And it does. Fatigue made the blocks stronger, more consolidated and more organized. They remain and only keep growing with every adverse effect CCP implements. The only thing that topples them is force from within.
2 Likes
Ohhh!! This is NICE!
Check out the dev blog, Okami is literally writing out what I’ve been thinking all this time:
I love everything about this. And they got it exactly right, large groups being able to project their entire force across the unvierse from the comfort of their homes is a massive problem, and anything that puts a limit on this is a good thing.
I especially like that they’re being a bit more bold now, and frankly, I think they should go even harder. If smaller groups are to have a fighting chance, then large alliance blocs absolutely cannot be allowed to instantly summon their entire member-base to defend every single system in the galaxy. They definitely should tackle the entire bridge mechanic next, and put some serious limitations on it, maybe even remove it outright!
Of course, the majority of comments will come from disgruntled null-sec brass that want to keep and maintain their power fantasy. I hope our developers see through their ruse right away and go ahead with the project undisturbed. I’m rooting for them! I hope this entire thing leads to a resounding success for the game!
With hopeful regards
-James Fuchs
4 Likes
you know it’s a good update when the null bears are grumbling 
3 Likes
Let me summarize my opinion:
- Ansiblex force projection nerfs: Awesome
- Blocking capitals from taking ansiblexes: Great
- Capacitor usage instead of fuel: Ok I guess?
- Capacitor usage depends on distance from capital: Unintuitive and inconsistent, bad
- ACLs pushing players and small groups to join largest alliances: Pretty damn awful
I feel like point 4 and 5 could have had a much more consistent, predictable and fair solution without adding extra reasons pushing players to join the largest alliances with one simple solution that has been spoken about often already. Fatigue.
“But fatigue feels like being stun locked!”. Well I’d rather see in my top left corner whether I can take a camped ansiblex or not than to figure out too late that the ‘capacitor is empty!’ when I attempt to jump it.
8 Likes
Which null bears are grumbling? Not the big ones.
2 Likes
ACL for alliance only will destroy smaller alliances tring to form a new coalition. As they can’t then share their ansi’s, as very often smaller alliances can work together, but don’t want to put all assets in one bucket. The obvious workaround for coalitions being parallel ansi networks, one per alliance. Or very frequent alliance hopping between characters. “Oh, need to go through 3 alliances of space? Ok, automate the corp applications and take each ansi jump by zone 0, then go back to your original corp at the end of it.”
Now, I read something about “cap draining” being a possible tactic. Does that mean I can remote cap transfer to the ansi as well?
And something that may have been forgotten for FC’s: can an FC or simply anyone in fleet (e.g. scouts) warp near an ansi and see whether it still has enough cap to jump the entire fleet through? It’d be awful if you’re halfway through jumping and the ansi is out of cap, causing a fleet to be split in two for god knows how long.
Next, each zone, how much more cap cost is it? 20% per zone? Definitely need numbers here.
3 Likes
Talking about cap usage which depends on distance to the capital:
What happens when fleets try to take ansiblexes further out of the capital?
Will a fleet just be cut in half waiting for capacitor to recover when they take ansiblexes there?
How is this a better idea than fatigue?
At least with fatigue the entire fleet can wait at the same time, instead of half of them being left behind each time.
I’m all in favour of force projection nerfs, but I’d love to see consistent intuitive gameplay please. None of this “check the map to see how many LY you are out of the capital to calculate whether you can take along half or only a third of your fleet at once”.
I’d rather see removal of all ansiblexes further than X LY from the capital fleet than some tiered capacitor usage.
5 Likes
In before many small alliances collapse because they cannot defend the space they live in without blue support. Sure, you want to shake up nulsec because you don’t like the state it is in, no problem, have at it. But don’t sugar coat this with the claim that it’s “nearly impossible for newer groups to get any meaningful foothold in areas of space like nullsec” in one breath while this specific change (ansiblex ACL restriction) appears very likely to hurt the smaller alliances that would rely on coalition support via their infrastructure. You seem to be making an assumption that these “smaller groups” can survive independently and history doesn’t support that assumption, at all.
Restricting ansiblex access to alliance only…seriously, look at the coalition map and think that through.
The capacitor system and zoning limitations plus removing capital jumps through ansiblex are the actual force projection limiters but the ACL issue severely limits scale and support for smaller entities (counterproductive to your “help smaller groups” goal).
We’ve seen this before by the way…FC introduces changes to “help the little guy” while implementing game mechanics that make it more difficult for those organizations to survive. The only thing I’ve seen recently that helps the little guy is the opening up of drone lands…a player enforced “no big blocs” policy seems to have worked far better for the little guy than anything the devs have produced in a long time.
7 Likes
I look forward to that. Time proven prophecy from CCP to make it easier for big groups to attack and harass smaller groups.
I am against this, because my corporation Perfect and Complete has no sovereignty and cannot possibly be affected by this change positive or negative. We have 1 member and as you may or may not know, it is very difficult to maintain sovereignty with one member doing everything, everywhere, all at once. FC needs to make changes that affect only my corporation, I think that will make everyone happier or at least the only member in my corp.
2 Likes
This does the opposite of letting smaller groups thrive. it kills them.
Now you can’t have smaller alliances joining the larger bloc’s and having space to grow and benifit from them as they can’t access the infra, so they should just join the main mega alliance instead.
The ACL change is TERRIBLE and needs to be removed.
6 Likes
So much ignorance towards individuality and forging your own path within a group. You could actually be an employee at CCP.
1 Like
It is also factually wrong, alliances have scopes different from coalition, like their own asset ownership.
Plus all the identity ■■■■■■■■ that CCP wanted to push on us like alliance emblems and “show your colors”
1 Like
If you are part of a coalition, you are not a smaller group, please stop claiming that you are a small group.
1 Like
a coalition is a very different thing from an alliance
for example it doesn’t own anything, only alliances do
a coalition is just alliances having each other as blue and helping defend if needed
coalitions can also be small
1 Like
And coalitions can organize to have their members have ansi networks running in parallel to get around the ACL limit, Alliances not part of a coalition cannot.
Yet that requires a resource-hungry upgrade in each system that will play host to each parallel network’s hubs.
1 Like
The nerve of them!
Not all members of a coalition are bigger alliances. many of them are smaller alliances banding together. This doesn’t affect the bigger alliances like Init, Fraternity or Goons. It only makes them stronger and weakens others.
3 Likes
Smaller coalitions don’t hold large areas of space…