Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
371
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 20:56:00 -
[91] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Thomas Orca wrote:Name Family Name wrote: Small gangs don't need some artificial boost, they need a purpose (and no I don't call 'Killmails' a purpose).
What about gudfites? I thought ~gudfites~ involved hotdropping some moms onto a solo pvp drake.
You don't need that much and you know it, you've even posted lol videos on youtube with a couple cloacky friends ganking ratters. Now you're pretending your opinion about gudfites or about how honorable it is to drop a carrier on whatever drake, actually matters?
Give us a break plz
|
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
371
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 20:58:00 -
[92] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:lol does Gillia really think removing local would help small corps/alliances in 0.0?
The worst of all is he truly believes it, no wonder null will ever get the boosts it deserves.
|
Gillia Winddancer
Shiny Noble Crown Services
220
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 21:07:00 -
[93] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Gillia Winddancer wrote:Which is why we go back to the problem of instant information with Local + d-scan and why the alternative of having the d-scan rely on signature radius becomes so tempting.
After that it is up to the players when it comes to how to utilize an environment where it takes a while to figure out if anyone is in a system and if so what ship is flown and it will be up to players whether they want to move small and swift or in a big blob. So what if a small group is chased by a blob? The small group will then have the advantage of detecting the blob before the blob detects the small group. That gives the small group a chance of getting the hell out, or if they are crazy enough, even attempt some kind of ambush by hiding in anomalies. Regardless of how things play out there will at least be a lot more possible outcomes because there is no instant information available to either side which automatically eliminates quite a few options.
Toss in the removal of structure mails (another instant information tool that promotes blobs) and you have my vote. Information through effort.
Well, to be perfectly honest, I am a bit torn on this one. I definitely get your point but I don't know if removing this entirely is such a good idea as well. The problem lies not as much with the warning email as the whole system involved in taking down a PoS with the whole reinforcement invulnerability time and all that.
On one hand being able to pop a PoS in one go would benefit attackers too much regardless of warning emails and the strength of the defender. On the other hand, a rather lengthy preparation time will always benefit the stronger side, regardless of whether he is an attacker or defender, meaning that attacking the biggest alliances is kinda...risky and probably not worth the time for most. Doubly so if you take the lovely cyno/bridging into consideration.
Some compromise would have to be found in this particular issue. Delayed message due to jamming or some such, I dunno. It's a tough nut regardless. Besides, CCP have been talking about looking into PoS's. Whether that includes warfare I wouldn't really know though. |
Gillia Winddancer
Shiny Noble Crown Services
220
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 21:08:00 -
[94] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:lol does Gillia really think removing local would help small corps/alliances in 0.0? They'll never see the titan blob coming :v:
Titans can fly in high-sec nowadays? Who on earth ever said that all attacks would come from null? |
Luanda Heartbreaker
27
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 22:50:00 -
[95] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Why are you so afraid of the unknown? Why do you only ever post rhetoric?
cos she cant say any usefull, but she has to fill the space. just like in 0.0 |
cheese monkey
Peniz inc...
82
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 22:59:00 -
[96] - Quote
Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. |
Name Family Name
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
102
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 23:30:00 -
[97] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Name Family Name wrote:
Small gangs [...] need a purpose
Shooting structures isn't a great purpose for small gang either.
Yes - they don't serve any meaningful one (killmails and gudfites aren't).
It's what I implied by mentioning they are in need of one. |
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
552
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 01:21:00 -
[98] - Quote
Quote:Yep. The problem with that is that, of course, the small group can field N gangs, while the Larger group can field 2N gangs, meaning that, even if the small group wins every battle they fight, the larger group will win the war in smashing style, having N unattended targets for every round of fighting.
Creating important targets that can only be efficiently fought over by small gangs actually magnifies the power of a larger group.
Of course it does. It's a core part of the game that having friends makes everything work better. EVE is a social game. |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
2996
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 02:44:00 -
[99] - Quote
cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. Last I checked you don't fight against NPCs when you PVP. Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 04:59:00 -
[100] - Quote
cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past.
Given that the AI switches instantly to newcomers in anomalies, even if those newcomers haven't taken any hostile action towards the rats whatsoever, most any sort of solo PvP in null is kind of a pain these days. Supposedly it's a bug, but I haven't heard anything about fixing it. You may know me better as Corestwo: https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/corestwo
This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
|
Luanda Heartbreaker
29
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 05:17:00 -
[101] - Quote
mynnna wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. Given that the AI switches instantly to newcomers in anomalies, even if those newcomers haven't taken any hostile action towards the rats whatsoever, most any sort of solo PvP in null is kind of a pain these days. Supposedly it's a bug, but I haven't heard anything about fixing it.
it seems to be "working as intended" http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=18318073
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
42
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 08:14:00 -
[102] - Quote
Luanda Heartbreaker wrote:mynnna wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. Given that the AI switches instantly to newcomers in anomalies, even if those newcomers haven't taken any hostile action towards the rats whatsoever, most any sort of solo PvP in null is kind of a pain these days. Supposedly it's a bug, but I haven't heard anything about fixing it. it seems to be "working as intended" http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=18318073
I'm not sure what this killmail is supposed to show. I see a Machariel that was ganked by two Cynabals and a Manticore, and figure he probably went down extremely quickly under fire from what was likely either EMP or Barrage ammo. I don't, however, see anything that refutes what I said. You may know me better as Corestwo: https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/corestwo
This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Yatama Kautsuo
Tencus
60
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 11:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
dexington wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:Hmmm... I dunno, but I'll take a stab: Change boosting mechanics to include a "law of diminishing returns" so that boosts give out more bonus to smaller fleets and less boost to larger ones.
So, say, a 10% boost could just up to 20% if the fleet is 5 people or less, or drop to only 5% if the fleet is over 20 people. Just an example. You get the idea. Realistically it would have to be scaled with more complex math (and I hate math, so you do it).
Justification would be simulating that it's easier to manage smaller groups than larger ones. Less strain on computers etc. What would stop people from forming 10 small fleets of 5 people instead of one big 50 man fleet?
probably the 10 needed booster alts... |
Wacktopia
Noir. Black Legion.
360
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 12:14:00 -
[104] - Quote
Anyone who chooses to fly solo or in a small group must accept the risks that come with it. There are of course many advantages of being small compared to a large group.
I am saying this with the experience and enthusiasm of a small-gang advocate. The bottom line is that now I have one of those annoying signatures. |
Miri Amatonur
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
40
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 12:53:00 -
[105] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:One thing I read a lot on these forums is people complaining that nullsec sucks because small groups are at a disadvantage to larger groups in combat merely because of size. Now ignoring the fact that there are ways to mitigate this, I'm curious about a few things.
You say that larger groups should not have an advantage over smaller groups by virtue of their size. First of all, this is not something you can just change because it's basic tactics that larger groups generally overpower smaller ones. This is not some variable CCP developers can go into the code and set "smallerFleetsHaveAdvantage=1;".
Furthermore, even if they could somehow force a mechanic to nullify the advantage that larger groups have over smaller ones in combat, why SHOULD they? That's basically sending a message that "we don't want you to cooperate in large groups, smaller groups are better." Where would they draw the line, anyway? Who's to decide what size of a group is "good" and what size is "bad"?
It's about fights in a away yes. But the scope is wider than just fights.
Alot of people and small enitities are interested in owning and working a SOV system in Null but they aren't interested to be a drone in large alliance or the super coalitions of today. The current system favours numbers. It hasn't to stay that way. PvP and fleets are just one aspect. There is production, ratting, moon mining, PI and so on you didn't even mentioned which is possible in Null. Many if not most small entities are interested in all that actions not just the narrow field you offered here.
Since most of us are no game designers it's not my task to find a way how it could work. We all pay subscriptions in one way or another for our accounts to pay for the content and it's development. Let them come up with something usefull.
WH isn't really claimable. You can say it's yours but it doesn't show anywhere and you can't do everything you can do in SOV Null.
As someone mentioned before. We can read tons of posts in General Discussions from Null that they would like to see more players there and less in highsec but you'll never achive that by nerfing highsec to death. You'll have to offer something. You'll need every aspect of the game workable in Null as or better than in highsec and you need to give small entities a way to raise their flag.
The SOV system has to become strong enough to weather some attacks for a time to keep their investment but it also has to be smart and smooth enough to leave it conquerable.
The risk to move to Null to own SOV is to high for small entities vs it's rewards. They can't compete with the large organisations there but also don't want to join them. So most of them just stay where they can have all aspects of the game everything. Highsec. |
Karrl Tian
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
100
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 13:06:00 -
[106] - Quote
mynnna wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. Given that the AI switches instantly to newcomers in anomalies, even if those newcomers haven't taken any hostile action towards the rats whatsoever, most any sort of solo PvP in null is kind of a pain these days. Supposedly it's a bug, but I haven't heard anything about fixing it.
*Obi-Wan Kenobi voice*
That's no bug....that's a feature. |
Gillia Winddancer
Shiny Noble Crown Services
237
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 13:13:00 -
[107] - Quote
Miri Amatonur wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:One thing I read a lot on these forums is people complaining that nullsec sucks because small groups are at a disadvantage to larger groups in combat merely because of size. Now ignoring the fact that there are ways to mitigate this, I'm curious about a few things.
You say that larger groups should not have an advantage over smaller groups by virtue of their size. First of all, this is not something you can just change because it's basic tactics that larger groups generally overpower smaller ones. This is not some variable CCP developers can go into the code and set "smallerFleetsHaveAdvantage=1;".
Furthermore, even if they could somehow force a mechanic to nullify the advantage that larger groups have over smaller ones in combat, why SHOULD they? That's basically sending a message that "we don't want you to cooperate in large groups, smaller groups are better." Where would they draw the line, anyway? Who's to decide what size of a group is "good" and what size is "bad"? It's about fights in a away yes. But the scope is wider than just fights. Alot of people and small enitities are interested in owning and working a SOV system in Null but they aren't interested to be a drone in large alliance or the super coalitions of today. The current system favours numbers. It hasn't to stay that way. PvP and fleets are just one aspect. There is production, ratting, moon mining, PI and so on you didn't even mentioned which is possible in Null. Many if not most small entities are interested in all that actions not just the narrow field you offered here. Since most of us are no game designers it's not my task to find a way how it could work. We all pay subscriptions in one way or another for our accounts to pay for the content and it's development. Let them come up with something usefull. WH isn't really claimable. You can say it's yours but it doesn't show anywhere and you can't do everything you can do in SOV Null. As someone mentioned before. We can read tons of posts in General Discussions from Null that they would like to see more players there and less in highsec but you'll never achive that by nerfing highsec to death. You'll have to offer something. You'll need every aspect of the game workable in Null as or better than in highsec and you need to give small entities a way to raise their flag. The SOV system has to become strong enough to weather some attacks for a time to keep their investment but it also has to be smart and smooth enough to leave it conquerable. The risk to move to Null to own SOV is to high for small entities vs it's rewards. They can't compete with the large organisations there but also don't want to join them. So most of them just stay where they can have all aspects of the game everything. Highsec.
This in a nutshell. Just too bad that so many ignore these facts. On purpose too no doubt.
|
cheese monkey
Peniz inc...
85
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 07:44:00 -
[108] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. Last I checked you don't fight against NPCs when you PVP.
Check again |
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1302
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 08:13:00 -
[109] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:" Where would they draw the line, anyway? Who's to decide what size of a group is "good" and what size is "bad"?
If your group is bigger than their group, you're evil and CCP should change everything about the game to stop you.
Pretty simple, really.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1412
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 08:21:00 -
[110] - Quote
Wacktopia wrote:Anyone who chooses to fly solo or in a small group must accept the risks that come with it. There are of course many advantages of being small compared to a large group.
I am saying this with the experience and enthusiasm of a small-gang advocate. Bloody Noir.
But always fun to kill Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1412
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 08:25:00 -
[111] - Quote
Miri Amatonur wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:One thing I read a lot on these forums is people complaining that nullsec sucks because small groups are at a disadvantage to larger groups in combat merely because of size. Now ignoring the fact that there are ways to mitigate this, I'm curious about a few things.
You say that larger groups should not have an advantage over smaller groups by virtue of their size. First of all, this is not something you can just change because it's basic tactics that larger groups generally overpower smaller ones. This is not some variable CCP developers can go into the code and set "smallerFleetsHaveAdvantage=1;".
Furthermore, even if they could somehow force a mechanic to nullify the advantage that larger groups have over smaller ones in combat, why SHOULD they? That's basically sending a message that "we don't want you to cooperate in large groups, smaller groups are better." Where would they draw the line, anyway? Who's to decide what size of a group is "good" and what size is "bad"? It's about fights in a away yes. But the scope is wider than just fights. Alot of people and small enitities are interested in owning and working a SOV system in Null but they aren't interested to be a drone in large alliance or the super coalitions of today. The current system favours numbers. It hasn't to stay that way. PvP and fleets are just one aspect. There is production, ratting, moon mining, PI and so on you didn't even mentioned which is possible in Null. Many if not most small entities are interested in all that actions not just the narrow field you offered here. Since most of us are no game designers it's not my task to find a way how it could work. We all pay subscriptions in one way or another for our accounts to pay for the content and it's development. Let them come up with something usefull. WH isn't really claimable. You can say it's yours but it doesn't show anywhere and you can't do everything you can do in SOV Null. As someone mentioned before. We can read tons of posts in General Discussions from Null that they would like to see more players there and less in highsec but you'll never achive that by nerfing highsec to death. You'll have to offer something. You'll need every aspect of the game workable in Null as or better than in highsec and you need to give small entities a way to raise their flag. The SOV system has to become strong enough to weather some attacks for a time to keep their investment but it also has to be smart and smooth enough to leave it conquerable. The risk to move to Null to own SOV is to high for small entities vs it's rewards. They can't compete with the large organisations there but also don't want to join them. So most of them just stay where they can have all aspects of the game everything. Highsec. Should the changes in the other thread or something similar ever see the light of day, Null will need more industrial types and not just Alliances like Goonswarm and TEST, they all will. Now while it may not be possible for an alliance of 10 Indy guys to claim SOV it will allow more INDY corps to make good money while under the protection of PvPers.
The whole objective really needs to be to not kill Hi-sec but to make Null a place where more than just PvP scum want to go.
Were alliances rely on the abilities of not just the PvPers to protect them but the Indy guys to support their efforts and help fund their alliances. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2237
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 13:05:00 -
[112] - Quote
Gillia Winddancer wrote:I am not saying that small gangs should be able to fly around and leave scrapheaps of former PoS's behind them. I am saying that small gangs should have the ability to harass as a means of fighting the "big guys" or anyone else. The economic damages would hardly be massive in any kind of way, but enough harassment overtime would still have an effect.
The manner at which these small gangs handle the "response" of their enemies is up to them. Either they get harassed back or get a full blob on them...or attempted blob anyway.
Here is my counter question: do you want to see more people in low/null? Cause you know, I believe we are in the agreement that not everyone wants to join a blob super-power or some such yet at the same time have absolutely no way of doing anything against them that would cause any kind of damage over time.
Small gangs already have the capacity to effectively harass the "big guys." Bombers, BLOPs Drops, AWOXing fleets, Suicide Ganking Freighters/JFs, Cloaky Camping, AFK Cloaking. If the "big guys" are able to effectively keep their morale up in the face of all of this on the grandest scale you can provide, well, too bad, their organization is too strong for you to hurt. But you'll generate a fair amount of Drama in most alliances using these tactics, and that's the goal of harassment. In EVE, the small gang is PsyOps. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. -á Back Again. |
Miri Amatonur
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
45
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 15:44:00 -
[113] - Quote
Gillia Winddancer wrote: (...) Just too bad that so many ignore these facts. On purpose too no doubt.
It doesn't matter if members of super cooperations/alliances/coalitions ignore the facts. It's an idea with potential.
The ones who matter are the developer within CCP. Some read this forums. Let's hope they find the idea interesting. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3024
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 15:57:00 -
[114] - Quote
cheese monkey wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. Last I checked you don't fight against NPCs when you PVP. Check again "Ganking ratters isn't pvp" Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2240
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 00:27:00 -
[115] - Quote
Miri Amatonur wrote:You are right that 10 player organisations will ever be to small to achive something in Null. But it shouldn't take thousands of characters to raise the flag and keep it there. A few hundred should be enough.
Some basic ideas like upgrading SOV are great. But there should be other defensible features than EHP of SOV moduls.
So, why should a few hundred people be able to take a and hold a system from a few thousand who are actively defending it? If your few hundred people can get the few thousand to not actively defend the system you want, you'll have no problem taking it (iHubs and TCUs don't take that many people to take down in a reasonable amount of time).
Basically, you're complaining that "people working together" is OP and suggesting that it should be nerfed. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. -á Back Again. |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
3024
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 00:46:00 -
[116] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:cheese monkey wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:cheese monkey wrote:Have you actually tried to PVP in null ina frigate these days?
NPC AI changes make small frigate gangs a thing of the past. Last I checked you don't fight against NPCs when you PVP. Check again "Ganking ratters isn't pvp" My point was how he's complaining about small frigate gangs being impossible due to NPCs. They're not, they're just significantly more limited in where they can go. I'm not denying there's a problem with that, I'm just saying small gangs aren't dead. Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm |
Dani Lizardov
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
11
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 00:47:00 -
[117] - Quote
Luanda Heartbreaker wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:One thing I read a lot on these forums is people complaining that nullsec sucks because small groups are at a disadvantage to larger groups in combat merely because of size. Now ignoring the fact that there are ways to mitigate this, I'm curious about a few things.
You say that larger groups should not have an advantage over smaller groups by virtue of their size. First of all, this is not something you can just change because it's basic tactics that larger groups generally overpower smaller ones. This is not some variable CCP developers can go into the code and set "smallerFleetsHaveAdvantage=1;".
Furthermore, even if they could somehow force a mechanic to nullify the advantage that larger groups have over smaller ones in combat, why SHOULD they? That's basically sending a message that "we don't want you to cooperate in large groups, smaller groups are better." Where would they draw the line, anyway? Who's to decide what size of a group is "good" and what size is "bad"? you take the wrong side of the question... we live in null and quite successful in small numbers, my ceptor alt was active for like 2 days in delve and killed 20 goon test razor pilot while lost an empty travel frig only, nothing in combat. the problem is, they still won the war. nobody will ever be able to compete with those, so there are 2 choices, lick an ass or leave. i can go there alone and live and get plenty of kills, but i cant build a stable background to start my roams from and earn my isk to buy and fit my ships, you can just live there, while they want you to live there, cos if that fleet start to move, you have no any chance to stop it... especially if they have unlimited range to hotdrop anywhere in the universe
The problem that you are talking about it's not related to bigger = better. The problem here is that kills does not matter. You will never be able to do enoght dmg, just by killing few ships.
The value of a kill is so low as the value of the individual in the group. Therefor, goons and test are unbeatable :)
They also have silly money to create a risk free pvp env. This is why i don't like then, I liked the risk vs reward that existed back in the days... |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3101
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 02:22:00 -
[118] - Quote
Dani Lizardov wrote:The problem that you are talking about it's not related to bigger = better. The problem here is that kills does not matter. You will never be able to do enoght dmg, just by killing few ships.
The value of a kill is so low as the value of the individual in the group. Therefor, goons and test are unbeatable :)
They also have silly money to create a risk free pvp env. This is why i don't like then, I liked the risk vs reward that existed back in the days... I see the risks you took didn't pay off. Since, you know, our blues are sitting on your moons. I thought moons were passive and riskless?
It's ok, though, EVE is harsh and cold. And blobby. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3101
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 02:23:00 -
[119] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Miri Amatonur wrote:You are right that 10 player organisations will ever be to small to achive something in Null. But it shouldn't take thousands of characters to raise the flag and keep it there. A few hundred should be enough.
Some basic ideas like upgrading SOV are great. But there should be other defensible features than EHP of SOV moduls. So, why should a few hundred people be able to take a and hold a system from a few thousand who are actively defending it? If your few hundred people can get the few thousand to not actively defend the system you want, you'll have no problem taking it (iHubs and TCUs don't take that many people to take down in a reasonable amount of time). Basically, you're complaining that "people working together" is OP and suggesting that it should be nerfed. "make smaller much better" Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1541
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 02:36:00 -
[120] - Quote
As I have said in other threads Sov needs to be tied to usage so smaller groups can take sov under the radar as it were by using a system more than the owners so reducing its sov level over time and then capturing it.
Having the ability to ignore a system you hold sov in and then just titan bridging over to it if someone attacks it does not further the game.
Having to use a system to upgrade it or take it does.
It also means more abilities for PvP rather than just blob. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |