These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Galatea] First batch of sov capture iterations

First post First post
Author
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#361 - 2015-08-19 13:12:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Alp Khan
Tallardar wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10


Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad.


Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :)
Smertyukovitch
Caladari CareBear Corporation
#362 - 2015-08-19 13:13:43 UTC
For crying out loud CCP! Not only your 4km\s speed limit doesnt change anything but you've made it easier to troll station services! You can still do it in a ceptor, you can still do it in a cruiser with some webs \ target jammers... When and who decided that this kind of soverenity worth anything?! ISK\hour for most 0.0 players is now lower than ever cince you can't now delegate control over figthers, running unrated sites with your carrier is also an issue, logistics is crap (it takes about hour of wathing REALLY ENTERTAINING SHINY COLORED CIRCLES to get something from Jita to most 0.0 space), you don't even get massive fights couse capitals are now nearly useless and it takes 5 characters in crappy ships up to 24m to disable your station. Exitement without a need to play 23/7!
Tallardar
Doomheim
#363 - 2015-08-19 13:16:12 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
Tallardar wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10


Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad.


Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :)


I thought MOA were ESL?
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#364 - 2015-08-19 13:18:03 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:
yogizh wrote:
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:
yogizh wrote:
Will you also create a ship that can track a ceptor moving at 4000 m/s ?
Cause that was your policy right ? Having a counter to everything ?

This change solves nothing.


Ever heard of precision missiles and nano-ships....? A nano-fitted Scythe Fleet Issue with Rapid Lights will easily kill a 4000 m/s trollceptor, better with speed-booster on grid, but also without it. There are more examples.


Yes, in case you can make it to the attacker alive thru places like X-7O in a ship with 0 tank.


Because when you gewn, you gewn hard - I mean, jump bridges ceased to exist... when again?
Really, trust it to gewns to be afraid of rolling in their own region...

Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Surely the real problem is that Interceptors should never have been given interdiction nullification in the first place. This was a huge mistake and should be rolled back yesterday.

Interceptors online needs to go away.

Delicious gewn tears. Keep it coming!
ED: In case someone misunderstands, the post above states "qqqq I can't kill a paper plane ship, nerf pls".


No, it states "certain groups who always want to avoid fights are abusing the system by using uncatchable entosis ships and since they aren't interested in maintaining sov or any space assets because they are not willing to fight, they just dabble in entosis stuff for trolling".

However, if we actually proceeded and went through what your... 'posts'... meant, we'd have to agree on calling social services and placing you under their stewardship depending on whatever jurisdiction you somehow managed to establish your presence under.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#365 - 2015-08-19 13:18:23 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
Warmeister wrote:
troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
...
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.

While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing.
This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.
People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin.

i didn't say null sec is not worth living in. you don't see people evacing their assets and dropping sov, so obviously it is worth it. especially considering the stupid amount of money people make from rental empires and the fact that there are people willing to pay that money.

what i said is that people capture sov but don't intend to live in it. the sole purpose of it is so they can see a big spot on the map with their name so when someone comes and tries to take it away from them, instead of showing up to protect this space, they cry to CCP about broken mechanics.


Actually, you do see people evacuating assets, quite regularly.
Alliance's are dropping sov, some merging into other alliances some just leaving nul.

The groups who hold sov "just to see the big spot on the map" sadly are the ones who aren't really at risk of losing anything due to armies of blues.
It is up to individual alliances to decide whether they want to play eve or blues online. So far, "blues online" seems to be winning on all fronts.

Give it a few more months and "blues online" will have spread enough that things will again settle into quiet isk making (and complaining about no content)

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#366 - 2015-08-19 13:21:41 UTC
Tallardar wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
Tallardar wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10


Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad.


Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :)


I thought MOA were ESL?


Only one or two corps within MoA are truly ESL, the rest are led by native speakers. The only exception is that the fact that Gen Eve is a sucker for a certain Serbian war criminal, but he pointed out before that he lives overseas in a English native country for higher education.

Other than that, my good friend MASSADEATH has publicly stated before that English is his native language.
Tallardar
Doomheim
#367 - 2015-08-19 13:23:47 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
Tallardar wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
Tallardar wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
Obvious MoA shill forum alt detected, terrible spelling and lack of knowledge in English grammar made it obvious. 1/10


Have you looked at the Legion of xXDeathXx posts? They're just as bad.


Hendrick, actually I did. But they have a valid excuse since most, if not virtually all of them, are ESL speakers by the virtue of being Russian native speakers. One wonders what MoA's excuse could be? :)


I thought MOA were ESL?


Only one or two corps within MoA are truly ESL, the rest are led by native speakers. The only exception is that the fact that Gen Eve is a sucker for a certain Serbian war criminal, but he pointed out before that he lives overseas in a English native country for higher education.

Other than that, my good friend MASSADEATH has publicly stated before that English is his native language.


Didn't Gen Eve have to change their name because they named their main after a war criminal who committed genocide?
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#368 - 2015-08-19 13:23:52 UTC
Zloco Crendraven wrote:

- And ofc better UI. But Punkturis is already on top of its game.



Agreed. Besides Punkturis, there are other team five-o team members that I personally believe in their excellence in their specialty tasks. I personally appreciate their work very much.
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#369 - 2015-08-19 13:31:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Alp Khan
Tallardar wrote:
Didn't Gen Eve have to change their name because they named their main after a war criminal who committed genocide?



That is indeed accurate. By his public personal claim, Gen Eve has pointed out before his character was originally named 'Gen Mladic', which refers to one General Ratko Mladić (a.k.a. 'The Butcher of Bosnia') who's been accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide by the International Court of Justice and currently is on trial for said accusations.

AFAIK you cannot name your EVE characters after people like Hitler, Idi Amin, Mladic etc.

(I suspect he might be the Internet personality who came up with 'Remove Kebab' without any intention to create a meme or a sense of irony)
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#370 - 2015-08-19 13:36:43 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Cat silth wrote:
More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not


Okay I don't get this reasoning. Litterally the only difference between shooting and entosising in this game currently is the sound and visual effect of the weapon. When you're sieging a structure with 8 guns you're still orbiting and pressing F1, same as now. If they made the Entosis link make a pew pew sound, would that make it more fun for you? Roll

that's the only difference you can see?
how about, for example one big difference is that shooting things give you a killmail while entosing things give you nothing; a killmaill in a pvp game, how about that difference?
should i go on? Roll
TigerXtrm
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#371 - 2015-08-19 13:37:36 UTC
gascanu wrote:
TigerXtrm wrote:
Cat silth wrote:
More boring spining round a structures , give me something to shoot for gods sake , fozzie sov is boring lets creat content , not


Okay I don't get this reasoning. Litterally the only difference between shooting and entosising in this game currently is the sound and visual effect of the weapon. When you're sieging a structure with 8 guns you're still orbiting and pressing F1, same as now. If they made the Entosis link make a pew pew sound, would that make it more fun for you? Roll

that's the only difference you can see?
how about, for example one big difference is that shooting things give you a killmail while entosing things give you nothing; a killmaill in a pvp game, how about that difference?
should i go on? Roll


Please do, killmail whoring does not convince me.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#372 - 2015-08-19 13:39:47 UTC
bear mcgreedy wrote:
If you insist on this entosis bull make it so these so called small gang warfare can happen

remove the ceptor idea totally its bull no major entity wants it 0.0 it doesn't create content, as command ships are not used due to t3 boosters make it so the command ships can entosis maybe review the bonuses that it gets a hp boost while in entosis mode (similar to bastion on marauder) also make it so the entosising ship can also receive reps. but can be jammed or the cycle can be itterupted to reset the timer

alternatively look at t3 having a subsystem which means it can entosis but make it so the subsystem is the same as nullified so to stop them be able to warp off while bubbled.

the whole idea of taking sov is that as an attacker you want that system not for sh*ts and giggles by having a command ship have the entosis link it means that you have more to lose by travelling through hostile systems with support this will be seen by hostile scouts be reported and a fleet will be scattered to go intercept why ? because content is created and kms to be had.

look at every single video ccp has made when you have a so called fight every ship has support in a hostile system im waiting cor the new trailer where you just have one ceptor going around the system for 3 minutes

take the ceptor idea and throw it away before you either get fired or get made redundant fozzie..



Another delicious gewn tears sample! I will quote the gem:

bear mcgreedy wrote:
no major entity wants it 0.0

You may not realize it (being gewn you don't have much thought going on usually) but that's the core reason it is a most welcome change.
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Tactical Farmers
#373 - 2015-08-19 13:42:01 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.

does this 'sharp drop' manifests itself in ways other than people like yourself whining on forums? Because the status monitor doesn't show any sharp drops in the past 6 months.
JiN Azuma
KILL Corp
#374 - 2015-08-19 13:45:01 UTC
My suggestions.

1) Limit the entosis module to battle cruiser and above.

This would make it remain accessible to smaller low SP groups while removing the troll interceptor's

2) increase the manufacturing cost of entosis modules, add a irreparable damage to them like T2 crystals but with a lower durability.

That will make spamming systems costly to the attacking alliance and discourage sov trolling for the sake of sov trolling. If someone wants to take someones space away there should be a cost involved, and this wont prevent you from burning an entities sov to the ground it will just attach a price to it.

3) Add a new capital entosis module that will entosis all free nodes in the current system, smaller entities could stop this by manually attacking nodes. Keep the capital penalty.

This gives us a chance to use cap ships in fozzie sov, it also puts those ships on the field to be attacked. I would much rather escort an expensive ship with the chance of a fight than have to sit on a node watching a timer while 10 other pilots do the same thing.

4) Add decay to the nodes based on the index of the system.

The whole point of fozzie sov is to occupy the space you own, if you can lock down the area then you have proven that this is the case. I think most players would rather go on a roam or set up a gate camp than watch timers tick down on magical space beacons. If a hostile activates a beacon then this timed decay should be extended/stopped for a set period so that the attacker has to put effort into taking space. As it stands someone can fly through your space entosising random systems and creating work for the sov holders with no further input from them.
Tallardar
Doomheim
#375 - 2015-08-19 13:45:07 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.

does this 'sharp drop' manifests itself in ways other than people like yourself whining on forums? Because the status monitor doesn't show any sharp drops in the past 6 months.


It's not a sharp drop, but it's certainly been peetering out over the past 6 months compared to previous years.

http://puu.sh/jGWlo/5fe24d1b4d.png

That said it's still been an issue that's dated back to 2014.
Warmeister
Tactical Farmers.
Tactical Farmers
#376 - 2015-08-19 13:48:53 UTC
Atum' Ra wrote:

Why someone mst create an alliance?
Someone need to get to the alliance! Hi-sec alliace and nothing more!
That char can be an alt of anyone with 1 mil SP
That sound like: " I'm 8 years old I know very much about everything, and now I want to be a president of a small country! Give me please the ability to be! " Shocked

That sov is the benining of the end.

i don't know why. you said defender has to pay whole of 1b to create alliance to hold sov, which is a disadvantage.
i'm just explaining you that attacker has to wear same costs. probably even more if you calculate cost vs member number ratio

it doesn't really matter what SP that alt has. if he only has 1m sp then you can fend him off with a 1m sp toon. but you won't even know how much SP the attacker has if you dont turn up
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#377 - 2015-08-19 13:49:09 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
No, it states "certain groups who always want to avoid fights are abusing the system by using uncatchable entosis ships and since they aren't interested in maintaining sov or any space assets because they are not willing to fight, they just dabble in entosis stuff for trolling".

Hear, hear! The goonie here claims that MoA, then #1 gewn killer, the member of top10 killboard stats (and one of two entities in top10 which does not pad their killboard on helpless freighters in hisec), is... not willing to fight!

They are not interested in maintaining sov - true. But they are interested in YOU not being able to maintain your sov, which makes their attacks a legit fighting agenda rather than "trolling" you seem to be so butthurt about.

So what do you think MoA does if it's not fighting? Ratting 23/7 like an average gewn? lmao, gewnologic.

Alp Khan wrote:
However, if we actually proceeded and went through what your... 'posts'... meant, we'd have to agree on calling social services and placing you under their stewardship depending on whatever jurisdiction you somehow managed to establish your presence under.

I have no idea what you mean here, but I think that was supposed to be an insult among gewns, which only someone as unsophisticated as gewn could understand and take as an insult. But hey, keep trying, and maybe one day you'll actually get under my skin. You sound like you have 80 years ahead to try it, you know...

P.S. Your tears are much appreciated. Please keep them coming.
TrickyBlackSteel
Black Consuls
#378 - 2015-08-19 13:50:16 UTC
lets change a few numbers from 10 o 4 and we make a new patch guys ),yeaaaa lets gooo
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#379 - 2015-08-19 13:54:02 UTC
Tallardar wrote:
The last time any major space battle was reported by non-gaming sites focusing on EVE was in February 2014. That was 18 months ago and no one has even tried or attempted to create another major battle on that scale between then and now.
I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur.

Warmeister wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
And clearly if that's what was being hoped for, it's failed, since the user count is still continuing to drop sharply.

does this 'sharp drop' manifests itself in ways other than people like yourself whining on forums? Because the status monitor doesn't show any sharp drops in the past 6 months.
Shocked ... Wut? Are you sure you're looking at the right stats? Take a look at EVE-offline YTD 2015. Even the peaks in July and August are at best on par with the average for the year so far.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Tallardar
Doomheim
#380 - 2015-08-19 13:56:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tallardar
Lucas Kell wrote:
I agree, null has been stagnant, that's why we've all agreed that a change is needed. Unfortunately that change is seemingly an attempt to make it even less likely that a large scale battle will occur.


Right, except no one was close to doing that nor trying to for over a year before the sov changes came out anyway.

Fozziesov isn't the sole reason those battles aren't occurring. The players have to be willing to throw their fleets at one another, and presently it appears that's not happening because of a lack of value in winning whatever systems or regions. Since the current sov system is less than 8 weeks old, I'm willing to give CCP time to implement changes to make the systems valuable enough in terms of natural resources.

That should have been done first before this tweak to Fozziesov though.