Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cryogenix DarkMatter
Caldari Core Dynamic Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 11:45:00 -
[1]
Ship Emisions : (anti blob) -- When ships group to close together their emission's radiation or something degrades ship efficiency, meaning that blobs of 4 or more will die easily because they have much reduced tracking and moving and shooting ability. this would force large force's to spread their battles out, and would allow for a lot more tactics.
Skipper Missiles : these missiles are very long range and designed for taking out station platforms, they need to cost a lot and only the largest of ships can use them. used for taking down platform defences, the missile needs to be slow enough to allow the platforms defences at least a 50% chance to stopping the ,missile. You no take Ore, It my ore.
let me know what you think. You no take Ore, It my ore. |
Kala Veijo
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 11:45:00 -
[2]
We already have bombs and remote ECM bursts.
Warp Wind, CSM Chapter blog. |
Xtreem
Gallente Scientific Creative Underworld Mafia
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 11:46:00 -
[3]
in star trek Armada the game you had a weapon that was pretty weak but hit one ship then bounced onto the next, each time doing more damage, in a huge fleet one or more of them popping into you would kill at least one ship with the gradual increase, and be more deadly the more ships you had :)
|
goatplasma
Killson Corp Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:06:00 -
[4]
lol, bombs
useless module tbh
|
Callthetruth
Caldari Drunken Ratbags Inc New Eve Order
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:07:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Xtreem in star trek Armada the game you had a weapon that was pretty weak but hit one ship then bounced onto the next, each time doing more damage, in a huge fleet one or more of them popping into you would kill at least one ship with the gradual increase, and be more deadly the more ships you had :)
reminds me of those missions with toxic clouds
|
Cryogenix DarkMatter
Caldari Core Dynamic Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:07:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Kala Veijo We already have bombs and remote ECM bursts.
Those do not stop blobs. my suggestion would litrally stop people blobbing. you would not see 50 ships all in a blob, because none of them would be able to shoot worth a damn due to the emition overload. as a result huge fleets would be broken down into squads of 3 or 4 , and that combat in a big war would then be spread over a full sector or solar system rather than 50 ships in blob 1, 60 in blob 2 and just pounding away on each other. You no take Ore, It my ore. |
Guilliman R
Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:09:00 -
[7]
anti blob:
-give missiles a huge aoe -make some sort of Shotgun blasters -create the old red alert2 lasters, they split to random targets when the primary is hit! -Make bombs cost atleast half of that they do now -Give me isk
---sig---
Carebear for life (unless I am in the advantage and have 99% chance of winning(, hey 1% chance to lose, thats risk right, good!)!
|
goatplasma
Killson Corp Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:12:00 -
[8]
I'm sure the rest of eve would use other methods of fighting if there actually were other methods of fighting. Right now, blob is the only effective way of doing things.
|
Cryogenix DarkMatter
Caldari Core Dynamic Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:24:00 -
[9]
Originally by: goatplasma I'm sure the rest of eve would use other methods of fighting if there actually were other methods of fighting. Right now, blob is the only effective way of doing things.
The problem is that if blob is allowed as it is now, then people will just keep doing it regardless of other methods cos its the safe easy option, and no one wants to lose their stuff.
adding my radiation type setup would be easy for ccp to do would not require a major patch and would put an end to blobs over a given size which would mean more smaller battles .. and I think thats what all the pvpers want. You no take Ore, It my ore. |
goatplasma
Killson Corp Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:26:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Cryogenix DarkMatter
Originally by: goatplasma I'm sure the rest of eve would use other methods of fighting if there actually were other methods of fighting. Right now, blob is the only effective way of doing things.
The problem is that if blob is allowed as it is now, then people will just keep doing it regardless of other methods cos its the safe easy option, and no one wants to lose their stuff.
adding my radiation type setup would be easy for ccp to do would not require a major patch and would put an end to blobs over a given size which would mean more smaller battles .. and I think thats what all the pvpers want.
It still remains that there is no alternative to blobbing. While there is no alternative, then anti-blob weaponry is just going to be a pain in the ass and won't contribute to gameplay.
|
|
Guilliman R
Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:28:00 -
[11]
how about ship explosion has AOE?
Type ship explodes does 50% damage to the ships around him of the same type, and +25% for every lower type
Meaning if a BS explodes and there's a whole lot of frigs around him.... BOOM no more frigs
cap ship blows up, woops 75% of all BS hp around him (for caps 10km range?, BS/BC 7.5km, cruiser/destr/frig/t2 stuff 5km aoe range)
This would be imba tactical! Shoot the bs in the middle of the fleet and watch the smaller ones go boom! Cap ship going down, cap going down scramble...Boom there goes all the cruisers/frigs and half of the wounded bs/bc
this would force people to spread a lot and in order to focus dps, they must suround the enemy and worp in smaller attack teams.
---sig---
Carebear for life (unless I am in the advantage and have 99% chance of winning(, hey 1% chance to lose, thats risk right, good!)!
|
Imiarr Timshae
Roid Vandals Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:31:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Imiarr Timshae on 02/08/2007 12:31:36 I think the idea would work, but its not really feasible. Mining ops would suffer if too close together, and ships in POS's would feel the effect.
Anyway, whats the point of anti-blob? If you reduced the max amount together in combat to 4-5, as you suggested, within a week forums would be full of "Perfect" gang setups, so that the only way to defeat another gang would be to have the same selection of ships with more expensive items. Every gang would become a duplicate of each other, with the richest winning.
-Imiarr- |
Guilliman R
Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:36:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Guilliman R on 02/08/2007 12:37:51 Edited by: Guilliman R on 02/08/2007 12:36:53 At first yes but then you'll see gangs getting counterd by multiple gangs engaging from difrent directions. It wont take long for masive battle's to start again knowing eve. But instead of having 2 large balls engaging, you'll have gangs fighting eachother over a wider area in the system.
For example you'd see gang v 3 gangs on a moon, the 3gangs win, warp to assist other gangs etc, spreads the load a bit (the gangs on the other side of the sytem wont need as much data untill they actualy meet up).
This would also mean, bringing masive numbers wont eaquil victory, so an allience is less inclined to blow, and more to use their nr's tacticly.
With this, 5 gangs of 10ships each could ptentialy win v 200 in simular gangs that have worse comunication and tactical ordering.
*edit. This would also potentialy increase the use of bombs, you engage from multiple directions. Meaning you must spread and search for hostiles, because they can easely slip by and assault you from the back, or one of your weaker flanks, droping bombs and making a breach. (chain reaction anyone? bomb goes off, all ships damage, 1 dies, he takes other with him.)
---sig---
Carebear for life (unless I am in the advantage and have 99% chance of winning(, hey 1% chance to lose, thats risk right, good!)!
|
Guilliman R
Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 12:39:00 -
[14]
Actualy, I'm gonna copy paste this to the dec part of the forums, features and what not. I actualy like it :o, I'm amazed by my thinking
If you like it, sent some isk, the isk could be used to buy stuff and all :P
---sig---
Carebear for life (unless I am in the advantage and have 99% chance of winning(, hey 1% chance to lose, thats risk right, good!)!
|
tikinish
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 13:05:00 -
[15]
could you please make a more detailed and well thought idea about how excatly the stop blob system would be, and then post it again.
since it is a very nice idea but it is way to scetched
|
umop 3pisdn
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 13:23:00 -
[16]
Any and all suggestions to do with aoe (includings CCPs ideas) are doomed to failure.
The blob is born of necessity, from the way ccp has made this game.
If you have AOE or crap like that then instead of a sniper blob camping a gate you get a ball of snipers sitting 150km out all in different directions... meaning those jumping in are at a disadvantage (blobbed up on the gate)
Band aid solutions arent working (titan wtf? goonswarm really that scary?) it is time for a real overhaul.
|
Grapez
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 14:39:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Guilliman R how about ship explosion has AOE?
I like this idea. Make is so CCP.
I don't like the ship emission idea, however. It's a nice, out-of-the-box idea, but what happens when friendly and enemy ships are close together? Would they still get the emissions penalty? Would the emissions penalty system take into account who is in what gang, or is it global? @º¬íí-T«+ºH for all your political humor needs |
Guilliman R
Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 14:46:00 -
[18]
Imo global, for everyone and everything.
However, none of these should provoke concord in any way. Ship Death AOE should also not happen when you selfdistruct (to prevent empire ganking)
Prehaps the damage could be somewhat limited, to prevent it from beeing exploited in highsec (10 cheapest BS at 10% hull,and use friendly fire to kill the BS off, via gang or so)) all bump freighter, dispite beeing cool, this is just to easy imo, so somewhat balance should be done
Prehaps, the longer the ship dies (from hull 100% to 0) the weaker the explosion.
so for example, You kill off a BS hull 100% to 0% in 10sec (focus fire) this would do a lot of damage, if he dies slowly from 100% to 0%, it would do less damage, the longer it takes the less the damage.
---sig---
Carebear for life (unless I am in the advantage and have 99% chance of winning(, hey 1% chance to lose, thats risk right, good!)!
|
ET pwnedhome
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 14:52:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Xtreem in star trek Armada the game you had a weapon that was pretty weak but hit one ship then bounced onto the next, each time doing more damage, in a huge fleet one or more of them popping into you would kill at least one ship with the gradual increase, and be more deadly the more ships you had :)
the akira class cruiser I think, something called a chain reaction pulsar??
I loved that game. I had a 233 CYRIX computer with 32Mb ram, a 4mb ATI rage II gpu and a 14" monitor at the time, was the age of 80+ hour online stints and 56k modem drop outs....ahhhhhh
of course the jach'eng would anihilate any kind of fleet...
|
Johnfromshipping
Butcherbirds
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 14:54:00 -
[20]
It seems to me that most of these 'anti-blob' solutions will make blobing much more effective.
Quote: "When ships group to close together their emission's radiation or something degrades ship efficiency, meaning that blobs of 4 or more will die easily because they have much reduced tracking and moving and shooting ability."
Sounds great until you put it into the game.
Then what will happen? Will fleet sizes get smaller? NO. They will just spread out over the same grid.
Take a hostile gatecamps ATM: Your alliance needs to get into the system for whatever reason. The enemy alliance owns the system & is camping it. -You jump into the bubbles. -The enemy snipers are bunched up 200km away. -You MWD out of the bubbles towards them & wait for someone to get a warpin so your tacklers can do their thing.
Take a hostile gatecamp after this change online: -You jump into the bubbles. -The enemy has the exact same amount of snipers, but they are all spread out in different directions from the gate.
As the attacking force, which would you rather have? A bunched up enemy you can warp to or not? Either way, the exact same amount of enemy ships are attacking you.
With our luck the only thing this 'anti-blob' solution would do is increase the lag somehow.
|
|
Grapez
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 14:55:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Guilliman R Imo global, for everyone and everything.
I was referring to the OP's idea. AoE for ship explosions I like, and I think it would be the best anti-blob change. However, from an implementation standpoint, it might be to much.
It might be easier, from CCP's standpoint, to try the OP's idea, though. After all, gang bonuses are already implemented, and the OP is effectively suggesting some sort of 'gang anti-bonus.' Since the gang stat modification mechanics are already in place, this one might be easier, and thus more likely to actually happen. @º¬íí-T«+ºH for all your political humor needs |
Johnfromshipping
Butcherbirds
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 15:12:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Johnfromshipping on 02/08/2007 15:12:08
Originally by: Grapez some sort of 'gang anti-bonus.' Since the gang stat modification mechanics are already in place, this one might be easier, and thus more likely to actually happen.
If you hardcap gangs (which is what will happen if a 'gang anti-bonus' goes in), people will form more gangs & keep on blobbing.
In a pvp game, you can't stop the blob unless you make artificial '5v5 type' matchups.
|
Vodka Neat
Vendetta Underground Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 15:46:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Vodka Neat on 02/08/2007 15:51:47 All you would see is either multiple small sniper groups warping in at different angles but the same amount on grid. Or the same blob but with all short range that way their "radiation" equally effect the enemy's equipment and it would go back to who had a bigger blob since all would be effected. Why are you still reading? Its over. Continue to the next post.
|
Hannobaal
Gallente Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 16:03:00 -
[24]
I don't see how forcing ships to disperse within the same grid does anything to solve any problem (real or imagined) associated with large fleets, and especially the lag problem. As long as the ships are all there within the same grid (even if there's 20 something km between each ship) everything is still the exact same. ------------------
|
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 16:05:00 -
[25]
While people in the game remain risk averse and creativity incapacitated there will be no way to stop blobbing. There doesnt need to be a way either because they are easily defeatible with a fraction of the force of the blob
Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken! |
Regarun
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 16:19:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Johnfromshipping In a pvp game, you can't stop the blob unless you make artificial '5v5 type' matchups.
Well, that depends. If the blob is somehow weakened and no longer the only viable tactic, it will die rather quickly. At the moment, game mechanics require blobs for certain things, such as seiging POSes or securing territory. If other methods were introduced which made the blob less effective at these actions and made smaller gangs the better choice, it would occur.
I can imagine that the radiation effect suggested here could be modified with the suggestion that the decrease in effectiveness is due to the communications between the systems of all the ships in the gang thus reducing the effectiveness of the ships in the gang. Do some other thing to discourage a large number of gangs on the same grid and the blob would be broken. After all, why concentrate all of your forces if they can be countered by smaller numbers? It would no longer be a useful application of force. Numerous small gangs fighting across multiple grids or even multiple systems becomes preferred and more tactically viable since a blob would not be able to wtfbbqpwn the small gangs instantly. ----------- Yes, I are made of alt. |
elohllird
Gallente Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 22:09:00 -
[27]
Ban the word "blob" and just use the phrase "lots of ships"
My work here is done
|
Hannobaal
Gallente Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 22:15:00 -
[28]
Originally by: elohllird Ban the word "blob" and just use the phrase "lots of ships"
My work here is done
Indeed! Nerf people who use the word "blob". ------------------
|
Lord WarATron
Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.08.02 22:24:00 -
[29]
There is nothing wrong with the blob. If I get killed by 100 people shooting me, then it sucks to be me!
Now the main problem with eve is that everyone in a blob is pretty much 100% effective. In other words Eve *Rewards* those who blob as there is little incentive otherwise.
Eve does not have a combat system like....
Nexus the Jupiter Incident Star Wolves/Star Wolves 2 etc etc.
In other words - in those "eve like" games - There is a point to formations, autofiring, and turret locations etc etc. There is a point to line of fire, and a point to angular directions of ships. In other words - it forces people to form up smaller, more focused, squads, since the guys in the middle of a giant blob are not 100% effective.
In other words - You are meant to kill a blob by peeling the onion. However - in eve you kill it with a sledgehammer lagfest, or you dont kill it at all.
Blobs are not the problem - the problem is lack of any incentive to formation, turret angles, line of fire etc etc.
--
Billion Isk Mission |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |