EVE Search - "a battleship is not meant to be a solo pwnmobile"

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

"a battleship is not meant to be a solo pwnmobile"

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Ephemeron The Dirty Dozen	Posted - 2010.12.28 01:24:00 - [61] It wouldn't be such a bad idea to put stacking penalty on RR, just like there's stacking penalty on all other buffs. And it kinda makes sense from realistic point of view - you can't expect to repair a ship in space during combat at 10x rate just cause there are 10 mechanics. Certain things take time to move and repair no matter how many people are at it. As for shield buffs, wouldn't the target ship's shield generators overload and burst into flame if they were getting too much energy pumped into them?
Alice Celadon	Posted - 2010.12.28 01:34:00 - [62] Just in case someone is reading this thread and actually wants to solo pvp ... let me assure you it is not only possible, but rewarding and fun to learn to solo pvp in null sec. I'm not going to tell you how to do it, but I'm going to give you the tools to figure it out. Want to spend next to nothing soloing in BCs? Hera Darkthorn is probably the best in game right now at that. http://podla.griefwatch.net/?p=pilot&pilot=Hera%20Darkthorn Interested in small faction/pimp ship soloing? Look at these guys. http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=alliance&name=DarkSide. http://www.hydra.eve-kill.net/ Want to do solo dic camping? Study this. https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/index.php
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Cloakers	Posted - 2010.12.28 01:35:00 - [63] Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 28/12/2010 01:37:51 Originally by: Space Pinata 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? This post is ironic and not insulting you at all by saying that. Numbers have a natural inherent power. If you have 1 person with 1000 HP and 100 DPS vs 5 of the same, then you are fighting 5000 HP and 500 dps and automatically lose (but might take one out first). Thats well and good and the way things ought to be. However, the Developers changed this natural law to add an additional penalty, not to the bigger gang but to the smaller one. Now the 5 get a 30% boost while the single player gets 0% boost. Additionally the 5 get to eliminate the solo players dps entirely by being able to utilize shared repair modules and transfer energy between themselves. Even if the player was foolish enough to attempt to fight the 5, his damage output would be unable to break any tank of the opposition due to the remote repping, even if the ship he was firing on was seriously inferior to his own. (You won't take one out before you die). Thats the way EvE is designed now, deliberately, to eliminate any form of solo pvp and force people to join gangs. As for solopwnmobiles, while the battleship is not one, the super carrier is. It takes around a minimum of 20 players, with at least 3 hictors, RR's and know how to have a chance to kill a single pilot in one. EvE is not "fixable" as it relates to solo play. Its gone too far into forcing a play style that the developers like and enjoy at the expense of other forms of play and I don't think there's any turning back the clock. --------------------------------------------- Hate Bots / RMT? Do something worthwhile and good for EvE and cause tears and anguish for others, while doing absolutely nothing yourself! Join up.
Space Pinata Amarr Discount Napkin Industries	Posted - 2010.12.28 02:15:00 - [64] Well, those are good points. Solo is at a huge disadvantage, moreso than the stacking of DPS/EHP. It's really a double whammy. Solo PVPers can still make a difference, though. See all the afk-cloaker whines. A good group of skirmishers (or a few isolated soloists) can shut down a whole constellation of sov space. They can't take sov, but they can throw a wrench in the works and severely hinder income levels and hurt morale. It's a more subtle effect than, say, taking an outpost, but to say it's not an effect would be wrong. An individual pilot skirmishing heavily in a system is a bigger asset than the same pilot as a rank and file blob member. Of course, if the whiners get their cloak nerf, this too will be gone...
Ephemeron The Dirty Dozen	Posted - 2010.12.28 02:30:00 - [65] just want to point out that battleship used to be very effective at solo before The Great Nano Nerf. Hell, there were quite a few people going solo to 0.0 with Machariels - 1.5 billion ships completely unescorted. Nowadays if you see a Mach you know he's well covered with friendly blob.
Ephemeron The Dirty Dozen	Posted - 2010.12.28 02:36:00 - [66] Originally by: Space Pinata Solo is at a huge disadvantage, moreso than the stacking of DPS/EHP. It's really a double whammy. Solo PVPers can still make a difference, though. See all the afk-cloaker whines. A good group of skirmishers (or a few isolated soloists) can shut down a whole constellation of sov space. They can't take sov, but they can throw a wrench in the works and severely hinder income levels and hurt morale. It's a more subtle effect than, say, taking an outpost, but to say it's not an effect would be wrong. An individual pilot skirmishing heavily in a system is a bigger asset than the same pilot as a rank and file blob member. Of course, if the whiners get their cloak nerf, this too will be gone... One of the problems with solo PvP is that it has near 0 possibility to impact alliance dynamics. If you believe you can make a difference, you are sadly mistaken. In the old days, alliance people used to haul important goodies in freighters and hauling using 0.0 star gates. It used to be when important things needed to be hauled, alliance to organize escort operations. It was possible for a solo PvPer to nab some unprepared alliance hauler and really hurt them. Nowadays, all important stuff is hauled via jump bridges and cyno equipped carriers and jump freighters, that go start from POS to 0.4 station with strait warp to high sec. Only blobs can have a chance at killing one of these now. Even without the haulers, most 0.0 alliance people use jump bridges, thus significantly reducing the potential target list for solo roamers. Jump bridges also allow alliance blobs to easier intercept / catch up with anyone who wanders into their territory, as they usually have scouts reporting all unfriendlies thru the choke points.
Space Pinata Amarr Discount Napkin Industries	Posted - 2010.12.28 02:57:00 - [67] You can make a difference, but you can't really cripple them. The rare freighter kill still happens, but it's too much of an anomaly to be considered a serious chance. I'm not sure about solo, but on 0.0 merc contracts we'd get to the point where the locals had abandoned an entire constellation. Despite having 3-4 people online we could sit outside their station. Traffic had come to a halt due to a small group of PVPers. The damages were in excess of 40 billion that week. Now, solo, you can't make so much of an impact, but you -can- shut down an entire ratting system (or at least make it very hard to turn a profit in.) This won't single-handedly bring the alliance to it's knees, but it will frustrate and demoralize the members, while denying them more ships for the blob, and denying the alliance itself taxable income. In other words.. You can't really hurt the leadership and their gigantic wallet so much as you can hurt the individual members which they rely on to fight for them. Unless alliances have started supplying free/cheap ships to their members, denying the members isk is denying the alliance fleets pvpers. The more income you deny, the more you starve them. It can't be a sudden, devestating event, but rather a slow sort of handicap. Sabotage, rather than outright destruction.
thisisnotright	Posted - 2010.12.28 07:39:00 - [68] Originally by: Infinity Ziona Numbers have a natural inherent power. If you have 1 person with 1000 HP and 100 DPS vs 5 of the same, then you are fighting 5000 HP and 500 dps and automatically lose (but might take one out first). Thats well and good and the way things ought to be. However, the Developers changed this natural law to add an additional penalty, not to the bigger gang but to the smaller one. Now the 5 get a 30% boost while the single player gets 0% boost. Yes. You nail it fairly well. When creating the OP I was not arguing for a single ship being able to defeat more HP or DPS, I was objecting to the development of EVE over the last years. Ever since the introduction of alliances this game has been focused on blobs and rewarded blob warfare. Blobs are boring as hell and it requires no skill what so ever. They even introduced the 'allign to' feature because obviously there were so many neckbeards unable to allign to objects when they were sitting in safespots with their buddies waiting to blob a single cruiser. The hitpoint buff and damage nerf was supposed to make fights last longer, an argument I'm unable to understand how they came up with.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2010.12.28 08:35:00 - [69] Originally by: Iraherag Originally by: baltec1 I still use BS in small fast gangs urdoinitrong, yes? My gang also trolled me right up untill everyone died but me because I aligned faster than all the BC The next day I managed to chase down a cruiser Battleships are bonkers.
mkmin	Posted - 2010.12.28 09:18:00 - [70] I'm confused... what does this guy want? Remove fleets? Make BSes with titan stats? To make incendiary statements? To be elected EVE-Jebus? Please tell us! How may we serve you?!? (<--note by the amount of punctuation I used you can clearly tell I must be approaching insanity by my desire to serve make a rambling bum happy)

cpu939 Gallente The 5th Freedom Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2010.12.28 09:23:00 - [71] Originally by: thisisnotright Prime time on Saturdays has more than 2000 players like it once had, its 500000 players now. 500'000 on a Saturday night did I miss the 80k 90k 100k and so on, online. eve like all other mmo will reward teamwork and lets be honest with the rl economics of people spending less ccp need to keep the isk incoming make the most people happy as you can. let be honest solo was given a boost since your solo battleship nerf, t3 cruisers bubbles any problem no warp cloaked yes look at eve-kills I looked only the frist six pages and there are a few high,low and null sec solo kills Signature not EVE Related. - Adida
Marlona Sky Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.12.28 09:31:00 - [72] Originally by: De'Veldrin 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) Speaking as an American who has never played either of those two games, ** you. Also, the quote is Quote: The carrier was never meant to be an OMGWTF mission running PWNMobile. If you're going to *** about Americans, at least apply the stealth whine layer correctly, moron. Don't mind him. He is still bitter about that whole tea thing we did back in Boston.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact	Posted - 2010.12.28 09:48:00 - [73] Read whole first page. 5/10
Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon	Posted - 2010.12.28 10:48:00 - [74] A battleship hull costs as much as 20 cruisers, thus it should destroy everything on grid instantly oh wait that's mothership logic.
Bollox Reader Farkistan GED Academy	Posted - 2010.12.28 13:19:00 - [75] Even back in beta the power of the group over the individual seemed to be the primary lesson. Everything I read back them from CCP stressed the importance of teamwork. I've dabbled in Eve off and on since then and it hasn't changed. Eve's always been about the corporation, about the group. Yeah, solo play has always been possible and some people (including myself) indulge in it, but that's never been the primary focus of the game. It's the road less traveled for the oddball misfit or the guy who really wants a challenge (except for missions or solo mining in high sec), but it has always excluded one from certain aspects of the game. CCP emphasized that from the beginning. Just as corporate drones sacrifice individualism for the benefits of corporate life, so to does the rugged individualist give up the ability to compete with the larger corporations. And I see no reason why a solo player should be able to even make a dent in a thousand pilot alliance. They put in all the time and resources necessary to claim the space, to develop those jump bridges and to maintain the logistical network, etc. It would literally be pointless if some solo artist could come in and do a lot of damage to the organization. Yes, as Eve's gotten more crowded and highly specialized the opportunities for soloists have shrunk. And it's going to continue to do so. Just as in the real world, where a tendency toward centralization is the main theme of human progress. And there are a lot of people who resent it in real life. But as the role of the network increases (both in Eve and in real life) the role of the individual decreases. Let's take the example of BoB. I remember when they were the alliance created to destroy alliances and remove them from space. They quickly became the first real feudal lords in Eve, becoming the thing they started fighting against. Rather than increasing chaos, they created a stronger structure as infrastructure permitted. This lessened the ability of others to truly operate independently. This can be seen in real life in the cycle of small start-ups--> successful corporations--> monolithic structures capable of market manipulation and anticompetitive practices. One day it's just a couple guys sitting around talking, and twenty years later you have a government lawsuit against you for being too dominant and stifling innovation. This is something that has to do more with people being people than it does with a design flaw in the framework either in Eve or in real life. Let's face it, if we're allowed to create vast networks capable of dominating the landscape and limiting the opportunities of potential competitors, we will. Any system that permits concepts such as sovereignty will, eventually, drive out independents. And the game had the concept long before it had the game mechanic.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Hounds of Anarchy	Posted - 2010.12.28 13:30:00 - [76] Edited by: Grimpak on 28/12/2010 13:30:57 Originally by: Opertone 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. yes something like a Remote ECM burst or some sort of doomsday device that you can fi- oh wait... --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Tekumze Wolf Minmatar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2010.12.28 14:28:00 - [77] Edited by: Tekumze Wolf on 28/12/2010 14:31:24 AOE weapons don't do squat for crowd control. AOE is an attempt to disperse a crowd. It doesn't diminish the blob it just makes for pretty pictures when they all go boom. At the same time you need a blob to kill some ships so whatever they do they are shooting themselves in the foot. IMO What eve needs is more space. Influx of new people, game changes (jump bridges, jump freighters) and stuff players do themselves (stations in every second system in 0.0) made the EVE universe feel crowded and small. It needs to become what space was. A vast area of nothing with some bright spots in them. There need to be areas that are hard to reach which automatically means there will be less people there and harder to reach for the blobs (due to logistics). To put it in a few simple points 1) Increase system count by doubling the current 0.0 system count. 2) Attempts to concentrate people in smaller areas with one of the following suggestions - Use system wide or even constellation wide with anomalies that prevent building stations and/or jump bridges. - Make Stations use some sort of maintenance. If they are not maintained they fall in disrepair. You can still dock but station service don't work until maintenance is provided AND extra stuff for repairing stations service (the more you provide the faster they are repaired). What this would achieve is - make it hard for a blob to reach all over EVE map for insta-defense making it harder to defend ones land the larger you are (no need for artificial costs being payed for sov) - An attack WILL cut into someones land before they can muster sufficient defense from father away and the larger an empire is the more spread the people will be - It makes for a more fluid space ownership since less insta defense requires less offense to actually make it count. This opens a possibility of multipronged attacks which is pointless now since the same blob can reach most places. - more empty space gives more room for smaller groups to move around without fear of blob camps every 2 systems. - smaller blobs or at least less frequent blobs (since they would be harder to achieve logistically) mean less lag for fights. - longer distances between populated areas mean less fear of hot dropping every time you attempt to use a carrier.
Anubis Xian Reavers	Posted - 2010.12.28 14:46:00 - [78] There are solopwnmobiles... they are called Legion, Loki, Proteus, and Tengu. Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
Syn Callibri Minmatar 21st Eridani Lighthorse Broken Chains Alliance	Posted - 2010.12.28 15:06:00 - [79] Edited by: Syn Callibri on 28/12/2010 15:06:32 Originally by: thisisnotright Edited by: thisisnotright on 27/12/2010 17:54:18 (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) As an american that has never played either of those games... 1) Mmmmm...salty troll tears. 2) Apply anti-american whine stealth layer more liberally. 3) *****ing about solo-play in a MMORPG/PVP/PVE/Etc...is whine-fail. 4) Poast with your main...chicken. 5) 0/10 Commander Tac-Ops
Drakarin Gallente Absentia Libertas Solus	Posted - 2010.12.28 15:30:00 - [80] Originally by: Bollox Reader Even back in beta the power of the group over the individual seemed to be the primary lesson. Everything I read back them from CCP stressed the importance of teamwork. I've dabbled in Eve off and on since then and it hasn't changed. Eve's always been about the corporation, about the group. Yeah, solo play has always been possible and some people (including myself) indulge in it, but that's never been the primary focus of the game. It's the road less traveled for the oddball misfit or the guy who really wants a challenge (except for missions or solo mining in high sec), but it has always excluded one from certain aspects of the game. CCP emphasized that from the beginning. Just as corporate drones sacrifice individualism for the benefits of corporate life, so to does the rugged individualist give up the ability to compete with the larger corporations. And I see no reason why a solo player should be able to even make a dent in a thousand pilot alliance. They put in all the time and resources necessary to claim the space, to develop those jump bridges and to maintain the logistical network, etc. It would literally be pointless if some solo artist could come in and do a lot of damage to the organization. Yes, as Eve's gotten more crowded and highly specialized the opportunities for soloists have shrunk. And it's going to continue to do so. Just as in the real world, where a tendency toward centralization is the main theme of human progress. And there are a lot of people who resent it in real life. But as the role of the network increases (both in Eve and in real life) the role of the individual decreases. Let's take the example of BoB. I remember when they were the alliance created to destroy alliances and remove them from space. They quickly became the first real feudal lords in Eve, becoming the thing they started fighting against. Rather than increasing chaos, they created a stronger structure as infrastructure permitted. This lessened the ability of others to truly operate independently. This can be seen in real life in the cycle of small start-ups--> successful corporations--> monolithic structures capable of market manipulation and anticompetitive practices. One day it's just a couple guys sitting around talking, and twenty years later you have a government lawsuit against you for being too dominant and stifling innovation. This is something that has to do more with people being people than it does with a design flaw in the framework either in Eve or in real life. Let's face it, if we're allowed to create vast networks capable of dominating the landscape and limiting the opportunities of potential competitors, we will. Any system that permits concepts such as sovereignty will, eventually, drive out independents. And the game had the concept long before it had the game mechanic. Perhaps I'm extremely bitter and pessimistic, but that was a very depressing read. You're absolutely right, but that doesn't make me happy at all. Why on earth would anyone want to make a game based on real life corporate dynamics? Business in real life is about as dull as it can possibly get. Well, maybe staring at a wall waiting for paint to dry is a bit more mundane, but hell, probably not. Obviously grouping up should be possible and rewarding, but there's plenty of ways to give solo players some power and at least create a few doors for them to venture into. As it stands, you can try it and if you get really lucky you may even win a few battles, but it does all of nothing against even just one individual's assets. The first step is to add a lot more space to space. And I do mean a lot. This game is huge, lets make it gargantuan. Add in 50,000 + null sec systems, and a bunch more low sec space. As well, separate each of the four empire faction's systems by at least 10 jumps through low sec, forcing people to transport goods across it.

Drakarin Gallente Absentia Libertas Solus	Posted - 2010.12.28 15:35:00 - [81] Continued here, ran out of space above.. I'd even go as far as to suggest that certain ores be region specific. Low sec would play host to all types, the rare ones included, high sec empire space would play host to the more common minerals, but each empire faction would only get a select few types. Meaning transport and trade would get a HUGE boost, as well as pirating. Activity in low security space between empire systems would increase because it would have no choice. You'd force the economy to adapt, the players will too. Perhaps changing the salvage loot tables too, to only reflect that of the specific empire faction. Again, creating a dynamic link between all empire factions, without any leeway room, absolutely necessitates that people cross through the dangerous space. Protection corporations emerge. Low sec mining gets a boost, etc... Now with all of those null sec systems added, the solo player has fresh meat in low sec, and can go out and explore/expand in completely uncharted space. While you're add this, remove insurance completely and drop the hyperinformation plate (star map), at least remove the ability to see direct activity in the system, so you can't tell if someone has been there.
thisisnotright	Posted - 2010.12.28 15:36:00 - [82] Edited by: thisisnotright on 28/12/2010 15:37:34 Originally by: Bollox Reader Even back in beta the power of the group over the individual seemed to be the primary lesson. Everything I read back them from CCP stressed the importance of teamwork. Of course teamwork is important and should be important. But why should teamwork = 1000 people? Whatever happened to the 3 and 5 man teams? Or just 10 man teams for that matter. Quote: I've dabbled in Eve off and on since then and it hasn't changed. Eve's always been about the corporation, about the group. Yeah, solo play has always been possible and some people (including myself) indulge in it, but that's never been the primary focus of the game. same here, only you are slightly wrong. EVE has changed a lot. You used to be able to get a small gang and head into hostile space, bu today thats not possible. Where are the 5 man frigate gang taking out a single battleship? PVP used to be fun as **, today its all bait and gank. Quote: Just as corporate drones sacrifice individualism for the benefits of corporate life, so to does the rugged individualist give up the ability to compete with the larger corporations. There should be a middle ground. I think there was a few years back. Quote: And I see no reason why a solo player should be able to even make a dent in a thousand pilot alliance. They shouldnt. because that would just be silly. Quote: Let's take the example of BoB. I remember when they were the alliance created to destroy alliances and remove them from space. They quickly became the first real feudal lords in Eve, becoming the thing they started fighting against. Rather than increasing chaos, they created a stronger structure as infrastructure permitted. This lessened the ability of others to truly operate independently. You mean the alliance with corrupted CCP employees handing out free ISK? Originally by:** Syn Callibri As an american that has never played either of those games... As an European, the fact that you are American really matters.... no seriously.
De'Veldrin Minmatar Green-Core The Obsidian Legion	Posted - 2010.12.28 17:27:00 - [83] Originally by: thisisnotright Originally by: Syn Callibri As an american that has never played either of those games... As an European, the fact that you are American really matters.... no seriously. You're right, it doesn't. Which makes me ask why you felt the need to bring it up in your OP? I mean, since it doesn't matter to you so much? hmm? --Vel I'm more of a care-badger.
Syn Callibri Minmatar 21st Eridani Lighthorse Broken Chains Alliance	Posted - 2010.12.28 17:37:00 - [84] Edited by: Syn Callibri on 28/12/2010 17:37:00 Originally by: thisisnotright Originally by: Syn Callibri As an american that has never played either of those games... As an European, the fact that you are American really matters.... no seriously. Really...and you're who again? Commander Tac-Ops
Gogela Freeport Exploration	Posted - 2010.12.28 17:44:00 - [85] Originally by: Morrn If you arent able to get down to buisness without being in an alliance, then you broke something. Really... just this ^ ------------------------------------ "A hungry man will tell you anything if you give him a cookie."
Ranger 1 Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Sodalitas XX	Posted - 2010.12.28 18:00:00 - [86] Originally by: Space Pinata You can make a difference, but you can't really cripple them. The rare freighter kill still happens, but it's too much of an anomaly to be considered a serious chance. I'm not sure about solo, but on 0.0 merc contracts we'd get to the point where the locals had abandoned an entire constellation. Despite having 3-4 people online we could sit outside their station. Traffic had come to a halt due to a small group of PVPers. The damages were in excess of 40 billion that week. Now, solo, you can't make so much of an impact, but you -can- shut down an entire ratting system (or at least make it very hard to turn a profit in.) This won't single-handedly bring the alliance to it's knees, but it will frustrate and demoralize the members, while denying them more ships for the blob, and denying the alliance itself taxable income. In other words.. You can't really hurt the leadership and their gigantic wallet so much as you can hurt the individual members which they rely on to fight for them. Unless alliances have started supplying free/cheap ships to their members, denying the members isk is denying the alliance fleets pvpers. The more income you deny, the more you starve them. It can't be a sudden, devestating event, but rather a slow sort of handicap. Sabotage, rather than outright destruction. Mostly correct, but you are overlooking one of the most damaging effects of the solo lurker. It's not the possibility of nailing that hauler full of BPO's, it's not even directly hurting alliance members wallets because they don't want to go out and rat (although it is related to the latter). Once you have the local population to nervous to go out and rat/mine/etc. you begin to seriously impact the alliance controlling the area because their indices start dropping rapidly. They are still shelling out the high rent, but with the indices dropping the number of spawns/belts/etc. drops off rapidly and takes some time to build back up. Not only is the population adversely affected financially (and their morale as well) but alliance leadership starts feeling the crunch every time they shell out isk for sov upkeep and get nothing in return for it. This has a much larger impact than the detrimental effect on a few ratter/miner wallets. ===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you.
Crushall Caldari The Nintendo Generation Snatch Victory	Posted - 2010.12.28 18:22:00 - [87] Boost it you tossers!
thisisnotright	Posted - 2010.12.28 18:25:00 - [88] Originally by: Syn Callibri Edited by: Syn Callibri on 28/12/2010 17:37:00 Originally by: thisisnotright Originally by: Syn Callibri As an american that has never played either of those games... As an European, the fact that you are American really matters.... no seriously. Really...and you're who again? I'm pretty much the gossip girl of the internet. Everyone knows me and everyone reads my blog. People admire me and worship me. Now who are you again? Oh you must be some random alliance peasant
Zhim'Fufu	Posted - 2010.12.28 18:30:00 - [89] Brilliant move on op's part to include the wow/american comment. Otherwise this would have died at page one.
Kattshiro Caldari	Posted - 2010.12.28 18:35:00 - [90] I think it's natural evolution that groups became larger and larger. I mean people wanted this game to grow and have a larger player base...then become astonished that it actually has. Furthermore I find it ironic that people want small group pvp, and then get mad at the notion of an "official" arena which would make such a thing possible. It's also quite odd that people dont want a blob, but yet want a solopwnmobile that would require a blob to take it down... I think to enable smaller groups you need to make it much easier to find people traveling in over groups of 10, and much harder to probe down solo or groups less than 10. Perhaps also require multiple points that need to be attacked simultaneously to achieve an object or objects that take less people overall. Perhaps also putting a limit to how many people overall can be docked (Or make a station home) at one time.



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.