These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Collective petition about fozziesov

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#261 - 2015-08-03 16:45:56 UTC
Fatal pewpew wrote:
I think we need to see further balance changes.

Entities like MOA still cant take sov and that makes me sad.


Are we sure that MOA wants to take - and hold on to - sov? Or are the mostly interested in punishing alliances still trying to use Dominion Sov tactics?
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#262 - 2015-08-03 16:47:57 UTC
UAxDEATH wrote:
More alliance leaders signed off on that petition Those who sign it, and I expect more will sign it. Thank you for your support.


But an even bigger thank you goes out to those members of large corps and alliances from nullsec that came here and decried this hypcritical piece of trash for what it really is.

They rest of EVE appreciates that you stand by your core values even when game changes go against what is probably your best interests.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#263 - 2015-08-03 16:50:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Icycle
I see a lot complaining that entosis is not fun. and you dont get the "big fights".
Currently we are the only game in town in the north besides OSS in Venal.
Black Legion is in Fountain at the momment doing their thing.
We will not fight battles vs 200 sub cap, + cap fleets + super + titans. You must have figger that out by now....

So if CFC really wants to get all their big slug fest with supers and titans all that, then why
dont you go and attack Black Legion in Fountain? What are you waiting for? You can grind all structures that
you want and POS's. Maybe even reset some of your allies/blues to neutral?
Or even better why dont you deploy and attack Fountain? Deploy to Fountain, put a few poses log supers and titans and get your butts there. Hell Camp their station like you guys do to us. Why is this not happening?
The CFC has over 50000 people in their coalition. Surelly you can do that? Can you?
Papa Django
Materials Harvesting Kombinat
#264 - 2015-08-03 16:52:25 UTC
It's delicious to read that people who can't handle a few frigs wanna a rollback to get more fight and in the mean time, we all know that the previous system equal 1 or 2 tidi fights per year.

Some people have a seriously broken logic.
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#265 - 2015-08-03 16:54:42 UTC
Papa Django wrote:
It's delicious to read that people who can't handle a few frigs wanna a rollback to get more fight and in the mean time, we all know that the previous system equal 1 or 2 tidi fights per year.

Some people have a seriously broken logic.


in all fairness when i lived in sov null it was tidi nearly every night

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Icycle
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#266 - 2015-08-03 16:56:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Icycle
Lan Wang wrote:
Papa Django wrote:
It's delicious to read that people who can't handle a few frigs wanna a rollback to get more fight and in the mean time, we all know that the previous system equal 1 or 2 tidi fights per year.

Some people have a seriously broken logic.


in all fairness when i lived in sov null it was tidi nearly every night


Yeah man tidi is terrible. And you are lucky if you are the first to load grid. If not then, you are going to lose probably badly. Half your fleet will be dead before you know what happened.
Seven Koskanaiken
Shadow Legions.
SONS of BANE
#267 - 2015-08-03 17:06:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Seven Koskanaiken
Altaen wrote:
Active PVP Pilots Per System Report for those that signed this petition

HARD Alliance - 2.5
Brothers of Tangra - 0.45
Synergy of Steel - 5.5
Triumvirate. - 6.2
SOLAR Fleet - 0.97
Dream Fleet - 0.66
Soviet-Union - 1.8
Infinity Space. - 17
Advent of Fate - 12.4
Legion of xXDEATHXx - 2.6
The Afterlife. - 5.8
Shadow of xXDEATHXx - 0.5
Gentlemen's.Club - 3.4
The Blood Covenant - 3.9
RAZOR - 10.5

For comparison sake, GSF, by all accounts one of the most organized and efficient alliances in EVE, has 14.5 (Was 17 a few days ago, either they picked up sov or lost some active PVP pilots).

Infinity Space. is a huge outlier here. A quick review suggests that they are closely tied to xXDEATHXx and likely felt some pressure to add a number to the list for their masters.
Other than them, these numbers are pathetic, and it's no wonder you don't like the new system, it was designed for you.

This is occupancy-based sov. Occupy or let it fall.


+1

Let's take time to remember this gem as well.

https://www.themittani.com/news/null-deal-statement-sovereign-00

Quote:
THE NULL DEAL: A STATEMENT FROM SOVEREIGN 0.0

OCCUPANCY-BASED SOVEREIGNTY

We believe that ownership of territory should be reflected by alliance occupancy. Players should live in and utilize their space, and player infrastructure and activity should be reflected in an occupancy index. We believe this will significantly shrink the footprints of the current absentee empires, free up large sections of sov 0.0 for smaller entities, and remove the current need for vast coalitions.

INCREASED PLAYER DENSITY

We believe that vast swathes of conquerable nullsec are essentially worthless to our line members and can only support the activity of a handful of players in each system. We would like to see the value of individual systems increased to support a dense ecosystem of players undocked and interacting within single system.


Let's look who signed it.

Oh.

Quote:
UAxDeath (CSM), Legion of xXDEATHXx


The only thing I can think to explain this is, either they were just saying the word "occupancy" because it sounded nice but with zero thought about what it would actually entail in game terms, or they simply didn't understand the dictionary definition of the word. Or maybe they just like signing names on things to feel important.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#268 - 2015-08-03 17:35:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Silvia Heart wrote:
Nituspar wrote:
Tappits wrote:
So yesterday someone tried to entosis a PL TCU in a 1x system.
I was able to burn to the system in a inti get on grid to see it’s a 4k/s vaga 200km off.. I burn at him and he burns away… he then left and never came back. Someone un-entisised the tcu and we went home.

Op success, that’s how you defend in fozzie sov boys and girls.


Now if you could just repeat this 50-1000 times, and write the next post accurately describing the amount of fun you had doing this from op 35 onwards. I think we'd all be a bit more enlightened on why a system that seems to promote sovlasering structures without any conflict being necessary, or fights occurring possibly being a bit flawed.

Bonus points for alarmclocking for a chase or two, since most reinforces will usually be done at the worst possible timezone for you the second you let your indexes slip.


This guys speaks the truth, there's a massive difference between scaring away one random etosis troll and trying to fend of a persistent group of them that keep on coming back at the worst times.

We both know this because he's the troll and i am on the receiving end. Its not fun, its extremely frustrating and again we get almost no fights. He has gotten a few good kills but considering everything i wouldn't say its worth doing for the occasional kill and getting kills because your enemies are falling asleep and be driven mad by all the RNG timers and massively time consuming nodes is not good for the game in the long term.


Frustrating people you dont want in an area is a speciality of a certain group of players that have been doing it for more than a decade and laughing at the people they frustrate.

Since im not one for naming names, illl just call them by a code word: SOVHOLDERS.

Since this same group will repeat this nuisance behavior repeatedly even when they know NO LARGE SCALE BATTLE will ever come from frustrating a lone explorer in a frigate i will use your term and call them 'trolls' and while im at it since that explorer will meet this same problem from this same group no matter how many times he returns to exploring in his frigate i will also call for CCP to make game mechanic changes so that that explorer can explore nulllsec without further trolling from, 'SOVHOLDERS'.

I know that given how clearly your 'collective' has stated that fighting frigates is something sov holders should not be doing in nullsec i fully expect to see your entire collective sign my petition to end this type of fighting.

Thank you in advance for your support !!!

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#269 - 2015-08-03 17:59:34 UTC
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:
The only thing I can think to explain this is, either they were just saying the word "occupancy" because it sounded nice but with zero thought about what it would actually entail in game terms, or they simply didn't understand the dictionary definition of the word. Or maybe they just like signing names on things to feel important.
I imagine that the problem has less to do with it requiring occupancy, and more to do with it requiring massive amounts of structure lasering to fend off people who have no interest in taking the space anyway, but can contest it with relative ease. Fozziesov is boring as sin. That's the problem with it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#270 - 2015-08-03 18:20:13 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:
The only thing I can think to explain this is, either they were just saying the word "occupancy" because it sounded nice but with zero thought about what it would actually entail in game terms, or they simply didn't understand the dictionary definition of the word. Or maybe they just like signing names on things to feel important.
I imagine that the problem has less to do with it requiring occupancy, and more to do with it requiring massive amounts of structure lasering to fend off people who have no interest in taking the space anyway, but can contest it with relative ease. Fozziesov is boring as sin. That's the problem with it.


Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.

If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.

The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#271 - 2015-08-03 18:34:04 UTC
Malus Maricadie wrote:
they need to **** can fozzie, what fun is a game that you don't have to earn your accomplishments. So now for all of us that put the time and work into grinding standings, Sov and training cap lvl ships turns out to be just a waste of time. Sadly world of ships is more like eve was in the good old days before fozzie screwed it up!!!!

There is nothing in the old sov or the new that keeps you from busting out your big ships and blasting your neighbor. In fact only one word has ever stood between quite boring nullsec and total space carnage and that word is CHOICE. Since game mechanics new or old cannot force you occupants of nullsec to fight and becauae you chose and still apparently still choose to not fight the only problem standing between you and large scale engagements is your own decision not to.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#272 - 2015-08-03 18:35:28 UTC
Eli Stan wrote:
Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.

If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.

The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it.
It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.

The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#273 - 2015-08-03 18:37:59 UTC
BrundleMeth wrote:
1). CCP obviously doesn't care. Or they wouldn't have done it.

2). I have no doubt they will not fix this.

3). I've been watching all my favorite ships get nerfed into junk for 2 years now. Complain and people call you names and tell you to adapt.

I still like EVE...but am well past the point of caring now if it simply dies off. I've gone from 9 accounts down to 2 all were paid for with cash. I laugh at the emails I get asking me to come back with these old accounts. 2 accounts are ok for me for now. Maybe some day, things will go back the other way. I really hope so....


On the 7 accounts you closed.....

Can i haz your stuffs ?

I like to use phrases nullsec is familiar with so im sure we are clearly communicating.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#274 - 2015-08-03 19:01:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Lucas Kell wrote:
Eli Stan wrote:
Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.

If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.

The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it.
It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.

The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.


So in a post that goes into detail how you are fighting throughout your sov to maintain your sov holdings you conclude that no conflict is occurring?

To you i introduce the term, "non sequitor" or as it is sometimes referred to as, "it does not follow". Meaning Your statements of fact dont support your conclusion and in fact in this case your facts actually refute your own conclusion which is even worse.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Dark Reignz
Four-Q
#275 - 2015-08-03 19:03:59 UTC
Wow don't people get it yet ? You're not supposed to be able to keep half off null sec with small / renter alliances. The whole point of the Sov update was to stop alliances from claiming much more space than a) they need and b) they are able to protect.

This is just another cry for nullbear easymode status.

Troll Mode - ON
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#276 - 2015-08-03 19:29:07 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:


The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.


It currently promote conflict. Just not conflict with explosions. We are continuously fighting over those systems to take/hold them. People's chase for the most efficient way of doing it is what cause trollceptor to be what we see so often. Fight denial was used in EVE since forever. Being irritated that it get used in a new way under a new system is just plain stupid.
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2015-08-03 19:38:51 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.

The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.


Oh my! I just realized I was gravely mistaken about something - I had been thinking that it was MOA who reinforced a big chunk of BL's Fountain, but now I know that it was actually your own alliance, SMA. Were you part of that op? What did you think of it? I've read you guys lost 40 Interceptors in the effort. Did you kill anything? What do you plan on doing with the nodes once they spawn?

The Last Game of Sov Updates " Rabbits in the Headlights " + bonus Update
http://updates.eve-volt.net/game-of-sov/rabbits-in-the-headlights/
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#278 - 2015-08-03 20:34:49 UTC
Why would moa be entosising BL anyway

Everyone knows massadeath only gets it on for the Imperium

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 ?
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
#279 - 2015-08-03 21:06:41 UTC
So it seems some organizations are having issues realizing what "occupancy" based sov really means.

Hint: If you are finding it too hard to defend your currently claimed systems, you should consider recalculating what systems you want to hold.

Having a beautiful Sov Map isn't everything. (Yes, the sov map has influenced what some want to claim)
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#280 - 2015-08-03 21:54:55 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Eli Stan wrote:
Assuming "occupancy" is there, I don't see how massive amounts of structure lasering would ever happen? Within the 15 to 60 minutes required for a T1 Entosis to capture anything, undock a VNI or Caracal, maybe warp to the TCU or Ihub, chase away or kill the Interceptor, and you're done.

If your system is empty and you cannot get anybody to it in time to prevent the capture that results in reinforcement followed by command node spawning, then you're missing the "occupancy" part.

The system doesn't require occupancy, but it punishes lack of occupancy be inflicting whack-a-mole. It's up to your alliance's judgment to determine how they want to handle it.
It's all that chasing though isn't it? All sorts of points to be captured all over and you're chasing around disposable ships that the enemy don't care about. And all it takes is one of those many points to slip though while you're chasing frigates about for command nodes to be spawning.

The whole idea of sov is it was supposed to promote actual conflict. It has failed to do that.


So in a post that goes into detail how you are fighting throughout your sov to maintain your sov holdings you conclude that no conflict is occurring?

To you i introduce the term, "non sequitor" or as it is sometimes referred to as, "it does not follow". Meaning Your statements of fact dont support your conclusion and in fact in this case your facts actually refute your own conclusion which is even worse.
I think what you and I define as "fighting" are disturbingly different. Chasing disposable ships around is not a fight.

Since you're determined to avoid the point (or too simple to see it), I'll put it in the most basic language I can:
I want to see ships of at least moderate value on both sides going boom. I want to see people trying to take sov, not just slapping a timer then running away to waste the defenders time. The system as it stands does nothing to promote these things.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.