Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:43:00 -
[31]
Originally by: AlleyKat When it comes to running level 4 missions, battleships are solopwnmobiles...
AK
Sure, but so are HACs, Stratcruisers, Field CSesà hell, even BCs and Combat Recons will do. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Sodalitas XX
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:47:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Ranger 1
Originally by: Goose99 Right now, the "pwn mobile" would be HAC/T3, not BS. No one uses BS anymore because they overgimped it. CCP needs to roll back some, but not all of the gimp so it's actually balanced. When everyone uses something (HAC), that's a good indication it's OP, when no one use something (BS), it's gimped. Once there's a nice mix, it's a sign that you've achieved balance.
... because no one uses Battleships in PVP anymore.
Yep. Not even in larger gangs post-dominion, and definitely not solo. They're still around as baits, but that's a minor role and not direct pvp.
I'm not saying that more options for players wanting to make a difference in PVP situations solo is "necessarily" a bad thing.
However if you think that battleships are no longer used in fleet combat or by solo specialists... you need to get out more.
===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
Kattshiro
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:52:00 -
[33]
It's a game involving thousands and thousands of people... Not really viable
Play X3TC you might get your BS wtf pwn everything fix.
Realistically a BS could beat near everything in the water/sky (At a given range). But then again destroyers where first invented to guard dreadnoughts from smaller craft (initial name was torpedo destroyers) once they got under the larger turrets firing line. They and frigates were then adopted to for anti sub warfare due to their speed and agility.
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 22:12:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 27/12/2010 22:14:20
Originally by: Kattshiro It's a game involving thousands and thousands of people... Not really viable
That's exactly why it should be viable. In real life, having large numbers can be used against you. Everyone likes talking about risk vs reward, but wheres the risk in just derping around in a blob?
My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Fat Willy
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 22:12:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Sean Faust Look at real life combat. "Solo" kills are never accomplished by marching a big heavy tank or battleship alone into enemy territory. They're accomplished using snipers, stealth, or some other form of guerilla warfare. Battleships and tanks and other similar big, heavy, slow, high-damage combat vehicles are ALWAYS escorted by support troops/fleets/whatever.
I entirely disagree. You've not heard of Bismarck versus Hood? Bismarck was a solpwtfpwnmobile, it took a whole taskforce to subsequently take her down. I think the current EVE dynamics fit this model nicely.
|
Major Sackrash
Odium Certa
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 22:13:00 -
[36]
I want my god damn solopwnmobile battleship back god damnit and if I don't then god damnit!!! I've waited too long CCP, it's time, to REMOVE THE STACKING PENALTY...
|
Kattshiro
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 22:22:00 -
[37]
Quote: That's exactly why it should be viable. In real life, having large numbers can be used against you. Everyone likes talking about risk vs reward, but wheres the risk in just derping around in a blob?
How does that work when the other thousand all have the same access? This either leads to dramatic uneven balance or results in null because everyone can get one.Then due to skill training time etc, how is it fair to others? Blobbing is something CCP can't really control (or measures to do so would violate the sandbox mentality)
You can't have wtfpwn mobiles for individuals in MMO's.
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 22:47:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 27/12/2010 22:53:37
Originally by: Kattshiro Blobbing is something CCP can't really control (or measures to do so would violate the sandbox mentality)
Their name is Crowd Control Productions, so if they can't that would be a shame.
And it wouldn't violate the mythical 'sandbox' to have something like better AOE bombs which could be used effectively against clusters of ships from range. It's the type of thing that exists in real life, and keeps troops from bunching up. Wouldn't have to be ridiculously devastating damage, just enough to give a disadvantage to groups. Maybe make the power multiply for however many ships it damages or something.
I tend to think if we really were this far in the future we'd have developed all kinds of crazy supernova bombs, but it seems to be one of the areas of weapon development which has been overlooked in favor of maintaining the status quo in 0.0.
My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Opertone
Caldari World - of - Empire
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 23:02:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Zendoren LINK
THIS!!!!!
STATE OF POST EPIC
UOU HIT IT
|
Kattshiro
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 23:05:00 -
[40]
I wasn't referring to CCP creating new weapons more so inserting direct control over allowing x amount of players into a system at one time.
There was a anti blob weapon...and people got mad. Furthermore I'd be all for nukes, but whats to stop anyone from using them on a single target or nonblob?
Cost? Such as that to a cap? So would be such a waste of money using it against anything less?
|
|
Opertone
Caldari World - of - Empire
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 23:05:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Professor Tarantula Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 27/12/2010 22:53:37
Originally by: Kattshiro Blobbing is something CCP can't really control (or measures to do so would violate the sandbox mentality)
Their name is Crowd Control Productions, so if they can't that would be a shame.
And it wouldn't violate the mythical 'sandbox' to have something like better AOE bombs which could be used effectively against clusters of ships from range. It's the type of thing that exists in real life, and keeps troops from bunching up. Wouldn't have to be ridiculously devastating damage, just enough to give a disadvantage to groups. Maybe make the power multiply for however many ships it damages or something.
I tend to think if we really were this far in the future we'd have developed all kinds of crazy supernova bombs, but it seems to be one of the areas of weapon development which has been overlooked in favor of maintaining the status quo in 0.0.
you speak the truth... AOE damage controls the crowd... CCP needs to introduce AOE ECM weapons and AOE shockwave weapons... just like smart bombs, but take serious penalties to capacitor and recharge rate.
|
Mista Sexamalicious
Sexa Inc
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 23:14:00 -
[42]
Re-introduce Splash Damage. ________________________________________________________
Real Men don't use Local.
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 23:15:00 -
[43]
They just have to provide a reason not to travel in giant groups. Make it more efficient or safer to travel light, and people will. Whatever that reason may be. Right now there is no downside to having numbers, and no benefit to being solo, and it's not realistic.
My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Messoroz
The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 23:33:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Messoroz on 27/12/2010 23:36:22 Edited by: Messoroz on 27/12/2010 23:33:35 If with the OP's argument that he wants BSes to be solopwnmobile, then by logic a supercap should be able to solo every single freaking thing thrown at it, including a 900 man blob.
|
Kattshiro
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 23:39:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Kattshiro on 27/12/2010 23:42:22 Shouldnt the benefit to being solo be one of "Below the radar"? Other than that realistically (since we keep bringing up the subject) there aren't a whole lot of benefits to being solo.
Strictly speaking why should there be?
|
Zyck
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:00:00 -
[46]
"l2p/whine/cry" or whatever
|
Sraik Doubter
PWNED THEORY
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:00:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Kattshiro Edited by: Kattshiro on 27/12/2010 23:42:22 Shouldnt the benefit to being solo be one of "Below the radar"? Other than that realistically (since we keep bringing up the subject) there aren't a whole lot of benefits to being solo.
Strictly speaking why should there be?
Hmmm....oddly this broke something loose in my beer-clogged synapses. A solo ship should be "below the radar"; almost literally. DSCN hits all ships regardless of proximity/sig, etc. Might be more realistic to have both DSCN and probing able to locate ship that are blobbed in close proximity to each other more easily than a solo ship (especially one that is small). RL radar behaves in this manner, where individual signatures merge if objects are close together, yet small, faster targets do not resolve well (if at all). This is actually just the physics of signal-based radar/ladar/whatever...should aply in EvE too.
Feedback, extension, or flaming of concept welcome.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:02:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Ranger 1
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Ranger 1
Originally by: Goose99 Right now, the "pwn mobile" would be HAC/T3, not BS. No one uses BS anymore because they overgimped it. CCP needs to roll back some, but not all of the gimp so it's actually balanced. When everyone uses something (HAC), that's a good indication it's OP, when no one use something (BS), it's gimped. Once there's a nice mix, it's a sign that you've achieved balance.
... because no one uses Battleships in PVP anymore.
Yep. Not even in larger gangs post-dominion, and definitely not solo. They're still around as baits, but that's a minor role and not direct pvp.
I'm not saying that more options for players wanting to make a difference in PVP situations solo is "necessarily" a bad thing.
However if you think that battleships are no longer used in fleet combat or by solo specialists... you need to get out more.
Trust me, I'd love to meet some of "BS solo specialists." I've certainly seem BS around, unfortunately for me they always turn out to be baits the last few years.
|
Ephemeron
Solitairian Society
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:08:00 -
[49]
I used to be a solo BS specialist, at least if you count dual boxing as solo. My main char would typically be a Dominix while my 2nd char would be in something light for fast tackle.
Nowadays, I just don't consider it the optimal tactic. If I want to go cheap, I'd bring a BC. If I want to go expensive, I'll get a t3. Roaming bs just attracts too much attention, people will blob and chase you down. Being in either BC or T3 will get you more kills over time, since people would be more willing to engage and not chase you down as much.
|
Borun Tal
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:15:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Mina Hiragi
Originally by: hired goon Before we continue can someone please explain to me why you would subscribe to a 'Massively Multiplayer' game, then complain on said game's forums there is a lack of solo-play?
Because massively multiplayer means nothing more than, "Several metric arse loads of players". It does not inherently mean, "Everyone split into two teams, guys!"
Thank you. I'm getting so f'in sick of hearing that tired old "but it's a massively multiplayer" excuse to insisting people play one way and not play their own game.
|
|
Major Sackrash
Odium Certa
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:16:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Ephemeron I used to be a solo BS specialist, at least if you count dual boxing as solo.
Hmmm let me think about that for 1 second........
Nope, that's not solo, I mean by definition that's not solo, unless of course you make up your own definitions. This is not a signature. Actually I lied, it is. Haha trolled. |
Kattshiro
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:18:00 -
[52]
Does this go the same for single player only games? "Why can't I play with more people?" People to a certain extent need to understand that other people are involved in their game or will be involved with "their" game at some point.
|
Ephemeron
Solitairian Society
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:23:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Major Sackrash
Originally by: Ephemeron I used to be a solo BS specialist, at least if you count dual boxing as solo.
Hmmm let me think about that for 1 second........
Nope, that's not solo, I mean by definition that's not solo, unless of course you make up your own definitions.
Solo can mean 1 player, not 1 character. But hey, it's not a big deal to me, I won't argue
|
Major Sackrash
Odium Certa
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:28:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Originally by: Major Sackrash
Originally by: Ephemeron I used to be a solo BS specialist, at least if you count dual boxing as solo.
Hmmm let me think about that for 1 second........
Nope, that's not solo, I mean by definition that's not solo, unless of course you make up your own definitions.
Solo can mean 1 player, not 1 character. But hey, it's not a big deal to me, I won't argue
It's not solo mmmkay. There sorted. This is not a signature. Actually I lied, it is. Haha trolled. |
Birdman Ravo
Legion of The Birds
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:34:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Birdman Ravo on 28/12/2010 00:35:20 I wholehearted support AOE weaponry as well as neut RR countermeasures to support solo PVP.
Originally by: thisisnotright (The EVE community took a serious hit when Star Wars Galaxy died and thousand of Americans started to migrate from it as well as World of warcraft)
The Eve community was also a better place before you posted, and an even better place than that before you subscribed. Coincidence?
|
Space Pinata
Amarr Discount Napkin Industries
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:48:00 -
[56]
Quote: It does make sense for there to be power in numbers, but it should be within reason. On the small and large scales things are too skewed in favor of numbers.
This, and all other posts about numbers, are inherently flawed.
Here's why.
Math. Math is why.
"But I want numbers to be less of an advantage!"... sorry, it's mathematically impossible.
You bring 5 guys, they bring 10. Unless their ships are only half as strong as yours (factoring pilot intelligence, fitting, ship hull, etc) or worse, they have an advantage.
You can't just say 'lower someones stats for being in a big corp!' or something like that.
EVERY player has access to the same ships, weapons, etc. This is a fundamental necessity to make the game fair. You may not have the skills or ISK to field them all yet, but if you're willing to invest, they're available to you.
This goes for your enemies, too. So, fundamentally...
No player can -really- be stronger than another. Therefore, the blob wins, no matter how hardcore you think you are, if you fight it directly!
Guerilla warfare exists for a reason. You never see the small band of rebels charging out across an open field to meet the big nation they're up against. They come by surprise, they use stealth, they retreat back into the shadows when countered.
It's a strategy that's existed since ancient rome. If you have less guys, you harass the enemy relentlessly and give them no rest and also deny them a pitched engagement where they can destroy you.
If you can't manage the last part, maybe you should join the blob.
Or you could just ask CCP to make you arbitrarily stronger with no thought or consideration for -how- it's possible to make 5 players as strong as ten players.
1=/=5 2=/=3 5=/=10
Understand?
|
Kattshiro
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:51:00 -
[57]
Well there's always the Fabian strategy.
|
Ephemeron
The Dirty Dozen
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 00:55:00 -
[58]
Space Pinata, of course larger numbers > smaller numbers
But we can influence rate of increase of power vs number of ships. It can be linear, it can be quadratic, it can be cubic. Existence of RR makes the rate geometric.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 01:01:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Major Sackrash
Originally by: Ephemeron
Originally by: Major Sackrash
Originally by: Ephemeron I used to be a solo BS specialist, at least if you count dual boxing as solo.
Hmmm let me think about that for 1 second........
Nope, that's not solo, I mean by definition that's not solo, unless of course you make up your own definitions.
Solo can mean 1 player, not 1 character. But hey, it's not a big deal to me, I won't argue
It's not solo mmmkay. There sorted.
Who was the guy with multiple monitors and keyboards for 17 Ravens at once? Forgot his name...
|
Space Pinata
Amarr Discount Napkin Industries
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 01:15:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Space Pinata on 28/12/2010 01:16:20
Originally by: Ephemeron Space Pinata, of course larger numbers > smaller numbers
But we can influence rate of increase of power vs number of ships. It can be linear, it can be quadratic, it can be cubic. Existence of RR makes the rate geometric.
This is actually a good point.
It only really applies to battleships (since smaller fleets field logistics and not 1-2 RR on every ship), but it is an example where numbers are much stronger than their sum.
This is bad when the people using the tactic are larger. EX: 4 RRBS vs 3 RRBS is a huge advantage, whereas 4v3 would be.. at least interesting were they not throwing RR.
A good example of 'fair' numbers fights is Dreadnoughts. 10v20 the '20' will still lose at least 2 dreads because they're forced to local tank.
I'd hate to completely remote RR, but, maybe it should be moved only to specialized ships.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |