Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
I currently reside in Fountain. As an area of null sec it's seen a lot of residents in it's time and had many outposts placed here. Currently they're chiefly under the ownership of the goon/test/bdeal bloc of alliances. With these alliances fighting in the North the area is a desert, yet game play at this time allows this to be so because of the ability to project your force across the entire map without any great difficulties.
I'd like to ask if any other areas are suffering from this same affliction? I don't believe this is in anyone's interests as it stifles the game, but wondered just how far the rot has spread. |
Florestan Bronstein
United Highsec Front The 99 Percent
415
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
(1) kick out -TF- (2) complain about lack of targets (3) ???
no profit for you.
all joking and personal involvement aside - sustainability is a pretty large problem for groups like G0dfathers; harass too much and the juicy targets will leave, get too annoying and TEST will bring 200man fleets to the fights you try to provoke, but don't have enough activity and your own members will leave. Why would any actual pvp group want to engage you on somewhat even terms? there is no honor or reputation to be gained by fighting a bunch of pirates and the fight can't be "won" in any tangible sense anyways.
There once was an alliance with a pretty insightful alliance name: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equation
You have the choice to either groom your targets with an eye towards sustainability & goodfites or to become nomadic. Even if TEST were to install some new renter alliances all over Fountain to make better use of the available resources nothing substantial would change for you in the mid-term (after the first 2 weeks of ganks). |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
My issue is a little broader than that, but keep the blinkers on, it stops you having to think about bigger things in the game. |
Aiwha
101st Space Marine Force Nulli Secunda
171
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
CFC let their pets carebear while they get :goodfites: ? Regards,
LCpl. Aiwha-á Senior Recruiter |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:42:00 -
[5] - Quote
Florestan Bronstein wrote:(1) kick out -TF- (2) complain about lack of targets (3) ??? no profit for you. all joking and personal involvement aside - sustainability is a pretty large problem for groups like G0dfathers; harass too much and the juicy targets will leave, get too annoying and TEST will bring 200man fleets to the fights you try to provoke, but don't have enough activity and your own members will leave. Why would any actual pvp group want to engage you on somewhat even terms? there is no honor or reputation to be gained by fighting a bunch of pirates and the fight can't be "won" in any tangible sense anyways. There once was an alliance with a pretty insightful alliance name: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equation
As I said, it's not about the 'goodfights' even. It just isn't good for the game when a large enough powerbloc can dominate to an extent that large swathes of null sec remain mostly empty due the ability to project force across the entire map without any great time or inconvenience. Whilst I appreciate the advantages brought about by titan bridges, jump bridges and other aids to logistics, the ease with which they can span the whole of eve is a very bad thing for getting people into null sec space and is noticably having the opposite effect in this corner of New Eden. I don't want eve to to strangle on this overly powerful feature which is why I was asking if it was more widespread than my own experiences. |
Florestan Bronstein
United Highsec Front The 99 Percent
415
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:42:00 -
[6] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:My issue is a little broader than that, but keep the blinkers on, it stops you having to think about bigger things in the game. don't tell me that all the "we don't want any sov anyways" rhetoric was a lie !!!
|
Steve Celeste
Wolfsbrigade
202
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
This thread is now about desserts. |
Red Templar
Raging Ducks Goonswarm Federation
140
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:45:00 -
[8] - Quote
I do not understand the problem. The alliance went to war, to have fun, to shoot things. How does that stiffles the game? Should they be only able to sit in their own space and entertain you guys? Please specify and expand what is the problem and how you see it. And please provide a solution, in your opinion ofc, otherwise this discussion is worthless. For Love. For Peace. For Honor.
For None of the Above.
For Pony! |
Az'Kagoth
Sons Of 0din Fatal Ascension
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
There are so many neuts idling in Fountain, I don't even consider it TEST territory anymore!
These neuts however don't affect the CFC in any way. Lost a couple of expensive ships to them? No problem, it's pocket money!
Working as intended. It would be like San Marino declaring war on Italy, the italians wouldn't even look their way... |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
33
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 14:57:00 -
[10] - Quote
Red Templar wrote:I do not understand the problem. The alliance went to war, to have fun, to shoot things. How does that stiffles the game? Should they be only able to sit in their own space and entertain you guys? Please specify and expand what is the problem and how you see it. And please provide a solution, in your opinion ofc, otherwise this discussion is worthless.
Ok, I'll try. One of the oft-quoted issues with eve as a game is the progression of players into null-sec space. Back before capital ships the game-play was quite localised for most players - logistics was the prime limitation as there were no cyno-capable ships, jump bridges didn't exist, nor did haulers bigger than the standard industrial ships. Empires had definite borders which were the sparking points for conflicts and there were many at these local levels. If you left your space empty it would be taken. You would suffer the loss of resources to someone else- but at least there had to be someone else there using it otherwise the space would be claimed by another of your neighbours.
Currently this happens less and less often as force projection allows a given side to hold that space and resource without needing to use it themselves, and without requiring much presence to prevent others from taking it - it's now sufficient to be able to hop back for the one critical moment in time that the pos/outpost/poco/whatever hits a key timer, and it's also too easy to arrange the logistics. I would prefer a situation where moving such a massive force across eve required real planning, effort and time; when the conquest of other space matters for what you ADD to your empire in the way of space and resources to grow, not for what currently happens which is the cherry picking of specific moons across the entire map (for example).
I can only see this balance being re-established if travel becomes more of a burden to a fighting force and if leaving vacant systems behind becomes a real risk to your holdings. Empty space that cannot easily be taken by smaller entities prevents entry into null sec for many.
I hope that helps set out what I'm trying to convey? |
|
Tarithell
Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore
7
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 15:46:00 -
[11] - Quote
desert and roses for you |
SilentMajority
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
10
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:14:00 -
[12] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Red Templar wrote:I do not understand the problem. The alliance went to war, to have fun, to shoot things. How does that stiffles the game? Should they be only able to sit in their own space and entertain you guys? Please specify and expand what is the problem and how you see it. And please provide a solution, in your opinion ofc, otherwise this discussion is worthless. Ok, I'll try. One of the oft-quoted issues with eve as a game is the progression of players into null-sec space. Back before capital ships the game-play was quite localised for most players - logistics was the prime limitation as there were no cyno-capable ships, jump bridges didn't exist, nor did haulers bigger than the standard industrial ships. Empires had definite borders which were the sparking points for conflicts and there were many at these local levels. If you left your space empty it would be taken. You would suffer the loss of resources to someone else- but at least there had to be someone else there using it otherwise the space would be claimed by another of your neighbours. Currently this happens less and less often as force projection allows a given side to hold that space and resource without needing to use it themselves, and without requiring much presence to prevent others from taking it - it's now sufficient to be able to hop back for the one critical moment in time that the pos/outpost/poco/whatever hits a key timer, and it's also too easy to arrange the logistics. I would prefer a situation where moving such a massive force across eve required real planning, effort and time; when the conquest of other space matters for what you ADD to your empire in the way of space and resources to grow, not for what currently happens which is the cherry picking of specific moons across the entire map (for example). I can only see this balance being re-established if travel becomes more of a burden to a fighting force and if leaving vacant systems behind becomes a real risk to your holdings. Empty space that cannot easily be taken by smaller entities prevents entry into null sec for many. I hope that helps set out what I'm trying to convey?
Oh no! Does the big bad pirate not like it when we can drop 100 people on your head without any notice? This is what you get for living next to the third largest alliance in the game. If you'd like, we can move TEST into wy- for a few weeks and see how your alliance membership holds up. Then you won't have to worry about big bad TEST and power projection; we'll be right in system!
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
815
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:31:00 -
[13] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:My issue is a little broader than that, but keep the blinkers on, it stops you having to think about bigger things in the game.
Or you could grow a pair get new players, train them, take sov, offer them logistic support like JB's that ask a lot of work and then show how interesting you are instead of a brainless crying bird asking for candies.
This is funny, one side you've got nerds dropping 200 titans/supers if you dare to show up in local with an Ibis and on the other crybabies crying because small entities trying to settle somewhere get tired of being harassed from every direction and specially from pussies living in NPC space that risk 0 assets loss and making gazillions of isk with omega implants +ganks and and alike.
You should leave this game and go play something else. You're useless to everyone in whatever region you live and to your own corp mates at first.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3248
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:32:00 -
[14] - Quote
invite people to live in 0.0
OMG that is against the gankers creed.
|
Esan Vartesa
Samarkand Financial
168
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:34:00 -
[15] - Quote
SilentMajority wrote:Nikuno wrote:Red Templar wrote:I do not understand the problem. The alliance went to war, to have fun, to shoot things. How does that stiffles the game? Should they be only able to sit in their own space and entertain you guys? Please specify and expand what is the problem and how you see it. And please provide a solution, in your opinion ofc, otherwise this discussion is worthless. Ok, I'll try. *snip* I hope that helps set out what I'm trying to convey? Oh no! Does the big bad pirate not like it when we can drop 100 people on your head without any notice? This is what you get for living next to the third largest alliance in the game. If you'd like, we can move TEST into wy- for a few weeks and see how your alliance membership holds up. Then you won't have to worry about big bad TEST and power projection; we'll be right in system!
There's the standard "Someone is criticizing something that is to our benefit. Quick, start acting like bullies!" response.
Truth is, OP is raising an excellent point. If a group can project the vast majority of their force anywhere on the map at the drop of a hat, then the entire game gets reduced to one of "he with the biggest fleet wins", which is an issue that does get brought up here and there...
Force projection abilities are too strong as they are. The largest fleet can control as much territory as that quick force projection reaches, which right now is everything. Even if you're cleverly attacked at 5 different locations right across the map, as the largest fleet you can just pop off each invading force one at a time in quick succession.
You're never forced to split up.
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
34
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:38:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Nikuno wrote:My issue is a little broader than that, but keep the blinkers on, it stops you having to think about bigger things in the game. Or you could grow a pair get new players, train them, take sov, offer them logistic support like JB's that ask a lot of work and then show how interesting you are instead of a brainless crying bird asking for candies. This is funny, one side you've got nerds dropping 200 titans/supers if you dare to show up in local with an Ibis and on the other crybabies crying because small entities trying to settle somewhere get tired of being harassed from every direction and specially from pussies living in NPC space that risk 0 assets loss and making gazillions of isk with omega implants +ganks and and alike. You should leave this game and go play something else. You're useless to everyone in whatever region you live and to your own corp mates at first.
Well you've certainly shown your colours.
This is not about targets.
Was that clear enough for you? Sorry, I know one word has two syllables, but hopefully you can get someone help you with that.
It's sad when I can begin to have a reasonable discussion with the people on the other side of this particular fence, and then we get idiots leaping in with both feet firmly in their oversized mouths. At least Florestan and Red Templar are open to the actual issue I am trying to raise and not resorting to ad hominem cliched retorts. Please, leave us to discuss this and go get your posting count raised elsewhere. I expected it from the likes of silentmajority, but you have disappointed me Tanya. |
Plyn
Random Jedi Industries KRYSIS.
22
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
I think the OP has done himself a huge disservice by making this thread, and his issue, sound like a crusade against TEST.
I'm inclined to agree about the dangers of force projection and the high barrier to entry it has created for nullsec sov warfare. It's just a very tight balancing act. It makes sense that the larger groups should have an advantage, because of the amount of hassle involved in getting everything and everyone setup and organized. At the same time, this destroys any prospect of the 'little alliance of hopes and dreams' being able to find two abandoned systems to pioneer.
Lots of people will say "That's what wormholes are for!", but my reply to that is that these people DO want to get involved in nullsec sov warfare, which WHs don't provide, but it can be ridiculously hard to attract a solid 0.0 pvp base when you don't have 0.0 to pvp for.
Vast tracts of space sit claimed but empty, or unclaimed but monitored. Anyone attempting to touch this space gets crushed. I won't knock the alliances holding and monitoring this space, it is a very sound strategic move for them, and given the opportunity to do so it would be foolish for them not too. However, with the ability to shift forces so easily, it means that these forces can stretch their claim as thin as they can pay sov bills without ever having to make a hard decision regarding which system(s) need to be protected over others.
TL;DR: Current force projection mechanics have made space too small, and removed any strategical option for new-entry 0.0 hopefuls. Come2Nullsec |
Valei Khurelem
365
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:47:00 -
[18] - Quote
Well **** it I'll post, I have an alt. somewhere in Blood Raider space, there's 'war' going on here too ( supposedly anyway ) NPC space near the territories of the big alliances are filled with enemies but yes, the moment I've gotten to quieter space there's absolutely no one aside from a couple of bots who I'm convinced are mining out the rare or before I can get to it.
This makes manufacturing in 0.0 completely pointless because all I've got to play with are the noob minerals that you can get in high sec anyway, I'm pretty sure the big alliances in 0.0 space have a monopoly over it, sure, it's divided up in regions and you have people warring with each other, but they're mostly skirmishes. I've never seen them actively trying to take each other out, it also turns out that the space I'm in have a lot of Russians so I can't join up with them really either.
The stargates and the entrances to 0.0 are the biggest problem, the 0.0 alliances just camp them all day and leave the rest of their space empty, what we need are either so many entrances to 0.0 that they spread themselves thin or, I know I'm going to get trolled for this, have 0.5 high sec systems nearby the entrances because I've noticed that a lot more sovereignty changes hands in those areas than the ones with low sec systems next to them, simply because alliances can't camp 24/7 in high sec.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
34
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 16:59:00 -
[19] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote: The stargates and the entrances to 0.0 are the biggest problem, the 0.0 alliances just camp them all day and leave the rest of their space empty, what we need are either so many entrances to 0.0 that they spread themselves thin or, I know I'm going to get trolled for this, have 0.5 high sec systems nearby the entrances with cloning services because I've noticed that a lot more sovereignty changes hands in those areas than the ones with low sec systems next to them, simply because alliances can't camp 24/7 in high sec.
Never noticed this before - is it from personal experience or do you have stats somewhere? It'd be intriguing if true and could liven things up a bit.
'I think the OP has done himself a huge disservice by making this thread, and his issue, sound like a crusade against TEST.'
As for this Plyn, I'm unsure how I've done myself a disservice. I have been involved in discussions about the creep of force projection previously, primarily from a point of view that the current mechanics remove a lot of the bottlenecks that lead to possible conflict, and thought that it was worth raising from this alternative aspect of creating large tranches of unused yet claimed space - something CCP and many players have expressed their dismay over when it prohibits others from entering the great null sec space race. Being now presented with a gilded opportunity to point to this desertification of null it would have been inappropriate to not try to find out how far this pattern is repeating itself. |
Plyn
Random Jedi Industries KRYSIS.
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 17:07:00 -
[20] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Valei Khurelem wrote: The stargates and the entrances to 0.0 are the biggest problem, the 0.0 alliances just camp them all day and leave the rest of their space empty, what we need are either so many entrances to 0.0 that they spread themselves thin or, I know I'm going to get trolled for this, have 0.5 high sec systems nearby the entrances with cloning services because I've noticed that a lot more sovereignty changes hands in those areas than the ones with low sec systems next to them, simply because alliances can't camp 24/7 in high sec.
Never noticed this before - is it from personal experience or do you have stats somewhere? It'd be intriguing if true and could liven things up a bit. 'I think the OP has done himself a huge disservice by making this thread, and his issue, sound like a crusade against TEST.' As for this Plyn, I'm unsure how I've done myself a disservice. I have been involved in discussions about the creep of force projection previously, primarily from a point of view that the current mechanics remove a lot of the bottlenecks that lead to possible conflict, and thought that it was worth raising from this alternative aspect of creating large tranches of unused yet claimed space - something CCP and many players have expressed their dismay over when it prohibits others from entering the great null sec space race. Being now presented with a gilded opportunity to point to this desertification of null it would have been inappropriate to not try to find out how far this pattern is repeating itself.
The reason you have done yourself a disservice is that by pointing the finger at a specific entity you are inadvertently drawing attention away from the fact that this is a game-wide problem. TEST, or any other major player, would be stupid not to control and defend as much space as possible. The real problem is that groups with as many pilots and as much firepower as they have can do so back and forth across the cluster without having to take strategic losses. The issue isn't with something they have control over at all. The problem is one of mechanics. If you were in their shoes you would use those same mechanics.
Anyways, we're on the same side, just please realize that TEST didn't create force projection, they are just using it. Come2Nullsec |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
815
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 17:29:00 -
[21] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Well you've certainly shown your colours.
This is not about targets.
Was that clear enough for you? Sorry, I know one word has two syllables, but hopefully you can get someone help you with that.
It's sad when I can begin to have a reasonable discussion with the people on the other side of this particular fence, and then we get idiots leaping in with both feet firmly in their oversized mouths. At least Florestan and Red Templar are open to the actual issue I am trying to raise and not resorting to ad hominem cliched retorts. Please, leave us to discuss this and go get your posting count raised elsewhere. I expected it from the likes of silentmajority, but you have disappointed me Tanya.
Well, wow.
Someone claiming he wants to discuss then not able to accept critics. Well my vocabulary is certainly lacking some academic rules, just bit more than yours imho, but at least seems you understood me.
Now if you ever want to start talking about force projection why don't you start by talking how much is easy with cyno alts, a minimum of logistics for fuel (at worst) and titans, to project whatever force you want everywhere in the map.
Let me try it again, I'll dumb it down as much as I can: you're pointing one problem that has several causes that you seem to not understand.
End of thread for me anyway, you bring nothing new but tears. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
34
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 17:59:00 -
[22] - Quote
Plyn wrote:
The reason you have done yourself a disservice is that by pointing the finger at a specific entity you are inadvertently drawing attention away from the fact that this is a game-wide problem. TEST, or any other major player, would be stupid not to control and defend as much space as possible. The real problem is that groups with as many pilots and as much firepower as they have can do so back and forth across the cluster without having to take strategic losses. The issue isn't with something they have control over at all. The problem is one of mechanics. If you were in their shoes you would use those same mechanics.
Anyways, we're on the same side, just please realize that TEST didn't create force projection, they are just using it.
Sorry, you misunderstood my intent. I wasn't pointing fingers at anybody, simply illustrating the problem I perceive in my locality and attempting to elicit information about how wide this is as a phenomenon in eve at this time. The fact of who it is is irrelevant, aside from the fact that it applies to large entities. The issue for me is what appears to be happening as power becomes consolidated into fewer hands with no natural mechanic in game that allows effective challenge to a broken system of force projection. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
439
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 18:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
Sounds like hot drops in general are annoying. All I wanted to do was grind a sanctum in a carrier, but PL with their force projection landed on it and killed it.
I don't know how you are gonna get rid of hot drops. Just don't go out and fly. disorientating |
Vetrox Satria
Canadian Forces Corp
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 20:22:00 -
[24] - Quote
Im a total noob when it comes to null sec as I dont have the capabilities or a corp/alliance with big enough ambition but what Im gathering from this thread is that. An alliance can claim a huge territory and the moment something is up they can just insta jump a fleet there?!? essentialy removing the need for guarding the borders of your territory?
Sounds a bit broken to me (but like I said I havent actually been out there) |
William Westmere
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
6
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 20:32:00 -
[25] - Quote
Good sir I have a problem with your statement at force projection being broken.
Compare Today's current world state from a military perspective. At any point if it so chooses, the United States (or any serious military power) can attack a country on the other side of the world (or defend other countries) within hours using planes (not to mention ICBMs although while they exist they aren't used). Force projection is a fact of warfare and as the attacker it's your job to try to manage it when you attack a more powerful entity.
|
Plyn
Random Jedi Industries KRYSIS.
25
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 20:48:00 -
[26] - Quote
Vetrox Satria wrote:Im a total noob when it comes to null sec as I dont have the capabilities or a corp/alliance with big enough ambition but what Im gathering from this thread is that. An alliance can claim a huge territory and the moment something is up they can just insta jump a fleet there?!? essentialy removing the need for guarding the borders of your territory?
Sounds a bit broken to me (but like I said I havent actually been out there) That's basically the gist of it, and yeah, it's totally borked.
The problem comes with creating an advantage as incentive for players to go through the huge hassle of maintaining a massive alliance. It takes a lot of time and effort to organize these things. In order to encourage development of massive space empires, jump bridges were created. In order to encourage big fights, titan bridging was created. Unfortunately, a combination of the two has created a mechanic where the largest alliances can move gigantic death fleets back and forth across the cluster at the drop of a hat.
It isn't that they don't have to defend the border, it's just so easy for them to mobilize and get there they can fight on four or five fronts in a single day and not lose a system. As soon as your tiny alliance's TCU goes online in that unclaimed system that you thought was abandoned you have a giant target on your head.
Space is small now. The days of smaller alliances carving out a piece of space on the fringe and trying to grow themselves are gone. There's a handful of megalliances that distribute fiefdoms to their friends and servants. If you can't get in with one of these groups on some level your nullsec aspirations will end in NPC space.
William Westmere wrote:Good sir I have a problem with your statement at force projection being broken.
Compare Today's current world state from a military perspective. At any point if it so chooses, the United States (or any serious military power) can attack a country on the other side of the world (or defend other countries) within hours using planes (not to mention ICBMs although while they exist they aren't used). Force projection is a fact of warfare and as the attacker it's your job to try to manage it when you attack a more powerful entity.
You are definitely correct that force projection is a valid concern in warfare, and something that should exist. However, your analogy isn't great when you think about the differences between the tactics involved in RL warfare and internet spaceship warfare.
IRL you don't just blast a structure and call it a victory, otherwise Al-Qaeda and the Taliban conquered the US in 2001. IRL the planes can perform attacks on a country very quickly, but no country can be conquered until ground troops arrive to occupy.
It could take weeks to move the proper forces into position to stage a full scale invasion of another country, and if the US devoted 100% of its military resources to a target in the middle east, what would happen if Mexico decided to say screw it and invade? The US would probably lose some of its Sov along the southern border.
Modern IRL military forces also don't have the convenience of a set timer letting everyone know exactly what day, hour, minute, second their strategic foothold will come out of protection from a magical invulnerability shield.
No, an IRL military analogy is not appropriate for this discussion at all. Though I agree that some force projection should exist, and it should be a consideration when starting a military campaign. Come2Nullsec |
Vetrox Satria
Canadian Forces Corp
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 20:57:00 -
[27] - Quote
William Westmere wrote:Good sir I have a problem with your statement at force projection being broken.
Compare Today's current world state from a military perspective. At any point if it so chooses, the United States (or any serious military power) can attack a country on the other side of the world (or defend other countries) within hours using planes (not to mention ICBMs although while they exist they aren't used). Force projection is a fact of warfare and as the attacker it's your job to try to manage it when you attack a more powerful entity.
Even if thats how modern warfare did work after polotics gets outa the way it doesnt really make sense in EVE (which is a game(games have a tendancy to be a bit more balanced than reality))
What lured me into EVE was the whole sandbox nature of the game and ever since I started playing it my dream was to find a small empty portion of null sec space, Slowly grow my small corp into an alliance to be reckoned with. After reading this thread it makes me feel like this is just a dream and has made me a bit sad tbh. |
Valei Khurelem
365
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:01:00 -
[28] - Quote
Quote:
Never noticed this before - is it from personal experience or do you have stats somewhere? It'd be intriguing if true and could liven things up a bit.
Yeah it's basically just from me scouting around and looking at things, once you get past a certain point, it's empty space, I even made a thread about it in the Crime and Punishment section, I took a pod, flew all the way to the edge of GoonSwarm space, stayed there for a few minutes, got bored and then logged, a few people in that time had come in to look at who was in local and they didn't even bother to try and gank me.
The excuse to not gank me on the forums was that they couldn't be bothered since they were busy fighting for territory elsewhere. Alliances are only defending the chokepoints and trying to gank everyone that comes in, the problem is they've made what would normally be neutral territory unusable which is why no one has come along and invaded anymore.
There is no economy in 0.0 so that means no high sec will ever come there to set up shop and cause the established alliances trouble, I do think nowadays that low sec is a pretty useless idea since all it is now is a sort of no man's land between high sec and 0.0. it may well have been intentional design. However it just isn't working because people can't be bothered dealing with gate campers at every jump or being ganked while trying to make any progress within the game.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Zhade Lezte
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:13:00 -
[29] - Quote
As far as force projection goes, it needs to be mentioned that force projection also allows for massive fleet battles that are something that many people enjoy and is actually a large selling point that draws people into playing eve for the first time. If you nerf force projection you are making it harder to achieve these massive fights and limiting others' fun, and whether that loss of fun is outweighed by your gain in fun is a matter of opinion.
For your concrete example (your life in NPC fountain and not finding much TEST to shoot) I'm not entirely sure if you are thinking through what would actually happen if force projection was drastically nerfed. I imagine you are sensibly fighting in small agile/cloaky gangs ganking the occasional ratter or traveling TEST and having fun with it, while TEST is having fun going off and fighting in massive fleet battles instead of trying to stomp out a evasive group of players that will cloak up or dock in response to being blobbed instead of getting needlessly murdered.
If you take away force projection, suddenly TEST only has your group as viable targets (or has to suffer through 40+jumps to even play the game as they like), and they camp you in a station/force you to AFK cloak for hours on end. Your group gets upset at being blobbed, TEST gets upset at not having large gangs of ships to shoot in massive meat grinder fleet battles, no one has any fun and everyone unsubs.
As far as the problem of small alliances not being able to participate in nullsec gameplay, I think there are many other things that could be changed first to vastly remedy that issue before even reconsidering the issue of force projecting, such as nerfing supercaps (possessed only by the well established and rich alliances of eve), nerfing technetium, and adding spool-up timers to capital jump drives (nerfing surprise hotdrops). All of which are supported by the CSM candidate The Mitanni (a shameless plug, I know).
As another solution to null sec deserts controlled by large alliances, I'm curious if anyone has an opinion on the idea of smallholding proposed a while ago in a devblog. It seems like an ideal way to be able to infest deserted sov claimed by large alliances as a small entity, if designed so that it is generally too much of a pain for the large alliances to root out the smallholds set up in out of the way areas. |
Valei Khurelem
365
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 21:18:00 -
[30] - Quote
Believe it or not Zhade, another thing I know I'm going to get hate for is that I think Wormholes are actually an answer, think about it, it's another way for small alliances or corporations to gain access to 0.0 space if they can't go toe to toe with the big alliances just yet. They can harvest their own rare ore etc. and get what they need to fight them gathering strength, then when they're strong enough they can go and pick some fights.
I think we should actually increase the number of wormhole systems and maybe even the size, I really like the exploration in EVE and think it's what a sandbox should be really about, I think if we increase the number of wormholes though maybe a good thing to do would be to put more in low sec, to give people a real reason to go there rather than just to play tag with each other until one of them gets bored.
Whatever happens, 0.0 needs a serious change, I'd say it's the attitude of the alliances that needs changing, but I'm realistic, we just need to change the gameplay so the blob doesn't win anymore.
p.s. I propose AoE self-destruct freighters loaded with explosives that can take out entire fleets :P
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |