tiny bit more level playing field.

I find it funny that you mention risk-reward. You hardly "risk" anything playing DingDongDitch with trollceptors, and vociferously demand to be rewarded with the fall of a huge coalition. Not to mention overplaying the 'victim' card, "Poor, plucky, little [insert irrelevant entity here], being besieged by big bad Goonswarm."

You are the ones who decided to base out of where you are now. It's like you moved next door to Delta Tau Chi Fraternity House, and are complaining that they play loud music, throw wild parties, and constantly trample on your petunias. Sure you like to roll the drunkards next door for their pocket money, but your poor petunias.
I think you have me confused with somebody else. I am not associated with MOA, who I think you're addressing your points at. I'm simply explaining the costs and benefits of NPC null, specifically Syndicate, since that's where I and my fleetmates the CAS Combat Guild live. To reiterate, yes, as you say there's hardly any risk in terms of losing our station, and commensurate with that there's little reward in terms of ISK.

For the record, in case you're curious, I couldn't troll sov even if I wanted to - I'm still in my starter corp after all. Except for a few alts some of us have placed in an alliance, that's true of most of us in fact. P
Kiandoshia
Likely Suspects
RAZOR Alliance
#731 - 2015-08-11 19:30:03 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Sov in a nutshell:

Blue/rent everybody around.
Non-aggress the rest.
Deny your own combat pilots any targets.
Blame CCP for lack of conflict.

Its not CCP you should blame, its your own leadership.


It's in CCP's power to break it all, if they really wanted =x
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#732 - 2015-08-11 19:31:54 UTC
mydingaling wrote:
There is no place in 0.0 for NPC protected stations. This is the end game of eve online brutal space mmo. 0.0 is player owned, player run. The sov in NPC 0.0 should be contestable, take the npc station you get benefits of the missions and rewards. NPC 0.0 distorts the endgame landscape.


Given the size of the map and the reduced jump ranges as well as the reduced wormhole connections to null, null becomes the absolute antithesis of what you describe. Hisec is literally more dangerous than most player controlled null, and a large part of this is due to the absence of accessible NPC stations. If you actually want to see this 'brutal space mmo', you'd do best to encourage the addition of an un-claimable NPC station every few LY, so there's actually a place for antagonists to stage from.

Compare Fountain and Delve to any given other region of Sov-Null.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#733 - 2015-08-11 19:58:26 UTC
As far as I'm aware, the probe Circadian Seekers use is an Entosis Link. Pre-Aegis, Seekers were Entosing all sorts of objects, including capsuleer ships. Have they been observed Entosing any sov structures recently? If they have, I assume it's been to no effect since nobody has reported anything, but it'd be interesting if they joined sov warfare. Especially if Drifters started Entosing sov structures. Talk about making Supers relevant again, since subcaps are one-shotted by Drifters. :)
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#734 - 2015-08-11 20:09:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Gallowmere Rorschach
Eli Stan wrote:
As far as I'm aware, the probe Circadian Seekers use is an Entosis Link. Pre-Aegis, Seekers were Entosing all sorts of objects, including capsuleer ships. Have they been observed Entosing any sov structures recently? If they have, I assume it's been to no effect since nobody has reported anything, but it'd be interesting if they joined sov warfare. Especially if Drifters started Entosing sov structures. Talk about making Supers relevant again, since subcaps are one-shotted by Drifters. :)

People would just cry that it was a nerf to everyone but The Imperium, PL, and NC.
Oh, and the fact that it's a pretty terrible idea.
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Unreasonable Bastards
#735 - 2015-08-11 20:16:03 UTC
My experience so far is that large scale engagements are no longer a regular thing, which is sad. I'd rather have superpowers that can steamroll regions in a day and rental empires than no fights at all, or small engagements with frigs >_>

As someone put it on reddit: working as intended.
Apollo Sci
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#736 - 2015-08-11 20:21:42 UTC
Speaking as a newcomer to null-sec, this change makes sense to me.

While it's clear to see that my alliance and CFC are currently in a bit of a flame war, there are no issues with the intended goal of the new system. There are only slight tweaks to be made that make the gameplay slightly more fun while achieving the same result.

What I've notice is that the only systems that are regularly populated are border systems with gate camps, systems with stations, and systems with good ratting possibilities. For the most part null-sec feels incredibly empty.

What I believe CPP is going for here is to give some power to the smaller organizations on the border of large alliance space. And why shouldn't that be the case? If it is very taxing and boring for an alliance to re-take their border systems, and they don't really use them anyway, why should we feel bad for them that they are having no fun defending them? The mechanics of this game should not defend the status quo.

Concerning the trollceptor:

I think this provides a valid roll for a ship type that is usually relegated to scouting and pointing a target. I'm not so sure an uncatchable/unkillable ship is best for gameplay but I don't fully agree with a PG increase on entosis module to prevent this ship from being used this way.

Perhaps aa auto targeting gun on the entosis-able structures that only does enough damage to slowly break a small ships tank that would force new tactics. Such as, bring multiple ceptors to switch out of aggro. Or bringing a bigger ship capable of tanking it.

However, I do not think complaining that the ceptor just gets away unscathed is a valid concern. If you do not have a big enough presence in a system to prevent the entosis of your structures, then you simply do not have any control over this space. It's not yours except in name.

I think it's important to separate the cries of the large alliances who want to keep what they see as theirs from the people who actually understand a tactic like an uncatchable ship is no fun. There's no shortage of propaganda from all sides.

This is a polarizing change but I think it takes adequate FIRST steps to shake up a stale system.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#737 - 2015-08-11 21:27:10 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:

CCP never stated "entertaining for both sides" as goals when developing the mechanics for the systems you mentioned. They did for this iteration of sov. It has clearly failed.


As we have said time after time (after time) after time, reduce the systems you hold to a number that you can ACTUALLY defend and you would have some fun.

It isn't a failure when the only issue here is alliances trying to hold dead systems that have no actual activity.

Working as intended.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#738 - 2015-08-11 21:50:33 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
I can link you to where I answered that exact question this morning.

And you may find it entertaining, it clearly isn't for both sides.
Ganking isn't entertaining for both sides.

Playing test the loot fairy with BRs on jita undock isn't entertaining for both sides

20 v 1 engagements in LS isn't entertaining for both sides

BLOPS aren't entertaining for both sides

should I go on?


Let's get rid of all of those then, if 'entertaining for both sides' is really a goal. Think before you talk.
That's all entirely irrelevant. CCPs stated goal for this development is to ensure both sides of the mechanic are entertained by it. Whether or not there are other mechanics in the game which bore one side doesn't change the fact that their new mechanics failed in it's primary goal.

What that about thinking before we talk? Roll

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#739 - 2015-08-11 21:53:58 UTC
Icycle wrote:
I just find it amusing and woring that you want to change all this so that you can finally get rid of us.
Nobody has suggested that to get rid of you. I do find all of this telling though. You guys are basically admitting that if MOA couldn't have high sec stations in null sec, you'd not even be able to survive.

Eli Stan wrote:
It's a balance of risk vs reward. There's less risk in living out of an NPC station in null because it can't be destroyed, but there's less reward as well since NPC systems tend to be very ISK-poor and can't be upgraded with IHubs. In our home system in Syndicate we might get a DED site or combat anom every couple days, for example. Like lowsec, the draw of NPC null is simply the enjoyment of PvPing. Unlike lowsec though, PvP in NPC null doesn't have to concern itself with sec status, sentry guns, reds and the like - everything is a potential target. Plus with bubbles, billion+ ISK pods are a lot less common making for a tiny bit more level playing field.
Except of course all of the missions as well as the fact that you can live in an NPC station yet use decent sov null space around it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#740 - 2015-08-11 21:59:21 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:

CCP never stated "entertaining for both sides" as goals when developing the mechanics for the systems you mentioned. They did for this iteration of sov. It has clearly failed.
As we have said time after time (after time) after time, reduce the systems you hold to a number that you can ACTUALLY defend and you would have some fun.

It isn't a failure when the only issue here is alliances trying to hold dead systems that have no actual activity.

Working as intended.
We can defend our systems. As we've said time after time (after time) after time, the mechanics to contest sov are boring. We know it, you know it, even CCP knows it (go read reddit, they are responding more there). It has nothing to do with undefended sov, mining structures just simply isn't good gameplay.

And no, not working as intended. Failing the #1 goal of the mechanic is not "working as intended".

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.