Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dwissi
Miners Delight
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 11:17:00 -
[121] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:
Of course they are not. So if HERO are not a threat then how powerful do you have to be before you can be considered a threat and how the hell can even get to that size?
I am sorry - but i just can't resist :) - that's easy: convince one or 2 directors of each of those big entities to do the same that happened to BoB and of we go ;) (sarcasm intended) |
Prince Kobol
2201
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 11:24:00 -
[122] - Quote
Dwissi wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:
Of course they are not. So if HERO are not a threat then how powerful do you have to be before you can be considered a threat and how the hell can even get to that size?
I am sorry - but i just can't resist :) - that's easy: convince one or 2 directors of each of those big entities to do the same that happened to BoB and of we go ;) (sarcasm intended)
Lol.. if only |
Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
142
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 11:26:00 -
[123] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote: First off you would need an alliance, not a corp. Secondly, in what way is a alliance going to be a threat to either entity?
You think you can just put together an alliance consisting of a few thousand pilots, Capital Fleet, Logistic backbone, enough isk reserve to fund SRP for a prolong war + fuel + structures + few other hundred things you need, live in NPC Null or Low sec without anybody taking notice?
Where exactly are you going to get all these pilots + ships + isk + FC's from?
Another thing, at what point can an alliance become a threat now? At what stage does a alliance have to be at before either entity consider it to be threat?
Lets use HERO as example, do you think HERO are a real threat to either CFC of N3?
Of course they are not. So if HERO are not a threat then how powerful do you have to be before you can be considered a threat and how the hell can even get to that size?
On top of all of this thanks to the way Sov Mechanics work along with Power Projection the defending force has all the time in the world to counter your insignificance force.
Remember, these guys have hundreds of Capital Ships + pilots, amazing logistical routes and cyno's everywhere. Unless you can somehow put together a pretty sizeable Capital Fleet you would not stand a chance.
Of course lots of things are possible but are they realistic..
If CFC and N3 were engaged in full scale war, then an alliance sat at one of the alliance's borders could become a real headache.
The other point I was trying to make is if they joined either CFC or N3 they would become more of a threat to the other alliance.
So it's best to keep your borders clear of any potential future problems. |
Inxentas Ultramar
Ultramar Independent Contracting
1525
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 12:25:00 -
[124] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:You think you can just put together an alliance consisting of a few thousand pilots, Capital Fleet, Logistic backbone, enough isk reserve to fund SRP for a prolong war + fuel + structures + few other hundred things you need, live in NPC Null or Low sec without anybody taking notice? Where exactly are you going to get all these pilots + ships + isk + FC's from?
Exactly. Good luck retaining them also! |
Prince Kobol
2201
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 13:21:00 -
[125] - Quote
Grog Aftermath wrote:
If CFC and N3 were engaged in full scale war, then an alliance sat at one of the alliance's borders could become a real headache.
The other point I was trying to make is if they joined either CFC or N3 they would become more of a threat to the other alliance.
So it's best to keep your borders clear of any potential future problems.
Name one alliance which was a threat to either party during the last war? |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
425
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 13:51:00 -
[126] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:
For me personally I find no enjoyment in what is basically a fixed fight.
The whole current Provi Bloc war with Hero is a complete farce. The pace and direction decided by NC and PL, who are content with farming amusing kill mails.
|
Prince Kobol
2201
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 13:54:00 -
[127] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:
For me personally I find no enjoyment in what is basically a fixed fight.
The whole current Provi Bloc war with Hero is a complete farce. The pace and direction decided by NC and PL, who are content with farming amusing kill mails.
100% agree
Personally I am hoping that you guys get involved just to spoil everybodies day |
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 14:16:00 -
[128] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Grog Aftermath wrote:
If CFC and N3 were engaged in full scale war, then an alliance sat at one of the alliance's borders could become a real headache.
The other point I was trying to make is if they joined either CFC or N3 they would become more of a threat to the other alliance.
So it's best to keep your borders clear of any potential future problems.
Name one alliance which was a threat to either party during the last war?
What is a "thread" to you ? And does a smaller force need to be a thread to the major alliances ? |
Trin Javidan
Caymen Labs
38
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 14:23:00 -
[129] - Quote
As a 10 yAs a 10 year old eve vet, gurillia favours me most. Pointing at the blob as the reson why eve is experianced as "boring" is to my opinion very shortshighted.
If someone gets blobbed it is because of a few factors:
1: More people avaialeble and rdy to blob on the blobbing side 2: The game mechanics allow or favours the blobbing side (depends on which ect, bait-trap, cyno camp, titan avaiability ect ect 3: To few people on the "get blobbed" side
It is time to analyse; ask yourselve 'why, how" and keep 8 years of gamedesighn in memory. You will come to a very logic conclusion... blobbing occours due ISK benifits, boredom and lazzyness.
1: ISK: pretty self explananing (positive when few, negative when plenty... "omg i dont want to run that *** forlorn hub anymore) 2: Boredom: "nothing to do" > See 0.0 political climate (negative) 3: Lazyness: Moral and emotional state towards playing the game (negative)
There is a big circle overlapping each reson... that is called free moongoo tech ISK that caused scaling up and more clustering of allaices. It led to a 0.0 monopaly. Which leads to negative inpact circle, circling the resons given above....
Next advice cost you $$$ CCP
|
flaming phantom
T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 15:09:00 -
[130] - Quote
I will be honest in that I was always a little sour towards the big groups, but I eventually came to the conclusion that thatGÇÖs just how it was. Imagine if we had a huge imperialist war on earth, with maybe the blocs of USA, Europe, and Russia fighting against each other, trying to take as much space and territory as possible. Of course theyGÇÖre going to do good because they have the numbers and funding to overpower and outlast other smaller entities. So IGÇÖm sorry that little New Guinea wants a GÇ£fair fightGÇ¥, but the fact is, itGÇÖs a tiny blip on the radar, and if it wants to compete it either needs to join a big bloc, or manage to recruit other small nations until it is of comparable size/force. Otherwise itGÇÖs going to get its face crushed in.
The same thing applies in EVE. If youGÇÖre a tiny corporation, donGÇÖt expect to be able to take on groups much larger than you. If youGÇÖre a solo pilot, donGÇÖt be upset when they bring reinforcements. If I was going to get into a fist fight, I would want to bring a few big friends with me, IGÇÖm not looking to assert my samurai honor here or anything, IGÇÖm looking to win. Either get friends or more recruits. This is more of a sim than a video game, and in that respect, I feel like itGÇÖs doing a good good job of mimicking what would happen in the real world. The blue doughnut also happens to mimic that sort of. We have gotten past our 2 world wars, and apart form small skirmishes, the world has been relatively calm compared to the 20th century. Similar story in EVE. Maybe something will tip the balance, we will see.
That being said, the 0.0 situation is a little stale, and not giving anything to solo is annyoing.
Some more solo stuff would be nice. I am terrible at solo, but it would be nice to be able to engage in that sometimes. ItGÇÖs hard to find a way to buff solo players without that buff carrying over to bigger groups. I think we donGÇÖt necessarily need to offer buffs for solo players, but give a consistent area for solo players to engage each other. Faction warfare has been fairly good with the plexes, but you can still get blobbed. I always wondered how well a mini outpost would do, in that it only allowed 2 ships to be inside at the same time. There would need to be a goal inside of it (like lp, or faction npc), but there would need to be a way to force 2 enemies inside it. Like maybe you get some lp in a randomly spawned plex (whether in FW or not, idk) only if you actually kill another player. There would need to be something in place to not just kill frig alts, and other balancing issues, but itGÇÖs just an idea for now.
Regarding 0.0; active defence of systems would be nice too. Whenever i fly through null sec i find it disheartening to see one alliance owning huge swathes of space, and yet I donGÇÖt see anyone in those systems. Null sec could hold so many more people, if just the same small alliances (relative to the entire community, but i am referring to the huge alliances) can hold huge amounts of space, set up their defence and not do anything about it regarding needing to defend it. I think holding space theyGÇÖre not using is stupid. My idea regarding changing large alliances holding unused space is as follows:
There are npcs in those systems, and I think they donGÇÖt like you being there. I think it would be cool if, at downtime, the npcs attacked your systemGÇÖs defences. The more npcs you leave around, the more they attack with. This would mean you would actively want to have people in your system, doing things, otherwise the npcs would retaliate. Maybe some sort of meter (like faction warfare plexing, in the top-left corner) showing the daily amounts. The more npcs that are killed in belts, anamolies, etc, and the more minerals are mined in a system, the bar goes up, and the assault at DT goes down, until you reach a 100% threshold, where the npcs determine itGÇÖs not worth it to attack for that day. This would make it so that it would actually be a liability to own systems that you werenGÇÖt using. I donGÇÖt think the attack should be so strong that it cripples the system after 1 DT, but maybe after a week of nothing happening, you system would be ripe for the picking. This forces alliances to hold an amount of systems that they can actually use, and the amount needed per day could be tweaked, as well as how much GÇ£damageGÇ¥ you system takes during DT to the outpost and i-hub or whatever else makes it effective/fair.
tl;dr, there needs to be X amount of rats killed, ore mined, facilties in Poses used, or something to that effect so that youGÇÖre actively GÇ£usingGÇ¥ the system. Otherwise the npcs you left alive attack your system defences, making it much easier to take over the system. This would make it so alliances would own space proportional to what they can utilize with it.
Big alliances will still own lots of space, but they wonGÇÖt own more than they particularly need. I really feel like this would encourage groups to move in and fight for space, since a lot of space would clear up, if the countless amount of empty systems I have seen can attest to that, since these huge blocs (desprite their size) just couldnGÇÖt defend against the constant attack, whether it be from players, or bold npcs. |
|
Dwissi
Miners Delight
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 20:53:00 -
[131] - Quote
As nice as the general idea sounds - any single activity will be quickly countered by the owning alliances/coalitions.
Only if a combination of those activities would be required in form of a overall quota it would make sense - Eve players have always been extraordinary great in countering single aspects. Anything more that involves timers/duration gambling will not change anything - there are already far too many of those 'fixed setups' that give everyone far too much time to prepare.
A form of a decaying mechanism on the other hand would force constant maintenance of whoever claims the sov. And i dont talk of the existing isk bills - thats just a fee they pay the empire. Things simply decay already - when i jetcan that thing is gone after 2 hours, wrecks are gone etc etc . In high and low its still the empire that pays and maintains obviously - they get enough of our hard earned isk to do that obviously :)
There is a saying in my native language - property and wealth is an obligation. - why not find something that would require an active maintenance of gates, stations or whatever you like. It has to be on a big scale - nothing that can easily be handled by 5 people but requires actual active gameplay of those who inhabit systems and/or areas in null. |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
252
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 21:59:00 -
[132] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I've written elsewhere: take everything you have seen in Star Trek and imagine all travel by Eve gate mechanics. Wonder what the plot lines would have been like then. They might have actually made sense for a change, instead of random battles out in the middle of nowhere or a couple-hundred-kilometer-wide wall of ships somehow being able to block transits across several thousand light-years of space.
Star Trek combat is perhaps the least intelligent imagining of space combat ever put to screen. Let's not try to copy stupid.
|
Ssabat Thraxx
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
850
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 23:27:00 -
[133] - Quote
Captain Awkward wrote:What is a "thread" to you ? And does a smaller force need to be a thread to the major alliances ?
A thread is like an individual conversation on any given topic, whereby someone starts the thread with an original post on their topic and then others can reply to it.
\m/ O.o \m/ We may never never never come home but the magic that we'll feel is worth a lifetime. \m/ RIP Ronnie James Dio \m/ |
Calypso Warsmith
Strata Dynamics Power Absolute Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2014.09.22 23:57:00 -
[134] - Quote
The large groups in Null sec have amassed the critical mass of the player base into there "Blocks" they have beaten then N+1 equation of eve by gaining the majority of the viable players willing to compete in nullsec.
You can't truly grow to fight them unless you can pull players away from them to start with, or bring fresh players into null sec and hope they don't just join one of the all ready large and established groups.
So yes something needs to be done to facilitate the break up of large blocks into smaller groups and by smaller i'm talking 6 or 8 larger groups with 30 or 40 intermittent groups spread about.
But how to do that with out breaking eve as a hole is beyond me for the most part. |
Darren Airtex
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 03:00:00 -
[135] - Quote
It is a soldiers right to complain. That right has never been questioned throughout history. It is when the soldier stops complaining, that is when the greatest empires have died.
|
Torneach Structor
Emrys Enterprises
136
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 04:15:00 -
[136] - Quote
Darren Airtex wrote:It is a soldiers right to complain. That right has never been questioned throughout history. It is when the soldier stops complaining, that is when the greatest empires have died.
Dude, that's like, so *puff* deep, man. |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
426
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 06:04:00 -
[137] - Quote
Torneach Structor wrote:Darren Airtex wrote:It is a soldiers right to complain. That right has never been questioned throughout history. It is when the soldier stops complaining, that is when the greatest empires have died.
Dude, that's like, so *puff* deep, man.
History also says it's bollocks. |
Priscilla Project
Custom Clothing Productions
24
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 06:10:00 -
[138] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I've written elsewhere: take everything you have seen in Star Trek and imagine all travel by Eve gate mechanics. Wonder what the plot lines would have been like then. They might have actually made sense for a change, instead of random battles out in the middle of nowhere or a couple-hundred-kilometer-wide wall of ships somehow being able to block transits across several thousand light-years of space. Star Trek combat is perhaps the least intelligent imagining of space combat ever put to screen. Let's not try to copy stupid. Star Trek proves that the universe is flat. &) Long and short dresses, strapless tops ... and bras! Mew Age Clothing! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5036238#post5036238 The universe ... is sexy ......................... |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6406
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 06:29:00 -
[139] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I've written elsewhere: take everything you have seen in Star Trek and imagine all travel by Eve gate mechanics. Wonder what the plot lines would have been like then. They might have actually made sense for a change, instead of random battles out in the middle of nowhere or a couple-hundred-kilometer-wide wall of ships somehow being able to block transits across several thousand light-years of space. Star Trek combat is perhaps the least intelligent imagining of space combat ever put to screen. Let's not try to copy stupid. They obviously had some amazing dragbubbles.
Too bad they couldn't have been waiting for the ihub in our solar system to exist reinforce in order to rep it. ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
flaming phantom
T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan
6
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 14:24:00 -
[140] - Quote
Dwissi wrote:As nice as the general idea sounds - any single activity will be quickly countered by the owning alliances/coalitions.
Only if a combination of those activities would be required in form of a overall quota it would make sense - Eve players have always been extraordinary great in countering single aspects. Anything more that involves timers/duration gambling will not change anything - there are already far too many of those 'fixed setups' that give everyone far too much time to prepare.
A form of a decaying mechanism on the other hand would force constant maintenance of whoever claims the sov.
For the most part, that's what I meant. I wouldn't actually want a fleet of NPCs to warp in and shoot your **** up. I wrote that more for the RP perspective. Basically my idea as far as functionality would be that each system your alliance controls has a meter of some sort. Doing certain things in the system increases the meter (or decreases it, whatever) like ratting, mining, using station services, etc. Different things can give different values as far as the system percentage, that would have to be balanced by the devs. If the bar was at 0%, mabye 10k damage (again, needs to be changed for a fair amount, i really have no idea i that would be considered too much or too little) would be dealt to ihubs and other things your alliance owns in the system, which would make it easier to tae over. If the bar was at 50%, then 5k damage, and if at 100% then no damage would be dealt. The npcs coming in is purely for the RP part, and you wouldn't see them or interact with them, they would just "attack" at DT based on how much materials and ships you left them with.
System buildings decaying is an option, but that would just be frustrating because you would have to send a logi fleet out ever couple of days to fix everything. I think my idea is great because it forces people to actually utilize their space (i.e. ratting and making money, mining for materials, etc.) and they get punished if they don't. I see your idea as just punishment with no gain out of it, while at least with mine your people would be making money and getting minerals. And from the role playing perspective; the system's npcs would have less troops to counterattack your presence and leave you alone. |
|
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
426
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 15:56:00 -
[141] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:knobber Jobbler wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:
For me personally I find no enjoyment in what is basically a fixed fight.
The whole current Provi Bloc war with Hero is a complete farce. The pace and direction decided by NC and PL, who are content with farming amusing kill mails. 100% agree Personally I am hoping that you guys get involved just to spoil everybodies day
I have no idea but who do you pick to ultimately support? One side is a dribbling mass of sperglords supported by new players with enthusiasm Alliance leaders only dream about. The other side are a bunch of dirty role players allied with RUS, who've categorically proven that incompetent as a word doesn't quite cover their level of ineptitude. Both sides are backed up by two alliances who are normally allies.
It's a cripple fight with a bored Klitschko brother in either corner. In between getting dribbled on and avoiding colostomy bags, we're going to side swiped by either of the biggest punchers in EVE. Not sure it's something to actually want to get involved with. |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
791
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 15:58:00 -
[142] - Quote
My smaller entity is still pretty small, even when empowered :'( Not today spaghetti. |
Prince Kobol
2202
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 15:58:00 -
[143] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:knobber Jobbler wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:
For me personally I find no enjoyment in what is basically a fixed fight.
The whole current Provi Bloc war with Hero is a complete farce. The pace and direction decided by NC and PL, who are content with farming amusing kill mails. 100% agree Personally I am hoping that you guys get involved just to spoil everybodies day I have no idea but who do you pick to ultimately support? One side is a dribbling mass of sperglords supported by new players with enthusiasm Alliance leaders only dream about. The other side are a bunch of dirty role players allied with RUS, who've categorically proven that incompetent as a word doesn't quite cover their level of ineptitude. Both sides are backed up by two alliances who are normally allies. It's a cripple fight with a bored Klitschko brother in either corner. In between getting dribbled on and avoiding colostomy bags, we're going to side swiped by either of the biggest punchers in EVE. Not sure it's something to actually want to get involved with.
You pick neither side.. just bring along bombers, lots and lots of bombers, lots and lots and lots and lots of bombers and just indiscriminately kill everything and everyone.
At the very least it would the hell out of a few people |
Zheng Hucel-Ge
Tiger Trap
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 19:27:00 -
[144] - Quote
Reiisha wrote:Pookoko wrote:Reiisha wrote:Pookoko wrote:Opening post Recent changes have made it easier for smaller groups to be smaller groups, but not to compete against larger groups - Which, please mind, have received the exact same 'buffs'. This I agree and cannot think of ways to go around the issue. Anything that buffs a small group will buff bigger group too. I wish I had some genius idea to make things more interesting for both parties, but alas, I don't. :( Removing local in nullsec would be a good start imho :) When sovereignty mechanics switch to an activity based model instead of the passive one we have now it will become a lot easier for smaller entities to get their foot in the door. As far as empire goes they already have a lot of tools handy as they don't have to compete with supercaps there (mostly) :)
+1 for removing null local. I think this could do wonders for smaller groups in nullsec space. It would make scouting an actual important job that and fc with an alt couldn't handle so easily. This could also allow for smaller groups to slip by more unnoticed and get more content for themelves without being blobbed so easily. I love this idea. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
8292
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 20:48:00 -
[145] - Quote
Zheng Hucel-Ge wrote:Reiisha wrote:Pookoko wrote:Reiisha wrote:Pookoko wrote:Opening post Recent changes have made it easier for smaller groups to be smaller groups, but not to compete against larger groups - Which, please mind, have received the exact same 'buffs'. This I agree and cannot think of ways to go around the issue. Anything that buffs a small group will buff bigger group too. I wish I had some genius idea to make things more interesting for both parties, but alas, I don't. :( Removing local in nullsec would be a good start imho :) When sovereignty mechanics switch to an activity based model instead of the passive one we have now it will become a lot easier for smaller entities to get their foot in the door. As far as empire goes they already have a lot of tools handy as they don't have to compete with supercaps there (mostly) :) +1 for removing null local. I think this could do wonders for smaller groups in nullsec space. It would make scouting an actual important job that and fc with an alt couldn't handle so easily. This could also allow for smaller groups to slip by more unnoticed and get more content for themelves without being blobbed so easily. I love this idea.
Someone has never head of Malcanis. Or his law.
Or the kinds of tools people could make with 5 minutes of thought (like what the goons have, browser based warning system for ratters lol.
Someone has also not heard of twitch TV streaming. Or simply sitting a cloaked alt on a pipe gate minimized but with the sound cranked up so you can hear gate activations..... |
Ssabat Thraxx
Dominion Tenebrarum Reverberation Project
854
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 20:56:00 -
[146] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Or simply sitting a cloaked alt on a pipe gate minimized but with the sound cranked up so you can hear gate activations.....
If a gate fires and no one is around to see it, does it still make a sound?
\m/ O.o \m/ We may never never never come home but the magic that we'll feel is worth a lifetime. \m/ RIP Ronnie James Dio \m/ |
Zheng Hucel-Ge
Tiger Trap
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.23 21:16:00 -
[147] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Reiisha wrote:
Most, if not all the arguments i've seen that argue removing local would be bad are along the lines of 'but we are used to the current meta and we are too lazy to adapt'.
Removing local would mean that guerilla style operations actually become possible. In order to respond a proper recon force has to be present. The lack of local is just as much a tool for attackers as it is a disadvantage for the defenders, but it can be flipped around just as easily. The way it stands now the defender's advantage is far, far too big.
Remind me what reasons there were for not removing local again? I can't really think of any outside of reasons for convenience, or an unwillingness to adapt to an entirely new metagame, both of which aren't reasons at all but statements of laziness and stubborness.
The reason is very simple, you think we do not have a lot of people in null now, remove local and it will be a even worse. Yes Sov Mechanics is very skewed towards the defender but removing local would not even anything up. It would actually increase the advantage to the defending force especially in systems where there is a station. Think about for a second, unless you have a spy you will have no idea how many hostiles will be docked up, you are a lot less likely to commit to a fight when you have no idea if there is 10 people in local or 500. Also people by their very nature are risk adverse, by removing local you are greatly increasing the risk but giving nothing back. On top of this what about those people who who live null to run anoms, rat, run exploration sites etc but have nothing to do with Sov Warfare, you are also going to harm them. You also seem to forget that one of the main reasons why guerilla style operations are not possible is because as soon as you shoot at a structure the opposing force is notified. Depending on what that structure is they can just forget about it or send a scout, either way local does not really play any part. Reiisha wrote:As for activity based systems: I don't have to provide an exact proposal to make the point that passive systems are bad.
Currently sovereignty for example relies on timers. When a structure is reinforced it encourages both parties to log off. This in it's own is already bad, but adding to this that it makes territory control disproportionally easier the larger the group gets is insane. It's the entire reason why we have supercoalitions which basically never wage any meaningful war.
Another example of how passive systems are bad is PI. It's a 5 minute a day affair, which then encourages you to log off and wait for the customs office to fill up.
An activity based system, if done well, rewards activity (if that wasn't clear) rather than inactivity. This is especially important for sovereignty as it encourages less blue ribbons and smaller territories as larger territories become too difficult to maintain. Even if coalitions are formed, since more people are needed to hold on to an area it automatically results in more wars (more factions = more friction). As good as this might sound, in practice nothing will change. All you would have is even more renters.
The only issue you've mentioned about not knowing how many people are in local I'd very short sighted. That five hundred person group isn't going to be moving stations everyday. War is taking risks, it's not always knowing the amount of people you are up against, it's finding and collecting information. All of a sudden does and Intel becomes even more valuable. Intelligence gathering other than looking at the local window means something. Sending a covert clammy into a system with a station to scout at range to watch activity has meaning more than just saying they'd invoicing. It brings forth one of the most underestimated importances of war. Information. Imagine the Vietnam war if it were eve. +1000 nva in jungle. +5000 here. The US would have trounced the nva if the jungle simply announced their presence. The guerrilla fighters advantage is their ability to remain hidden until they strike. Not to have their presence announced all along the pipeline giving opposing forces plenty of time to form up. Even if there were 500 in local, they might not be able to form up in seconds or a couple of minutes to respond properly before the guerrillas take off. It would help enable small groups harassing bigger entities. |
Zheng Hucel-Ge
Tiger Trap
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.24 05:10:00 -
[148] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: Someone has never head of Malcanis. Or his law.
Or the kinds of tools people could make with 5 minutes of thought (like what the goons have, browser based warning system for ratters lol.
Someone has also not heard of twitch TV streaming. Or simply sitting a cloaked alt on a pipe gate minimized but with the sound cranked up so you can hear gate activations.....
Go ahead and cloak on a pipe gate. There's wormholes. Did you miss that release? They take you places.
Talk about someone who can't think and you can't even tear apart your own counter argument before you make it. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
8292
|
Posted - 2014.09.24 05:20:00 -
[149] - Quote
Zheng Hucel-Ge wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: Someone has never head of Malcanis. Or his law.
Or the kinds of tools people could make with 5 minutes of thought (like what the goons have, browser based warning system for ratters lol.
Someone has also not heard of twitch TV streaming. Or simply sitting a cloaked alt on a pipe gate minimized but with the sound cranked up so you can hear gate activations.....
Go ahead and cloak on a pipe gate. There's wormholes. Did you miss that release? They take you places. Talk about someone who can't think and you can't even tear apart your own counter argument before you make it.
Sigh.
You do know that wormholes show up on dscan as sigs right? you do know that the larger a group is, the more people who can leave scanning alts in tech1 scanning ships just lying around to sweep for such holes frequently, something the smaller group can't do nearly as well. And that guy or group popping in to a system from a wormhole won't know that there is a guy sitting on a gate cloaked up and streaming to twitch, but the cloaked guy WILL be able to tell when things start changing in system because someone is ratting or mining or whatever.
No local works in wormholes because of the rest of wormhole space's mechanics (no cynos, no gates, no dockable structures , mass limits to entrances etc). K space (including null) has none of that, no local in null would become EVEN MORe unfriendly to people who don't have 10,000 accounts worth of back up and resources.
But hey, don't let reason and experience stop your naive pie in the sky thinking, everyone else is doing it , why not you lol. |
Prince Kobol
2202
|
Posted - 2014.09.24 06:46:00 -
[150] - Quote
Zheng Hucel-Ge wrote: War is taking risks, it's not always knowing the amount of people you are up against, it's finding and collecting information.
This statement here shows me that you have no idea.
People do everything they can to mitigate risks. I can't count how many times a potential fight has been blue balled or where we have stood down because of the potential of facing an overwhelming force.
If take into consideration power projection and TiDi it means that any fleet engaged in battle must keep a constant vigil, not just in nearby systems but throughout the entirety of EVE. FC's often carefully track their watch lists and use scouts in staging systems and midpoints to ensure that they have the ability to fight or, if they are facing overwhelming odds, to extract.
Removing local changes this. Barring an incredible amount of luck or committing a hell of a lot of guys to reconning , FC's would be blind to any incoming force.
All that would happen is FC's who already do as a much as they can to mitigate risk as they are very wary of an opposing fleet forming up and hot dropping them will now be much more likely to field smaller fleets of less value or simply not deploy.
On top of all of this you very sophisticated api tools being used by these entities, tools which have been developed over the years that smaller forces will not have access to.
The you have PvE.
All those PvE targets.. gone. The risk v reward is simply not worth it.
All those miners, ratters, explorers, people running anons, DED Sites.. all of them will go.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |