Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Ben Ishikela
20
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:04:05 -
[1021] - Quote
uiuiuiuiui, .... took some time too read through all of it. its amazingly easy and provides lots of opportunity to fight. Now i even consider going there.
One question for now (more tomorrow) : What happens, if a ship that has applied the link, dies? is its progress deleted? can its progress be continued by friend? does this friend have to have a secondary link already active to be able to continue? If it is like the timer in FW atm, where the timer stops if nothing is active and can even be continued later in these 4 hours, then +1 for this point.
No more nerfing of percieved Overpowered Content!
It makes a game boring after too many iterations. Instead add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to fight the current Meta.
|
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
147
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:06:46 -
[1022] - Quote
the misles will never get to this ares, not eaven from cerberus.
Remeber every second this ceptor do another 4 km, so every second you lose another 4 km from the missle.
Missles will run out of fuel before they can get to any of those interceptors.
Sniper naga would be much better for this. Chep max range, will track ceptor on this insane orbit with no problems. |
Zip Slings
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
63
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:06:46 -
[1023] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:uiuiuiuiui, .... took some time too read through all of it. its amazingly easy and provides lots of opportunity to fight. Now i even consider going there.
One question for now (more tomorrow) : What happens, if a ship that has applied the link, dies? is its progress deleted? can its progress be continued by friend? does this friend have to have a secondary link already active to be able to continue? If it is like the timer in FW atm, where the timer stops if nothing is active and can even be continued later in these 4 hours, then +1 for this point.
We had the same question. I think it makes sense for any broken link's progress to be saved and either restarted by an ally or undone by an enemy, regardless of why the link was broken. |
Zip Slings
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
63
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:07:49 -
[1024] - Quote
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:the misles will never get to this ares, not eaven from cerberus. Remeber every second this ceptor do another 4 km, so every second you lose another 4 km from the missle. Missles will run out of fuel before they can get to any of those interceptors. Sniper naga would be much better for this. Chep max range, will track ceptor on this insane orbit with no problems.
Works for me :) anything to get people to shut up about this interceptor nonsense and focus on the actual issues with this system. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
137
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:07:54 -
[1025] - Quote
Bit late but here's my counter for 56 of those Ares (assuming you put light neutrons in the two remaining highslots not taken by the link)
http://i.imgur.com/3iy4TtX.jpg
come at me brah
:D |
captain foivos
State War Academy Caldari State
269
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:09:16 -
[1026] - Quote
Zip Slings wrote:Works for me :) anything to get people to shut up about this interceptor nonsense and focus on the actual issues with this system.
the interceptors are an actual issue with the system |
Roofdog2
Penn Industries
4
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:10:08 -
[1027] - Quote
captain foivos wrote:You can't kill what you can't catch, hope that helps.
first off, plz bring a 100 of those in my space. its pretty easy to just kill them all without a scratch on my naga. or has noone heard of tracking enhancers on sniper ships? and that nice align time isn't gonne help you since you got a module on which blocks you from warping and has a quite long cicle time.
Only thing i think is going to be a problem is the Ihub. An Ihub cost around 350 mil which isn't that big of a deal but the upgrades in there are. At the moment a fully upgraded Ihub costs around 6.5 bil without taking in consideration that you have to move a lot of the upgrades in by fraigter instead of JF couz of the size. And with the new changes you can blow these things up in around 40 min. Looking at the ease of how you can blow one of these up and how mutch they cost, i think the Ihubs need to be rebalanced. Basicly make them less m3 including the upgrades and make them around the 1 bil total cost. Else it will not be worth it hanging something so easely distroyed up in 0.0 , but without them, its not even worth living anywhere in 0.0
at least, thats my vieuw on it.
|
Barbaydos
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:10:18 -
[1028] - Quote
Zip Slings wrote:4. "The 'Primetime' Mechanic" This one is the only one that has some actual merit behind it. There is something to be said for "off" time pilots. So... My suggested change: We can keep the proposed 4 hour vulnerability window. Having Alliances have to be most vigilant in their own stated prime time makes sense. BUT the idea that an alliance should be completely invulnerable to SOV attack for the other 20 hours is ridiculous. Instead, have the other 20 hours work on a sliding scale. 4 hours before and after "primetime," that alliance's structures require Entosis Links to cycle for twice as long as during "primetime." Four hours before and after that, three times as long. Etc. These are numbers off the top of my head and could be thought out more and normalized etc. Either way this makes SOV vulnerable round the clock but MOST vulnerable during primetime and least vulnerable in off times. The only thing I can't figure out is how to manage when things would come out of reinforce depending on when it was reinforced. Discuss.
well if you take it so that it takes 2x or 3x as long to reinforce the structure outside of prime time then you take the multiplier and apply it to the timer window itself and move it up to 2/3 x the original 4 hour window |
Zip Slings
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
63
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:11:44 -
[1029] - Quote
captain foivos wrote:Zip Slings wrote:Works for me :) anything to get people to shut up about this interceptor nonsense and focus on the actual issues with this system. the interceptors are an actual issue with the system
You mean the part where people have to actually defend their space when people start reinforcing things? The part where interceptors can't actually hold a field in a real SOV fight? Where exactly should I fear the interceptor? |
captain foivos
State War Academy Caldari State
269
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:12:15 -
[1030] - Quote
Zip Slings wrote:captain foivos wrote:Zip Slings wrote:Works for me :) anything to get people to shut up about this interceptor nonsense and focus on the actual issues with this system. the interceptors are an actual issue with the system You mean the part where people have to actually defend their space when people start reinforcing things? The part where interceptors can't actually hold a field in a real SOV fight? Where exactly should I fear the interceptor?
have you ever been to nullsec
serious question |
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30736
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:12:51 -
[1031] - Quote
Is this not a huge buff to solo PVP. Now one dude with halitosis can pick all the fights they want
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Zip Slings
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
63
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:13:40 -
[1032] - Quote
Roofdog2 wrote:captain foivos wrote:You can't kill what you can't catch, hope that helps. first off, plz bring a 100 of those in my space. its pretty easy to just kill them all without a scratch on my naga. or has noone heard of tracking enhancers on sniper ships? and that nice align time isn't gonne help you since you got a module on which blocks you from warping and has a quite long cicle time. Only thing i think is going to be a problem is the Ihub. An Ihub cost around 350 mil which isn't that big of a deal but the upgrades in there are. At the moment a fully upgraded Ihub costs around 6.5 bil without taking in consideration that you have to move a lot of the upgrades in by fraigter instead of JF couz of the size. And with the new changes you can blow these things up in around 40 min. Looking at the ease of how you can blow one of these up and how mutch they cost, i think the Ihubs need to be rebalanced. Basicly make them less m3 including the upgrades and make them around the 1 bil total cost. Else it will not be worth it hanging something so easely distroyed up in 0.0 , but without them, its not even worth living anywhere in 0.0 at least, thats my vieuw on it.
I don't disagree that a lot of your points on IHubs are valid but they cant be blown up in 40 mins. They can be reinforced, but then everyone has a timer to fight over. Same large scale strategic objective with arguably more complexity/difficulty. |
Soleil Fournier
StarFleet Enterprises
29
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:15:53 -
[1033] - Quote
You're on the right track, but it's very incomplete.
Suggestion 1)
There should be cruiser-specific objectives, battleship-specific objectives, and capital-specific objectives. These objective would require the use of that specific sized Entosis module.
Command Nodes should be for cruiser entosis Modules. X Nodes should be for battleship Entosis Modules. Stations/Ihubs should be for capitals Entosis Modules.
Reasoning:
All shiptypes should be included in sov. I can't get capital combat anywhere else, but this design kills capital combat by not requiring their use. Using a design practice as shown above will ensure that all players get to participate in their favorite playstyle without causing it t be detrimental to other playstyles.
Suggestion 2)
When a station service is "captured" or "incapped" There should be a 24-hour timer before it can be reactivated.
Reasoning: Consequences. If I can just "repair" a service 5 minutes after a hostile gang incaps it, there really isn't a consequence and it'll just be a carry over of design failures of the dominion system. Consequences like this make sense.
I like a ton of what you've done, but you have to really just go that extra step now.
|
Zip Slings
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
63
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:16:27 -
[1034] - Quote
captain foivos wrote:Zip Slings wrote:captain foivos wrote:Zip Slings wrote:Works for me :) anything to get people to shut up about this interceptor nonsense and focus on the actual issues with this system. the interceptors are an actual issue with the system You mean the part where people have to actually defend their space when people start reinforcing things? The part where interceptors can't actually hold a field in a real SOV fight? Where exactly should I fear the interceptor? have you ever been to nullsec serious question
A. Yes. I have lived in null my entire EVE career.
B. This change is designed to change how you think about SOV mechanics. Shocker. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30736
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:17:48 -
[1035] - Quote
Dear CCP Fozzie, I suggest making the tosser module a default warpable item in overview like cynos.
Can you also make the tosser module eject pods from their ship? Ship sov contests would be fun.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
677
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:19:11 -
[1036] - Quote
And I counter with this Muninn: 70 dps at 100km against your inty's numbers. Two or three shots and you're dead.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Proton Stars
OREfull
36
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:21:30 -
[1037] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Dear CCP Fozzie, I suggest making the tosser module a default warpable item in overview like cynos.
Can you also make the tosser module eject pods from their ship? Ship sov contests would be fun.
Ha! Tosser module. And like the model T ford.... |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2062
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:22:20 -
[1038] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:MeBiatch wrote:Okay here is the idea.
MAKE tech II (tier 3) battleships. I would call them Flag ships.
They are the only ones that can fit the Entosis Link.
Make the Entosis Link a variation of the bastion module. so it gets bonus to hull resist and armor and shield.
Make some lore about how the drifter technology is extremely advanced and it requires a specialised ship to do so.
this mean tech II black abbadon
tech II red hyperion
tech II camo rokh
tech II mael
.................. Sure, and they keep their sov by hiding behind bubbles, and instalock gatecamps thirty jumps away from where you want to take. Nothing changed good game! , CCP are not stupid enough to fall for this, give them SOME respect. Possibly you would like a super jump fatigue temoval module on top?
you should be able to defend space you live in... its the space they dont actively live in that should be vulnerable
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Coelomate
Gilliomate Corp
28
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:26:45 -
[1039] - Quote
Dispersed conflict: People are underestimating how spread out conflict will be - "just" 5 command nodes will only happen if attacking a single station on its second timer. If you reinforce every structure in a constellation you get dozens of command nodes. The strategic choices will be interesting, and conflicts could have mixed results, with attackers picking up a few structures but failing to get others.
Occupancy: More metrics need to be included in defensive bonus calculation. The 3 current indices are just length of time held, rats killed, and ore mined. PI, PVP activity, market activity, and many other activities should get rolled into the system, or else you'll see min/maxing to the indices (which will mean unironic mining ops that will bore people to death).
Supers: The size of your super fleet will now determine the quality of space you can hold, not the quantity of it you can hold. This started to be true in Phoebe, but these changes will really cement it. That's probably healthier for the game, but realistically supers are going to become more valuable than sov, so one wonders how willing people will be to commit them.
Prime time: I like 4 hours of prime time. It's a violent change and will cause huge strife to existing social structures, but that pain will result in an EVE where groups of pilots who actually log on at the same time are playing with (and against!) one another. That shuffle is also likely to see some coalitions fragment (at least initially), because your alliance only needs to beef up a single timezone for defense.
Sov structure placement: I may have missed this in the blog, but what will be require to place a TCU, ihub, or station? If the answer is "nothing" then TCU races after big sov battles and dropping caldari research stations in other people's sov could become a thing...
Armor caps: Just a funny thought, but with no more final armor timers, that's one less reason to focus on an armor/super doctrine.
Love,
~Coelomate
|
Kyonko Nola
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
10
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:27:37 -
[1040] - Quote
I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time
KitKatSimKatKo
|
|
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
140
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:28:40 -
[1041] - Quote
Kyonko Nola wrote:I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time In which case you just plonk an atron at zero...sigh. |
Robertson Nolen
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:28:47 -
[1042] - Quote
Wait, I just thought of a better system while reading the thread! Instead of inti-wars entosis links, why not add a new class of ship! Call them starbase bashers or something. Their weapons are very powerful against starbases, but only do minimal damage to other ships. When firing they have to anchor (or something) reducing their velocity, preventing warps, and reducing RR received by like 75%. Send a bunch of these ships out and as soon as they begin attacking a sov structure, a warning is sent out to the alliance owner. The alliance comes to defend to station from destruction but oh wait the starbase basher is surrounded by bubbles. Now you need to fight through defenders to reach the starbase basher because its starbase bashing weapons have a range of 300 km (or something).
Prime time would need a bit of a rework, but alliances could split their attacking fleets to cover more systems and spread out defenders
Reduce jump fatigue to give caps a break
Boom, I came up with a slightly better system than CCP in 10 minutes. |
Kalissa
Sacred Templars DARKNESS.
58
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:33:54 -
[1043] - Quote
As far as what I think about the changes it's a pretty mixed bag, my first thoughts after reading the Dev Blog were positive though. Below are a few of my thoughts/ideas.
The Prime Time idea is in theory a nice idea but the idea behind it assumes that the alliance holding the space is predominantly in the same TZ. That's never happened in any alliance I've ever been a part of and certainly not in Darkness. One of the idea's I had off the top of my head on that was to make there be more than 1 timer per day, not for 4 hours each of course but maybe spread them out a bit. (with some minimum time required between each timer) Maybe a 90 minute timer 3 times a day? With a minimum of 3 hours between each? That way you make it much more likely that your own members in different time zones will be around for some of them.
The Entosis module having a range of 250km for the T2? I hope that was a typo and you meant 25km
For any alliance having a few supers it'd be too easy for them to deploy off a structure and just keep firing Remote ECM's on a rotational basis, since the Entosis module only has an effect as the end of the cycle you could make it so no one ever got to an end of a cycle.
I think the idea of the Freeport and the idea that all structures are now separate is a good one, the way structures will spawn throughout the constellation rather than just in the system is also good and that the way of bringing more people will not quicken the capture of a structure is also welcomed. All the stuff on occupational indices also looks okay to me.
I think that just having the messages going out to the alliance executor corp directors/ceo is a poor idea at best, many alliances keep the number of members in executor corps low for a good reason that the less people you have the less likely you are to be hit with a rogue director dropping all your sovereignty, much better to make sure that everyone from the ground up gets the message if a structure is under attack.
Aside from the ECM burst thing I mentioned before, it worries me that Titans/Supers now have no role, no reason for them to be used which I think means a sharp decline in their usage, I personally hope you have plans for them in the future about giving them something back that only they are really suited to do.
On the whole I'm say I'm about 60% pleased. 30% Disappointed and 10% flat out terrified about the changes (the 10% would be the prime time idea ) But as CCP said this is just a first round of discussions, I have no doubt we'll all get to the a compromise in the end that makes no one feel satisfied (the sign of a truly good compromise)
|
Dradis Aulmais
RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic
710
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:37:16 -
[1044] - Quote
All I heard was the sky is falling
Bunches of hyperbole about a ceptor orbiting while link to the structure. Which prevents the ceptor fromwarping while the mod is active so basically a orbiting duck in a room full of hunters.
I'm cloaked in your thread, stealing your info.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30736
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:38:42 -
[1045] - Quote
Will the module make ships immobile as well, like the other modules it seems to behave like?
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Lister Vindaloo
5 Tons of Flax
40
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:41:09 -
[1046] - Quote
Zip Slings wrote:Lister Vindaloo wrote:There is no excuse for being able to use your 'prime time' window to exclude entire time zones from participating in alliance/corporation activities, it is simply a divisive, segregating mechanic that will disillusion entire groups from attempting to participate in sov warfare, it HAS to go, i dont know how to respond to anyone who supports it as it only reduces content rather than increase it Have a look at my post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5547628#post5547628 and let me know what you think
Any mechanic based on TZ's segregates the community, as an AU player, why would i ever bother being involved in Sov if my chances of participating are base don the TZ i live in.
Just increase the randomness involved in setting a timer so it may or may not fall the way the defensive fleet wants, and allow both parties to figure out how best to contest the timer.
The entire concept of 'prime time' affecting ANY in game maechanic is terrible, we already suffer from the much smaller number of pilots active in AU timezone, lets not add anyhting that further isolates us.
I understand you are trying to modify the concept to make it better, but the entire concept is fundamentally flawed
DEATH TO PRIME TIME! |
PerrinBash
Living the Dream
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:41:48 -
[1047] - Quote
I guess I don't understand all your concerns as I'm not active out there atm. I will tell all this: if one controls a solar system you should have a loss at stake. The current system has some risk with sov mods but its really not much different then the old POS system. I purpose to up the stakes with my 3 tier station system. If you want sov, invest a station and prepare to defend. It will end these empty voids of null sec IMO
|
Illindar Tyrannus
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:41:57 -
[1048] - Quote
The prime-time Idea I still think is pretty terrible I am being punished for having friends in other timezone's that want to be apart of the alliance I'm in and I think that is pretty ****.
Also the regional spawns are a cool idea buts whats to keep the defender from just hell camping the entrances into the region and trust me the larger groups can do this pretty much unopposed so this only hurts the small groups trying to get into the Sov Game and punishes those that cant get the numbers for huge hell camps of gates.
The problem I see with asking for feedback is the whole system is build around the prime-time idea so I don't know how you can fix it without scrapping the whole system...the best I have seen is the prime-time only effects when it comes out of reinforce and can be put in any time is good but I still think there should be a bit more then a 4 hour window or its back to pile in for the fight just instead of max dudes here we put max dudes at a couple choke points and a few dudes to hit the sov buttons.
|
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
141
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:42:03 -
[1049] - Quote
Dradis Aulmais wrote:All I heard was the sky is falling
Bunches of hyperbole about a ceptor orbiting while link to the structure. Which prevents the ceptor fromwarping while the mod is active so basically a orbiting duck in a room full of hunters. Or an empty room that's got dust covers on all the furniture and which the owners had forgotten all about since Timmy had that accident. |
Paula C Deen
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 02:42:29 -
[1050] - Quote
The alliance-wide prime time mechanic is the worst idea I've ever seen. Widening the window does not fix it either as that would become self defeating.
This does not encourage small gang sov warfare at all if you really think about it. If you have to control all these control points in a whole constellation, then the system will result in a baseline minimum number of pilots spread across the constellation to defend/attack effectively. Again, the big alliances with most players will prevail. 1000 man fleet, 200 in each system, winning the "tug of war" by beating the other side who only have a 300 man fleet with 60 in each system. Congrats, you have split the big fight into potentially smaller parallel fights, but the end result will still be the same (1000 beats 300). Also I'm pretty sure TIDI still affects neighbouring systems, so I don't really see how the load will be reduced.
That being said, I'm seeing no detail around how this "tug of war" mechanic exactly works. Is it points based? or time based? What points/time is the limit? It's the major fundamental component to the whole sov system! How about some clarity please?
All of the components in this new system heavily rely on each other in order for it to work as a whole. It has some gargantuan flaws/lack of clarity (obviously it hasn't been fully thought out) that need to work properly, all it takes is one of these pieces to not work properly, and you wind up with a completely crap sov system.
This all basically sounds like a half-assed job... keeping the old indexes etc but essentially try to introduce a faction war style system to nullsec. Station services vulnerable at all times? So every morning I wake up in my TZ specific alliance in my TZ specific system (thanks to the prime time mechanic) and just to refit my ships in my own station I'll need to spend 10 mins recapturing the fitting service that some solo troll disabled during the night without contest. Great, just what I wanted, another daily chore to worry about.
Let's not mention dreads/supers/titans which will be pretty much useless after this...
Far too many plot holes in this... this all needs going back to the drawing board in my opinion. But A+ for effort. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |