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) |
Siggy Afuklrang
ROC Academy ROC.
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:05:44 -
[2161] - Quote
Well here's an idea to fairly balance out the troll ceptor but keeping all the good things in the dev blog.
Introduce two new modules and copy the existing patterns in EVE of linking benefits to cost, opening a range of tactical options.
To explain, imagine we had two modules the Estorus module and Estorus array.
The Estorus Module has a fitting cost of 10 power grid and range of 25km.
In contrast the Estorus Array takes 1000 power grid to fit but offers a range of 160km.
This means that range options are more applicable to larger class ships, how ever larger class ships now have two options to fit the closer range module with no real cost to fitting there ship for combat or fit for range with the array but on doing so seriously compromise there combat effect, thus making them more reliant on their support.
In addition the array and module should have the following effects when activated to balance their use.
Both module and array stop the ship from warping while activated
Both module and array stop the host ship from receiving remote repairs when active
Both module and array increase the ship signature radius by 15m, thus making the use of cheap small hulls come with some compromise
Both module and array infer a bonus to sensor strength of 20, countering the ecm spam
The array only takes 25% longer to take a node/structure
The array only infers a 30% resistance bonus to shield and armour when active. Increased fitting has some benefit especially on caps
Both modules infer a reduction in speed to take a node when fitted to a capital ship. So yes I could fit my super with an array and gain 30% res but also an increased exposure time to danger.
The numbers used maybe a little arbitary and need balancing. But the concept is to make more tactical options from the module and array. Specifically to encourage fight mechanics and not ninja mechanics.
Final points the module and array in T1 versions cost 30mil, with the T2 versions costing 80m but inferring a 20% range bonus and reduced cycle time, although they should still take nodes at the same speed as the T1 variants. I.e they can deactivate quicker if needs be. |
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
495
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:07:01 -
[2162] - Quote
Devi Loches wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:On the entire interceptor thing: If it really does become a big issue, a simple change would be:
"Activating an Entosis Link also causes ships to become extremely vulnerable for the duration of the moduleGÇÖs cycle: the equipped ship cannot warp, MICROWARP, MICROJUMP, dock, jump or receive remote assistance until the cycle completes."
New idea added in caps. Its not as limiting as being stuck in place, but my guess is it's enough. Sniper ship at zero running a defensive link = dead ceptor. Enough about the ceptors already. 5 man fleet. 2 Interceptors, 1 Covop cyno, 2 Blackops. Interceptors with E-Link start working on a structure, Sniper warps in to shoot them down, Covop lights up and Blackops jump in, Sniper dead. Bring multiple snipers? Interceptors jump over a few systems and start again. Catch Sniper ships as they try to move around to keep up with interceptors.
In this scenario you assume that a sniper would jump on there alone, nope it jumps there to bait those black ops -> 2 dead black ops -> 2 dead ceptors and a very dead cov ops cyno ship. It's no rocket science now if that alliance actually has only one sniper BS in the system in prime time zone then they shouldn't be holding that space in the first place since they obviously lack the man power to do so.
But keep on with this ceptor thing and we eventually end up with a "cyno" or "siege" type solution which might not be a bad thing. However from what I read actually reinforcing the thing does nothing, you have to come back later to to finish the job so likely they don't even bother with your ceptor until then. |
Gorgof Intake
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:08:31 -
[2163] - Quote
Everyone just needs to chill and wait out for more info on the actual fitting requirements and adjustments that will inevitably be made to this.
Stop splurging on like autistic children. Sheesh. Decent observations are getting lost in the absolute drivel you people have spewed forth about trollceptor fleets, CFC posturing and ~the end of supercaptials~.
Guys, its still months away from implementation and there WILL be adjustments. Just chill. Its not the end of the world. Its a good step in the right direction and with a bit (a lot?) of spit and polish this will be a marked improvement on the current status quo of sitting on a titan and gaining perfect intel over the enemy before standing down for yet another blueball OP.
Relax people. Relax.
Some Thoughts on Sov Mechanics
DEADPACKS: Alternative Sov Mechanic
|
Dark Spite
The Real OC ROC.
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:11:42 -
[2164] - Quote
Gorgof Intake wrote:Everyone just needs to chill and wait out for more info on the actual fitting requirements and adjustments that will inevitably be made to this.
Stop splurging on like autistic children. Sheesh. Decent observations are getting lost in the absolute drivel you people have spewed forth about trollceptor fleets, CFC posturing and ~the end of supercaptials~.
Guys, its still months away from implementation and there WILL be adjustments. Just chill. Its not the end of the world. Its a good step in the right direction and with a bit (a lot?) of spit and polish this will be a marked improvement on the current status quo of sitting on a titan and gaining perfect intel over the enemy before standing down for yet another blueball OP.
Relax people. Relax.
Well said! |
VolatileVoid
ELVE Industries Shadow of xXDEATHXx
46
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:14:13 -
[2165] - Quote
I see a little chance that this sov capture system will not be misused for harassment (like afk cloaking). The aggressor has to pay the structure/system fee beginning with the first second of the first! reinforce. This has to be taken from the their corp wallet. If this won't be paid there will be no reinforce.
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
685
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:14:45 -
[2166] - Quote
Anyone doing this as a small group understand from the start that you are going to have some large group come in and flip your sov because, well because they can. Of course a proper attack is not going to be easy to stop and you might have to let your sov go and then grab it back, which is all good as long as you go in light, its the IHUB which is the issue, I will come back to that.
The target system has perhaps an icebelt and a number of belts and is between -0.01 to -0.3, do not expect anything better, it is likely not to have a station in it and if it does then expect that to be defended.
The first thing you have to do is get your system, start off with interceptors and see if you can flip it, no response your good, if someone defends it then you have to start your campaign, this will be continuous attacks wearing them down, if it is a system held by one of the sprawling alliances its likely that you will wear them down. Unless CCP listens to those that want to make you fit these things in Titans and make them cost 20bn, being sarcastic there but what ho. The thing about the troll griefing attitude is that they want to make them expensive as hell so people do not try, like the SBU's are now. CCP your current pricing is fine. You commit to rf'ing the system which you do perhaps by using a marauder backed by a fleet, your call on doing that based on the tactical situation.
Next up comes the command node stage, this will require a fleet and effort, you could do so with allies and mercs. Once that is done you have your system.
TCU make sure you have a death star 50 km from the TCU, that is your first defence against Goons and their interceptor fleets, I would just sit there shooting interceptors giggling to myself, that will be fun as I have all my characters able to run POS gunes. One comes in with a T2 Entosis link, just get an interceptor and a Munin and bang, dead interceptor, or perhaps a Tornado poking out of the shield. Done, so much for Interceptors. We all know what this is going to mean, the POS will be the defence point of the small entity.
Now if the Goons seriously want to waste interceptors and add green to my KB feel free I will laugh myself silly.
If someone comes for your system seriously then you will have to defend it, the key part is that even if you lose you can still keep at it, it might not mean much to them but this is your turf so you harass the hell out of them, then it becomes a question of willpower and assets, allies and mercs, all fun parts of Eve.
The IHUB, this is key and its CCP's call whether you have to put it next to another POS or the same one where the TCU is. This is a major question along with the IHUB itself, if you need a freighter to move an IHUB then your space is not going to be worth much and if you have it at a planet as it is now you will not be able to defend it easily. So for the truly small guy you wait until you have numbers to be able to defend it with a fleet. Question to CCP, are you going to keep the IHUB at its present size as well as the upgrades? And will it stay at the planet location only?
If CCP make the difference to the system based on use move to a max of -0.3 in truesec they will make it worth doing, think very carefully on that next part.
The TZ aspect is so important for vulnerability and CCP is right to do this, thought the idea of scaling with alliance size is a good one, or perhaps allowing different TZ's per constellation.
People talk about caps and no longer being useful, well simple, the POS is key, Dreads will have a role and by the fact of them being used will be something that means the other larger toys will get used.
There will be so many people that will come in and poke you with a stick, but your POS is the centre of your defence.
So when the Goons talk about interceptor fleets I was laughing hard at them because the TCU will be next to a POS, its their sprawling empire of unused systems that is undefended against interceptors not the small guy who really wants the system.
Check mate!!!
Ella's Snack bar
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
6351
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:27:59 -
[2167] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Anyone doing this as a small group understand from the start that you are going to have some large group come in and flip your sov because, well because they can. Of course a proper attack is not going to be easy to stop and you might have to let your sov go and then grab it back, which is all good as long as you go in light, its the IHUB which is the issue, I will come back to that.
The target system has perhaps an icebelt and a number of belts and is between -0.01 to -0.3, do not expect anything better, it is likely not to have a station in it and if it does then expect that to be defended.
The first thing you have to do is get your system, start off with interceptors and see if you can flip it, no response your good, if someone defends it then you have to start your campaign, this will be continuous attacks wearing them down, if it is a system held by one of the sprawling alliances its likely that you will wear them down. Unless CCP listens to those that want to make you fit these things in Titans and make them cost 20bn, being sarcastic there but what ho. The thing about the troll griefing attitude is that they want to make them expensive as hell so people do not try, like the SBU's are now. CCP your current pricing is fine. You commit to rf'ing the system which you do perhaps by using a marauder backed by a fleet, your call on doing that based on the tactical situation.
Next up comes the command node stage, this will require a fleet and effort, you could do so with allies and mercs. Once that is done you have your system.
TCU make sure you have a death star 50 km from the TCU, that is your first defence against Goons and their interceptor fleets, I would just sit there shooting interceptors giggling to myself, that will be fun as I have all my characters able to run POS guns. One comes in with a T2 Entosis link, just get an interceptor and a Munin and bang, dead interceptor, or perhaps a Tornado poking out of the shield. Done, so much for Interceptors. We all know what this is going to mean, the POS will be the defence point of the small entity.
Now if the Goons seriously want to waste interceptors and add green to my KB feel free I will laugh myself silly.
If someone comes for your system seriously then you will have to defend it, the key part is that even if you lose you can still keep at it, it might not mean much to them but this is your turf so you harass the hell out of them, then it becomes a question of willpower and assets, allies and mercs, all fun parts of Eve.
The IHUB, this is key and its CCP's call whether you have to put it next to another POS or the same one where the TCU is. This is a major question along with the IHUB itself, if you need a freighter to move an IHUB then your space is not going to be worth much and if you have it at a planet as it is now you will not be able to defend it easily. So for the truly small guy you wait until you have numbers to be able to defend it with a fleet. Question to CCP, are you going to keep the IHUB at its present size as well as the upgrades? And will it stay at the planet location only?
If CCP make the difference to the system based on use move to a max of -0.3 in truesec they will make it worth doing, think very carefully on that next part.
The TZ aspect is so important for vulnerability and CCP is right to do this, thought the idea of scaling with alliance size is a good one, or perhaps allowing different TZ's per constellation.
People talk about caps and no longer being useful, well simple, the POS is key, Dreads will have a role and by the fact of them being used will be something that means the other larger toys will get used.
There will be so many people that will come in and poke you with a stick, but your POS is the centre of your defence.
So when the Goons talk about interceptor fleets I was laughing hard at them because the TCU will be next to a POS, its their sprawling empire of unused systems that is undefended against interceptors not the small guy who really wants the system.
Check mate!!!
The goon argument then ultimately boils down to "but...but... muh renter empire"
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
257
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:34:36 -
[2168] - Quote
Gorgof Intake wrote:From what im reading, the defenders actually have the advantage on uncontested nodes.
Strictly speaking, whoever is hitting the node uncontested has the advantage on uncontested nodes.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30761
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:36:19 -
[2169] - Quote
If you want to hear Mittens speak about Sov and breaking down the enemy with exhaustive threats of invasion, find a recording of his EVE Vegas 2012 presentation. Then relate that to how easy it is to present a credible threat with this Entosis laser. Then come back and read what Aryth, Querns, Arrendis, and Gevlon have said in this thread.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Worrff
Viziam Amarr Empire
78
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:36:38 -
[2170] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Alp Khan wrote:The sovereignty system Fozzie described in the dev blog he wrote is extremely poorly thought and half baked. CCP should just take it back to the drawing board and rethink. Meanwhile, perhaps they would also do well to review their assumptions about EVE players and how they behave and plan their actions in game. I'm going to write more about what I think are the peripheral causes as to why Fozzie and others are constantly failing later. For now, I'd like to elaborate on what I think is the central cause behind the dev team's shortsightedness.
It might be just that the faulty line of thought on the dev team's part is assuming that these poorly designed changes will result in people fighting more. I think they are expecting that they can really change bloc (and individual player) behavior solely through changing rules and mechanics and avoiding touching risk-reward balance.
They are wrong.
For instance, as Arrendis mentioned before, Encounter Surveillance Systems weren't adopted en masse by null residents. They were supposed to create fights. Because they did not see any serious adoption, not many fights were created through them.
Has any developer ever thought about why they weren't adopted by null residents?
More importantly, why is Fozzie's dev blog containing statistics makes him sound like an apologist, or worse, a distressed middle-level executive trying to defend his design through cooking up his numbers, when his plan obviously failed to achieve the intended objectives? If you look at the number carefully, Fozzie is only able to say 'hurray, my plan is doing okay and null sec pvp-related player deaths increased', because Pandemic Legion got bored and decided to farm HERO coalition. I especially laughed out loud and ended up spilling the Turkish coffee I've been sipping when I saw that Deklein region, the place I live in and the revered Goon homeland, has seen PvP related losses decrease by 20% since Phoebe and Jump Fatigue hit. Fozzie isn't just doing a terrible job at re-imagining sovereignty, he is also doing a terrible job at covering his own back so that he and his plan can look good to his immediate superiors who no doubt track his so called progress.
I have said this before when Greyscale announced plans for Phoebe before and I'll say it again;
No amount of change and skewing of sandbox mechanics towards a theme park setting will result in players fighting and causing destruction just for the sake of doing so. People also will not fight and create destruction just so that Fozzie and CCP are appeased and are able to recite statistics without good analysis.
Holding space in null is currently is not worth much for all the effort and resources it takes. Even with these changes, it will still not be worth it.
EVE players will always collaborate, cooperate to minimize risks, and the instances of fights that they do not want to take.
The structures that make up the large entities cannot and will not be dismantled through the change of game play mechanics. You cannot change human behavior and tendency to socialize, cooperate and collude to further mutual goals through introducing ~bright ideas~ like this.
We need developers that are ruthlessly pragmatic and in possesion of first-hand knowledge and experience of life in nullsec to fix nullsec, not developers moonlighting as bright idea fairies that don't know the game and the mechanics they are working on. It's the second type of developers who always end up with introducing Hail Mary plans that are destined to fail like this one. This needs to be reposted again and again.
Well said. Spot on.
CCP Philosophy: If it works, break it. If itGÇÖs broken, leave it alone and break something else.
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
815
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:38:24 -
[2171] - Quote
This thread is literally FULL of people **** scared of logging in and living in THEIR space.
It would be funny if it was not such a damning and tragic indictment of the state of sov null.
Yup, systems should support more people, that's fine.
There's a disgusting amount of pressure from certain areas to push this away as fast and as hard as possible. That alone tells me this is going in the right direction. The outrage that people might have to DEFEND what they OWN for a mere 4 hours per day at a time of THEIR choosing is disgusting.
The large sprawling entities have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo - stay on the path, CCP. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
257
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:42:59 -
[2172] - Quote
afkalt wrote:This thread is literally FULL of people **** scared of logging in and living in THEIR space.
It would be funny if it was not such a damning and tragic indictment of the state of sov null.
Yup, systems should support more people, that's fine.
There's a disgusting amount of pressure from certain areas to push this away as fast and as hard as possible. That alone tells me this is going in the right direction. The outrage that people might have to DEFEND what they OWN for a mere 4 hours per day at a time of THEIR choosing is disgusting.
The large sprawling entities have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo - stay on the path, CCP.
I live in my space. I rat, mine, and conduct industry in my space. The CFC on the whole does. Really, look at the track records of the people posting in this thread and where they were on siphons, ESS, sentry drones, and other changes, and whether or not those changes played out closer to CCP's predictions, or those of the people who were actually playing the game and living out in the affected regions.
I know this is hard to believe, but not everyone wants the game skewed toward their own benefit. Some of us actually want the game to be... what's that word? Oh, right, fun. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30761
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:45:28 -
[2173] - Quote
At this point I'm pretty sure the Entosis' stats are intentionally being presented in a broke OP state (by Fozzie) for the hype. I predict Entosis will be changed to require X number of Entosis minutes (or hours) which can be sped up with multiple Entosis lasers at once, from both sides. So basically the contest will be a rolling count of total Entosis minutes with the winner being the side with an X minute / hour lead.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
175
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:46:24 -
[2174] - Quote
Gorgof Intake wrote:Everyone just needs to chill and wait out for more info on the actual fitting requirements and adjustments that will inevitably be made to this.
Stop splurging on like autistic children. Sheesh. Decent observations are getting lost in the absolute drivel you people have spewed forth about trollceptor fleets, CFC posturing and ~the end of supercaptials~.
Guys, its still months away from implementation and there WILL be adjustments. Just chill. Its not the end of the world. Its a good step in the right direction and with a bit (a lot?) of spit and polish this will be a marked improvement on the current status quo of sitting on a titan and gaining perfect intel over the enemy before standing down for yet another blueball OP.
Relax people. Relax.
coming from someone who's group was main reason jump fatigue was created.
you'd be crying a tear of hell if they nerfed hot dropping all together.
yeah I said it so what.. you gonna drop a nyx on my miner ship........again!
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30761
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:48:16 -
[2175] - Quote
I love your name, btw Milla. Goodpussy.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
686
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:51:02 -
[2176] - Quote
Worrff wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Alp Khan wrote:I especially laughed out loud and ended up spilling the Turkish coffee I've been sipping when I saw that Deklein region, the place I live in and the revered Goon homeland, has seen PvP related losses decrease by 20% since Phoebe and Jump Fatigue hit. Fozzie isn't just doing a terrible job at re-imagining sovereignty, he is also doing a terrible job at covering his own back so that he and his plan can look good to his immediate superiors who no doubt track his so called progress. This needs to be reposted again and again. Well said. Spot on.
I have left in the part that pokes so many holes through that piece, Deklin is sitting behind all the other CFC alliances, its is remote has large numbers of defenders. The changes made by jump drive reduction and fatigue made it even more difficult to attack, so -20% was actually not as bad as I was expecting.
It proves nothing except that Deklin is a very good place to have as your homeland!
Ella's Snack bar
|
Specia1 K
State War Academy Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:53:32 -
[2177] - Quote
I support these changes +1.
Change is good... |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
257
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:55:51 -
[2178] - Quote
Specia1 K wrote:I support these changes +1.
Change is good...
Change often is.
Change just for the sake of change... rarely is. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30761
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:56:14 -
[2179] - Quote
How to make it seem like you listen to feedback:
Present a broken idea
Let players rabble
Do it the right way like you planned, and say it was due to feedback.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
151
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:01:46 -
[2180] - Quote
So, how about giving the T1 link a bit more range around 35-50km and T2 a way higher fittingrequirement to prevent ceptor, covertops and D3 shitshows? They can still flip your structures but if you undock it is more about the fight and less about the chase. Ofc this might run into problems with rapid lights. |
|
Eric Xallen
Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda
20
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:01:53 -
[2181] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:How to make it seem like you listen to feedback:
Present a broken idea
Let players rabble
Do it the right way like you planned, and say it was due to feedback.
I'm inclined to agree. Purposely put it out there that it can be fit on trollceptors, and other terrible ideas, let people freak the **** out about it, and then 'wind it back' to the original idea which is still a massive change that people will hate, but they'll accept it more readily because you've already given them a truly bad idea they managed to 'change your mind on'.
Notably the CSM are absent in this, and quiet, not coming out and helping calm people privately or publicly on some of the worst aspects of this. Almost as if they know its going to be rolled back. Perhaps that's tin-foiling. Perhaps this is the new method of delivering big, harsh changes, not unlike aspects of phoebe. |
GrimmRipper
Ordo Drakonis Nulli Secunda
34
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:02:17 -
[2182] - Quote
CCP please start playing your game.
In Ordo Drakonis we trust!
|
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
620
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:06:28 -
[2183] - Quote
Timezone-locked faction warfare. What could possibly go wrong?
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30762
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:07:30 -
[2184] - Quote
You'd end up with an Australia that nobody touches.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
25
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:09:50 -
[2185] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:If you want to hear Mittens speak about Sov and breaking down the enemy with exhaustive threats of invasion, find a recording of his EVE Vegas 2012 presentation. Then relate that to how easy it is to present a credible threat with this Entosis laser. Then come back and read what Aryth, Alp Khan, Querns, Arrendis, and Gevlon have said in this thread. The fear mongering you guys keep doing is getting tiresome. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
258
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:10:06 -
[2186] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:You'd end up with an Australia that nobody touches.
So basically, Turn 3 of Risk? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30762
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:16:15 -
[2187] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Rain6637 wrote:If you want to hear Mittens speak about Sov and breaking down the enemy with exhaustive threats of invasion, find a recording of his EVE Vegas 2012 presentation. Then relate that to how easy it is to present a credible threat with this Entosis laser. Then come back and read what Aryth, Alp Khan, Querns, Arrendis, and Gevlon have said in this thread. The fear mongering you guys keep doing is getting tiresome. m8 you're confused. That post has the most candor of any of my posts in this thread so far.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
620
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:17:55 -
[2188] - Quote
Timezone locked faction warfare is not an idea that ANY null-sec entity will get on-board with.
But then you can't trust the CFC because we're here to ruin everyone else's game. And you can't trust N3 either because they are dirty mega-renters.
Listen to the Empire players, the heart and soul of a dynamic and inclusive EVE. They will surely love this timezone-locked faction warfare content for the revolutionary innovation in gaming that it truly is.
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
|
Dark Spite
The Real OC ROC.
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:21:47 -
[2189] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:If you want to hear Mittens speak about Sov and breaking down the enemy with exhaustive threats of invasion, find a recording of his EVE Vegas 2012 presentation. Then relate that to how easy it is to present a credible threat with this Entosis laser. Then come back and read what Aryth, Alp Khan, Querns, Arrendis, and Gevlon have said in this thread.
I dont doubt that many of the gamers in goons/cfc want the game to be fun! I had a great time rolling around with Topgoon last time I was subbed in 2014. But what is this above meant to prove? Is it that CFC/The Mittani will use all tools including those of a physcological nature that dont have an ingame mechanic in order to wear down their enemy. Check, we knew that!!! Its pretty much how CFC won the Tribute war against NC.
You can sh*t all over other entities, we know that. But what the game lacks now is a chance for smaller entities and newer groups to be part of nullsec sov-holding. The large exception to it being impossible are the variouss reddit-born groups that have come onto eve during the last years. Maybe some of these mechanics like the Entosis module need to be tuned, but focusing capitals towards fighting capitals as is a great thing. Finally I can use my dreads and carriers for combat and even when in a smaller group. Having sov space again would be fun and I would like to help my alliancemates who never had the chance for null get in at an entry level. Not everyone is suited for the coalitions, and the game desperately needs mechanics that are focused on serving the smaller and mid-sized groups. Large coalitions will still be superstrong but holding all the empty territories will be harder and less motivating for the line members, which is a good thing tbh.
I dont want to be a renter and I dont want to be part of the larger coalitions this time around because I have absolutely NO impact on what content is generated for me with the exception of a roam or so. Not that I have all the answers, but the best gametime for me was when in small to mid-sized alliances without a bloated bluelist.
That sov levels are based on mining and ratting is a far greater issue imo. Mining and running anomalies are really bad parameters with regards to providing security to other players and fuelling the industry that alliances really need in order to function combatwise and provide SRP to members. Industry has other indexes after Crius that would be much more relavant to use. For security its more tricky, since any linking of pvp-kills/value can be exploited as proven by goon finance cabal when revamped FW was introduced. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
26
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 09:22:21 -
[2190] - Quote
For those who are claiming they will take over half the galaxy in 40 minutes with their swarms of interceptors; what are your plans for protecting your space while you are away? Do you honestly think no one will do the same thing to you?
You claim that any small group will be crushed by your thousand upon thousands, but you leave the rest of your territory wide open. So you will lose it just as fast as you gain it.
Your other option is to spread your blog out across your territory in order to hold it. Your so called blob to blot out the sun is now thinned out. Now instead of that small group facing thousands and thousands of you at once, they enjoy only having to fight smaller sections at a time. Thus, greatly increasing their odds of winning.
Everyone knows that without massive numbers, most large blocs do terrible in smaller scale combat compared to the average player due to how much they relied on massive numbers to do anything. I can't help but think that is the reason for all this fear mongering you all have been doing. The idea of having to fight a smaller group without bringing every single member of your coalition bloc frightens you.
It's OK to be afraid. I have faith your pilots will learn how to use more than just the F1 key. |
|
|
|
|
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 |