Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
tovarich cookies
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 12:24:00 -
[1]
This is just a old EVE evolved article from massively that caught my eye, and i think it has some merit, enough to bring it to your attention.
Here is the article:
http://www.massively.com/2008/05/26/eve-evolved-to-blob-or-not-to-blob/
TL;DR
Blobbing is considered most effective in 0.0. Blobbing is tactically superior to small roaming gangs. Blobs cause lag. Blobs are not fun for both parties involved because: Lag. Insta death: target has no time to react before dying to focus fire. No fun. Ner***e to blobs and focus fire are suggested in this article, using a system called noise. Noise increases someone's targeting time on the ship you are currently trying to acquire a lock on. In short the more people are trying to target the same ship the longer it will take everyone to lock it. Note that is is only when TARGETING the ship: actually having the ship locked will not generate noise. This is done to prevent excessive focus fire which is not fun for both sides. This could possibly be circumvented by pre-locking targets, so a second measure was added, you can only be AQUIRING 2 targets at a time.
For instance: say if anyone targeting a ship will add 0.4s lock time to a ship.
Say average BS to BS lock is 5 sec. 1 ship locking: 5sec 2 ships locking at the same time: 5.4s 3:5.8s 4:6.2s 5:6.6s 6:7s
hope i explained this well enough.
|
Eli Porter
Amarr Altruism.
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 13:44:00 -
[2]
Stop whining. If blobbing wasn't fun no one would play this game.
Of course it's not fun if you get way outnumbered. Learn to look at local and scan often and your likelyhood of getting blobbed will go down.
|
Dalek Commander
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 14:22:00 -
[3]
From my experience (2 years in 0.0) a blob is anything larger then the other fleet. 30 guys get jumped by 50 the 30 will cry BLOB, but that same 30 would happily destroy a fleet of 10 guys while being all smug about it.
Now I've been witness to some pretty epic blobs. So in my opinion it's not a blob till the surrounding systems start to lag because the node is crying for more resources and not getting it. This doesn't happen often till you get about 600 or so people in an unenforced node, so next time your roaming fleet gets wtfbbqowned by a larger fleet don't cry "blob" unless they got 500 people in their fleet.
|
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 17:06:00 -
[4]
Blobbing is not the problem, perfect focus fire is the problem.
Just imagine two bands of 100 hostile archers meeting each other, and their volleys of a 100 arrows unerringly landing on a specific individual among the hostiles until it is dead.
The alphabetic problem is a concurrent problem. People at the top of the alfabet suffer from focused fire more often because we can perfectly identify each hostile and sorting by name is an effective way to focus fire.
If perfect identification would no longer be possible (just shiptype (Zealot) or even shipclass (HAC), focus fire would get harder and harder the larger the blob becomes, and would be a natural counter. Sure, people can still try to focus fire manually if they show info on a specific target, but the availability of perfect identification in overview is what causes the main problem.
Designating a target on the main viewscreen by means of fleet commands, I have less of a problem with that, since its more difficult in large blobs to do so succesfully.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
Pupp3tMast3r
Gallente Project Nemesis
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 19:36:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Merdaneth Blobbing is not the problem, perfect focus fire is the problem.
Just imagine two bands of 100 hostile archers meeting each other, and their volleys of a 100 arrows unerringly landing on a specific individual among the hostiles until it is dead.
The alphabetic problem is a concurrent problem. People at the top of the alfabet suffer from focused fire more often because we can perfectly identify each hostile and sorting by name is an effective way to focus fire.
If perfect identification would no longer be possible (just shiptype (Zealot) or even shipclass (HAC), focus fire would get harder and harder the larger the blob becomes, and would be a natural counter. Sure, people can still try to focus fire manually if they show info on a specific target, but the availability of perfect identification in overview is what causes the main problem.
Designating a target on the main viewscreen by means of fleet commands, I have less of a problem with that, since its more difficult in large blobs to do so succesfully.
^^This is by far the best solution I've seen to this problem. It's simple and it would work. Most of the idea's I've seen involve adding a new game mechanic, one that would probably increase lag further (maybe only by a bit but still).
The noise idea I have seen before and personally I don't really care for it. It's a system that could be abused and exploited too easily. Among the other problems listed in that article just imagine how many people would use sensor damps with scan res damp scripts if lock time started being pre-nerfed.
But doing something so small as to remove character names from the overview... It may also become necessary to remove the target calling in fleet feature but perhaps not as that is much less efficient than calling names over voice comms.
|
Captain Tardbar
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 21:39:00 -
[6]
Blob on Blob Combat = Epic
Blob on Solo Combat = Not So Epic
|
DeputyFruitfly
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 22:28:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Merdaneth cute idea
That's cute, but it's not an issue that can be dealt with isolation.
It's not about making blobbing worse. It's about making blobbing worse than some other tactic.
As long as blobbing is the *most* effective tactic, you won't see a change. Even if ccp made it more annoying, if it was still more effective than tactic X, then blobbing will not change.
I'm just pointing that out. I don't really care, since I don't really care about whiners whining about blobs in the first place.
|
Gaven Darklighter
Gallente The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 22:52:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Captain Tardbar Blob on Blob Combat = Epic
Blob on Solo Combat = Not So Epic
well said.
As someone who enjoys going out on my own a bit more than in a 30 BS fleet, I routinely get smashed to bits by larger fleets. Personally, I like the noise idea, but it would be hard to implement it without it benefiting friendlies.
|
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 23:16:00 -
[9]
Originally by: DeputyFruitfly
Originally by: Merdaneth cute idea
That's cute, but it's not an issue that can be dealt with isolation.
It's not about making blobbing worse. It's about making blobbing worse than some other tactic.
As long as blobbing is the *most* effective tactic, you won't see a change. Even if ccp made it more annoying, if it was still more effective than tactic X, then blobbing will not change.
I'm just pointing that out. I don't really care, since I don't really care about whiners whining about blobs in the first place.
Numbers should be an effective tactic. However, overview makes application of those numbers very easy, and frankly, a bit boring. Blobbing should still be one of the most effective tactics, I'm only aiming to make the fight last longer and be more interesting for all involved. Blobbing is an universally effective strategy, I'm merely making it a bit harder for those in big fleets.
The chaos of two fleets of 200 meeting each other should be true chaos, people trying to focus fire but sometimes mistaking their targets. Inties and smaller ships weaving between the targets holding small duels while the big boys slug it out. Lots of mini-battles within the large fleet battle, not the surgical pinpoint strikes and cold logical working down the alfabet.
There is now some chaos too in large fleet battles, but that is largely caused by lag. Lag makes it also difficult to focus fire reliably. ____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 23:22:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Pupp3tMast3r
But doing something so small as to remove character names from the overview... It may also become necessary to remove the target calling in fleet feature but perhaps not as that is much less efficient than calling names over voice comms.
I think target calling in the fleet feature should stay, but only as long as its difficult enough in a seething chaos of ships to correctly click and lock your target. ____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
|
Marko Riva
Adamant Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 01:59:00 -
[11]
Blobbing is a great way to not have to be scared of your own mistakes and shortcomings, it also means that you can just be effective while not putting in effort, fly the ship you're told to fly, target the one you're told to target and hit F1.
non-effort, 'safe' gameplay.
----------- ADM-I |
ropnes
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 13:44:00 -
[12]
What we need is combat mechanics that make large scale fights interesting
For example, in sniper fights you often warp around a lot while dictors try to bubble you. That's a fun mechanic that requires coordination (warpins, people killing the dictors etc). The actual sniping doesn't work all that well though because of focus fire
Focus fire = focused attention. There is only one thing happening. A good system would encourage different parts of a fleet to be doing different things. That's a bigger problem than ships going pop to quickly.
|
Tanja Cyprus
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 14:07:00 -
[13]
Originally by: tovarich cookies This is just a old EVE evolved article from massively that caught my eye, and i think it has some merit, enough to bring it to your attention.
Here is the article:
http://www.massively.com/2008/05/26/eve-evolved-to-blob-or-not-to-blob/
TL;DR
Blobbing is considered most effective in 0.0. Blobbing is tactically superior to small roaming gangs. Blobs cause lag. Blobs are not fun for both parties involved because: Lag. Insta death: target has no time to react before dying to focus fire. No fun. Ner***e to blobs and focus fire are suggested in this article, using a system called noise. Noise increases someone's targeting time on the ship you are currently trying to acquire a lock on. In short the more people are trying to target the same ship the longer it will take everyone to lock it. Note that is is only when TARGETING the ship: actually having the ship locked will not generate noise. This is done to prevent excessive focus fire which is not fun for both sides. This could possibly be circumvented by pre-locking targets, so a second measure was added, you can only be AQUIRING 2 targets at a time.
For instance: say if anyone targeting a ship will add 0.4s lock time to a ship.
Say average BS to BS lock is 5 sec. 1 ship locking: 5sec 2 ships locking at the same time: 5.4s 3:5.8s 4:6.2s 5:6.6s 6:7s
hope i explained this well enough.
Very simple solution to do this:
The more people lock up 1 target, the more that targets Signature Radius is reduced. Leads to both longer locking time and less damage taken, depending on how you scale it at some point it will be more efficient to Shoot at a new target than the same one. Not hard to implement either, just give each ship locking up someone an inherent negative Target Painter Effect (fully stacking ofc).
|
Noxford
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 14:35:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Noxford on 05/11/2009 14:36:50
Originally by: Marko Riva Blobbing is a great way to not have to be scared of your own mistakes and shortcomings, it also means that you can just be effective while not putting in effort, fly the ship you're told to fly, target the one you're told to target and hit F1.
non-effort, 'safe' gameplay.
Which is EXACTLY why it shouldn't be the 'best' tactic.
Blobs are about as fun as waiting for noobs outside a station to flip a can so my entire corp can decimate his velator.
Originally by: Tanja Cyprus
Very simple solution to do this:
The more people lock up 1 target, the more that targets Signature Radius is reduced. Leads to both longer locking time and less damage taken, depending on how you scale it at some point it will be more efficient to Shoot at a new target than the same one. Not hard to implement either, just give each ship locking up someone an inherent negative Target Painter Effect (fully stacking ofc).
I see lots of Hyenas in fleets in the near future. _____________________________ - Noxford Realtor Services - |
Zverofaust
Gallente Ice Fire Warriors
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 15:18:00 -
[15]
Blobbing can be fun. If it weren't so insanely laggy. While I prefer the more "heart-pounding" small-size engagements where life and death are determined by skill and reaction time, sitting around with a few dozen of your mates in a big ******** of a fleet while reliving the battle of Endor is enough to give me small momentary orgasms every once in awhile.
|
Insa Rexion
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 19:29:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Merdaneth Blobbing is not the problem, perfect focus fire is the problem.
Just imagine two bands of 100 hostile archers meeting each other, and their volleys of a 100 arrows unerringly landing on a specific individual among the hostiles until it is dead.
The alphabetic problem is a concurrent problem. People at the top of the alfabet suffer from focused fire more often because we can perfectly identify each hostile and sorting by name is an effective way to focus fire.
If perfect identification would no longer be possible (just shiptype (Zealot) or even shipclass (HAC), focus fire would get harder and harder the larger the blob becomes, and would be a natural counter. Sure, people can still try to focus fire manually if they show info on a specific target, but the availability of perfect identification in overview is what causes the main problem.
Designating a target on the main viewscreen by means of fleet commands, I have less of a problem with that, since its more difficult in large blobs to do so succesfully.
Broadcast target ...ur solution most likely does little for reducing focus fire other than forcing ppl to use "broadcast Target" and quite possibly improving the fire focus of ****tier gangs who were previously not so good as shooting the primary.
If it does actually turn out to make it considerably more tricky then all you have done is ruin the player experience of engagements for many pilots as their FCs demand gangs consisting of only 1 BC or BS type to take advantage of this. If they are not outright rejected because they cannot fly a harbinger for an amarr FW fleet for example, they will be instaprimaried anyway when their ferox sticks out like a sore thumb.
Where this may not be such a problem for small gangs and very large gangs where possibly each BS may have 10 representatives, I think that mid sized fleet engagements (such as in FW particularly) would be screwed for pilots of a different race to the faction the fight for. Considering that FW is full of new pilots, there will be many caldaris in amarr who don't fly geddons, many minnies who don't fly megas... what are these guys expected to do in ur scenario ?
I has 17 XBOX can I get sov ??
|
Insa Rexion
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 19:41:00 -
[17]
Incidentally, if a system were implemented to reduce the effectiveness of focussed fire, Remote repping would have to be altered in some way too. How would one be able to break tanks in a well flown 20 strong RR BS gang if only 5 ppl could shoot (effctively) at a single target ? Obviously sensor damps and ECM would work but far more would be needed. Implemented on it's own, this would be a big buff to RR which is already highly effective (and pretty damn tedious).
I has 17 XBOX can I get sov ??
|
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 20:52:00 -
[18]
If the Alliance tournaments have shown as anything, then its that RR and ECM rarely make for good and fun fights. ____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
Insa Rexion
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 21:03:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Merdaneth If the Alliance tournaments have shown as anything, then its that RR and ECM rarely make for good and fun fights.
I quite agree, i find RR utterly dull, I just think that ur idea for reducing focussed fire (if effective) will have a nasty side effect for some pilots. Certainly in FW it could result in pilots who fly races differing from the faction they fight for being left out of fleets or almost certainly being insta pwned in every fleet they join as they are the only ferox in a fleet of harbingers.
Perhaps your RPing background in PIE. (and subsequent rules on amarr only hulls) means you see this to be of little concern or even favorable, but for others it would be crud. This really isn't the way to go to reduce focussing fire if improving player experience is a concurrent objective.
I has 17 XBOX can I get sov ??
|
Feyona
R.E.C.O.N. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 22:34:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Insa Rexion
Originally by: Merdaneth If the Alliance tournaments have shown as anything, then its that RR and ECM rarely make for good and fun fights.
I quite agree, i find RR utterly dull, I just think that ur idea for reducing focussed fire (if effective) will have a nasty side effect for some pilots. Certainly in FW it could result in pilots who fly races differing from the faction they fight for being left out of fleets or almost certainly being insta pwned in every fleet they join as they are the only ferox in a fleet of harbingers.
Perhaps your RPing background in PIE. (and subsequent rules on amarr only hulls) means you see this to be of little concern or even favorable, but for others it would be crud. This really isn't the way to go to reduce focussing fire if improving player experience is a concurrent objective.
This is kind of a dumb idea anyway as you can always just broadcast primaries on a target ship, this works with NPCs so you would have to remove that ability. Hardly think it would fix things. Not that things really need 'fixing' I suppose...
|
|
Eelis Kiy
Gallente Shadows Of The Federation
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 23:37:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Dalek Commander From my experience (2 years in 0.0) a blob is anything larger then the other fleet. 30 guys get jumped by 50 the 30 will cry BLOB, but that same 30 would happily destroy a fleet of 10 guys while being all smug about it.
This. ^^
Flying round in FW there are always "omg blob" cries. Whether it's about a fleet of 70, 30 or 10.
|
Burnharder
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 23:44:00 -
[22]
In my experience FF is the worst aspect. Once you're primaried it's game over in a few seconds. A simple fix would be to limit the number of ships that can target you, but then this would disadvantage a group of frigates, say, attacking a larger ship. Not sure I can see the solution to be honest. The idea above doesn't work, because if it takes 1s, or 10s to target you for primary, you're still going to die very quickly.
|
Insa Rexion
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 21:19:00 -
[23]
Originally by: tovarich cookies This is just a old EVE evolved article from massively that caught my eye, and i think it has some merit, enough to bring it to your attention.
Here is the article:
http://www.massively.com/2008/05/26/eve-evolved-to-blob-or-not-to-blob/
TL;DR
Blobbing is considered most effective in 0.0. Blobbing is tactically superior to small roaming gangs. Blobs cause lag. Blobs are not fun for both parties involved because: Lag. Insta death: target has no time to react before dying to focus fire. No fun. Ner***e to blobs and focus fire are suggested in this article, using a system called noise. Noise increases someone's targeting time on the ship you are currently trying to acquire a lock on. In short the more people are trying to target the same ship the longer it will take everyone to lock it. Note that is is only when TARGETING the ship: actually having the ship locked will not generate noise. This is done to prevent excessive focus fire which is not fun for both sides. This could possibly be circumvented by pre-locking targets, so a second measure was added, you can only be AQUIRING 2 targets at a time.
For instance: say if anyone targeting a ship will add 0.4s lock time to a ship.
Say average BS to BS lock is 5 sec. 1 ship locking: 5sec 2 ships locking at the same time: 5.4s 3:5.8s 4:6.2s 5:6.6s 6:7s
hope i explained this well enough.
Unfortunately this idea fails too since FCs just call secondary, tertiary even quaternary targets which are already locked with no delay by the time the primary is dead. The article posted this possible fix to that ...
"A simple fix to this pitfall is to reduce the number of ships that a player can actively acquire to one (wtf?) or two."
...and i am sure i don't even need to explain why this is an utterly ****e idea.
IMO the problem of focus fire and remote repping are the same. They both involve multiple players affecting one target and issuing either dmg or hp, they are mirror images. For that reason it seems to me that any solution to this problem should be centered on these two aspects, not upon things like target locking or overview information that will affect so many other aspects of the game unintentionally.
Damage and repping should stack, the size of the target should the amount of damage and repping before the stacking kicks in so as not to gimp frigs attacking BSes or other similar scenarios. I don't see that this issue can be resolved any other way really.
I has 17 XBOX can I get sov ??
|
Grut
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 08:59:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Insa Rexion
Damage and repping should stack, the size of the target should the amount of damage and repping before the stacking kicks in so as not to gimp frigs attacking BSes or other similar scenarios. I don't see that this issue can be resolved any other way really.
^^ this would improve things alot. At the moment even in a 200 man blob the organisation is FC >> Fodder. With stacking you need teams so that organisation would go FC >> Squad Leader >> Fodder , still not paradise but it would dramatically up the skill ceiling on fights - not only do you need a great FC you need a robust organisation under him to keep working even when taking hits.
The main problem is that in eve stacking numbers on a grid is king - there are no mechanics to give an adavantage to splitting fleets off grid. Even spliting off a few guys to find an in system fleet boosting CS is pointless, they're either sitting in a pos or with a cloak.
Kinsy > deadman you there? Kinsy > are either of us in pods, becase we dont know...
Mostly harmless [ 2005.12.09 19:22:50 ] (notify) You have started trying to warp scramble the Dreadnought |
Meridius Dex
Amarr Gunship Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 15:51:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Insa Rexion
Damage and repping should stack, the size of the target should the amount of damage and repping before the stacking kicks in so as not to gimp frigs attacking BSes or other similar scenarios. I don't see that this issue can be resolved any other way really.
It's funny. After two years of playing this game religiously I've just recently made the decision to close my account. For all it's other good and bad points, what kills the fun most of the time in EVE is hands down the blobbing aspect - whether you are on the receiving end or giving end, it's still lame.
I've been recently telling people that a solution just like yours is what this game desperately needs. Damage stacking so that a finite number of ships piling onto a single target becomes redundant and ineffective. Such a refinement would encourage more focused (pardon the expression) strategy, including smaller 'fire teams' and specialized squads within the context of a larger blob.
How stupid is it that when 200 ships face 200 other ships that every single spacecraft in both entire fleets fire on just one target?! Have we seen this in any movies? In RL? No, it's an absurd mechanic in this video game which imo makes the game LESS intelligent, LESS strategic and - ultimately - less enjoyable.
Targeting issues (and things like secondary explosions coming from tons of incoming fire) should in effect reduce additional incoming damage by stacking. Having this further related to target sig radius would also be a good idea. Make it so that once x number of ships are firing tons of damage at a target that additional damage is stacked to the point where it is redundant. If anything, such changes might even even be a buff to active tanking under certain circumstances. -- Meridius Dex Visit the Gunship Forums --
|
Razzor Death
Antares Shipyards Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 16:12:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Razzor Death on 07/11/2009 16:17:02 Not flaming or anything but you guys do know the target calling is the key for a smaller gang to beat a blob yea ? and its the focused fire on the correct ships in the right order that give you the chance to come out against the odds ?
Tbh if your in an alliance that sorts primary's by alphabet you and your alliance are already part of the problem you are complaining about.
We live next door to the NC and are no virgins to getting blobbed. And I personally just love all the targets to shoot at.
By taking away focused fire your taking away the ability of the gang and the talent of your FC and your only hope in hell of defeating the people that outnumber you.
I get what the op is saying about lock time bonus per lock but some of the suggestions following are rather disturbing.
The whole joy of small gang pvp in this game is the skill in perfect focused coordination and ability to try and overcome the odds. I don't claim to be at that level yet by any stretch but I strive to get better against the odds as we all do. Your nice smaller gang should be well out the way before the slow ass blob has coordinated its way to you.
I remember a few weeks back we got in a engagement with MM and it was set to look for a nice tasty "fair" engagement. So we warped to gate and jumped into them and as the engagement went off 30 odd more MM or RZR ( can't remember )jump in and we got totally destroyed. Was MM being f@gs ? No... we all accepted straight away it was purely our fault for not being up on the scouts and Intel and choosing to engage. It was purely our fault we lost our ships, MM had been losing a lot of there younger members to us and was just doing what they needed to do to ensure victory. It was our fault for allowing ourselves to be blobbed.
Theres nothing wrong with blobs in this game it simply makes it more realistic and what keeps it well away from 10v10 wow instances or w/e.
So many crys about blobs and naps and it does make me laugh. Taking Delve is like taking a country that's going to make a you trillions in wealth. You don't go around invading other country's with 1 man. And you best be prepared for how many people there going to mount to protect there trillions and there home.
I know eve is obviously a game but its those factors like that witch is why eve is alive and breathing today when all the other mmos from its time died.
Anyways not flaming the OP or nothing but this hole "Hate the blobbers" thing is just dumb.
Edit - Just to summarise.. Your suggesting we kill blobs in the game by taking away the smaller peoples ability to come up tops when faced against the blobs.
As the old saying in eve goes Adapt or Die
Fly safe o/
( Sorry for terrible spelling/grammar )
PS. I'm going to have nightmares tonight about coming up against a drake army that's half the size of us and where all shooting random people with out the ability to see anything other than "Drake" . Its safe to say we would stop using killboard's ;)
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 16:43:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 07/11/2009 16:48:13 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 07/11/2009 16:47:02
Originally by: Merdaneth Blobbing is not the problem, perfect focus fire is the problem.
Focus fire is not a problem. It's sensible in a world where the following is true: - ships take a long time to pop each other individually
Make ships die in 1-2 volleys from a single ship and there would be no problem with the focus fire issue (akin to your "archers" example).
Your "archers" example already shows this; present them with a siege weapon or something which you'd need to fire a lot of arrows on to disable it (eg. burn in or such), and they would focus fire.
Comparisons with one good shot -> disable/kill systems are problematic, since EVE weaponry takes a lot of firing to have any effect and there is no such thing as supression.
In EVE world, focus fire (disregarding anti-support and such) simply makes sense compared to all the alternatives.
Furthermore, nerfing focus fire has all sorts of undesirable effects. It would make it easier to blob smaller gangs as they would require more time to pop targets assuming they managed to engage the larger gang piecemeal, for starters. So on and on.
Furthermore, the whole "blob" talk is so exaggerated. The blob is always the gang with your ship count + 1. On the other hand, if you outnumber the other guys by a factor of two you were just in a roaming gang, and what are you supposed to do, send people home to make it fair? Blah :P
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 17:55:00 -
[28]
Would it really be so bad to have gates randomly deposit ships into the target system? You gotta align and warp to the next get anyway. Why have to show up in the exact same spot?
If you cash your paycheck at the same bank at the same time at the same day every week, you can get blobbed in the parking lot. Get it? But if it had multiple exits, you go on different days, and use other branches, you don't get ganked for your wages.
End the "gate to gate" jumping thing and the gate camp blob is history overnight.
|
Insa Rexion
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 19:40:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Insa Rexion on 07/11/2009 19:41:29
Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer Would it really be so bad to have gates randomly deposit ships into the target system? You gotta align and warp to the next get anyway. Why have to show up in the exact same spot?
If you cash your paycheck at the same bank at the same time at the same day every week, you can get blobbed in the parking lot. Get it? But if it had multiple exits, you go on different days, and use other branches, you don't get ganked for your wages.
End the "gate to gate" jumping thing and the gate camp blob is history overnight.
All but pre-arranged combat would be history unless I am missing something, at least in losec. Not to mention invincible carebear haulers/freighters etc.
I has 17 XBOX can I get sov ??
|
Swatyy
Deus Imperiosus Acies
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 21:25:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Meridius Dex How stupid is it that when 200 ships face 200 other ships that every single spacecraft in both entire fleets fire on just one target?! Have we seen this in any movies? In RL? No, it's an absurd mechanic in this video game which imo makes the game LESS intelligent, LESS strategic and - ultimately - less enjoyable.
Actually, its a tried and true naval tactic called "Crossing the T" [Wikipedia.com]. In 2 dimensions, it slows enemy fire and makes attacking fire more concentrated and accurate. But I agree, it makes for less enjoyable fleet fights and promotes the Blob.
The idea of removing the name from the overview is a pretty good one. They could replace it with the ship name, so identifiers could be used if a fleet wanted to. I'd make it so that when a ship is unpacked, you are asked to give it a name and then can't change it until it's repackaged again.
Anything that involves targeting on a ship probably wont work because it would be easy for friendlies to confuse the system with "hostile" mods like target painters or a single warrior drone or the like.
xDIAx | Swatyy |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |