EVE Search - Dominion and the "Blob problem"

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Dominion and the "Blob problem"

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rancideous	Posted - 2009.11.06 20:13:00 - [1] It is refreshing to see in Dominion that sovereignty will no longer involve the mindless time waste of shooting player owned stations. I have read a bit about the Dominion expansion and have tested quite a few features and fleet combat on Singularity. What I find lacking is that the single largest problem with EvE warfare; the "Blob" or the overwhelming tactic of "Blobbing" has not been addressed. It is readily apparent that no amount of program tweaking or hardware upgrades will alleviate the lag that plagues EvE's fleet battles. Why has this not been accounted for? Surely there can be invented strategic ways of limiting "Blob" warfare that is so rampant. IE: If too many ships are close together their combined warp fields reduce their capability by such and such percentage, or when defending/attacking markers they react proportionally to the amount of ships on grid. I am sure there are hundreds of ideas that can be created. The lack of strategy and the overwhelming lag that follows' 0.0 alliance Blob warfare in my opinion has limited the enjoyment of one of the best aspects of the game and "one universe".
The Crushah Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.11.06 20:18:00 - [2] I have a brilliant suggestion: Ninja smoke for solo roamers. The blob got you? Drop the Ninja smoke! POOF, youre gone!
Juan Valhdez	Posted - 2009.11.06 20:33:00 - [3] Originally by: The Crushah Drop the Ninja smoke! POOF, youre gone! I approve this message. ------------- I bring you fresh coffee from columbia with my donkey.
Neliel Soifon	Posted - 2009.11.06 20:48:00 - [4] +1 for the ninja smoke
Katsuri Minamoto	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:11:00 - [5] The problem is, people are never inclined to play fair when something of value is at stake. Surprisingly, even in a video game as it would seem. Only in romantical circumstances (or in sport) is the "fair fight" honored and true. What we see day to day is the nature of real conflict, and it expresses itself in games like EVE as a "BLOB", where it is directly in opposition to the user expectation of fictionalized conflict, where the odds should be kept the same, and for a lack of a better word, "fair". Adjusting or promoting mechanics to diminish the BLOB as we know it won't realistically solve anything, as player ingenuity will (afterall, this is one thing eve always promotes) inevitably seek out new conventions of exploiting simple numbers, or other aggragate mechanics in their favor. I really want to see clever ways of thinning people out in Dominion, but I really doubt the simplest and easiest answer as far of tipping odds in your favor won't continue to be to just add more pilots to your fleet.
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:12:00 - [6] Originally by: Juan Valhdez Originally by: The Crushah Drop the Ninja smoke! POOF, youre gone! I approve this message. ECM Burst? _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
Tristan Acoma Caldari Dirah Dominion Dirah Dominion.	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:13:00 - [7] Originally by: The Crushah I have a brilliant suggestion: Ninja smoke for solo roamers. The blob got you? Drop the Ninja smoke! POOF, youre gone! /signed
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:19:00 - [8] Titans are excellent anti-blob weapons! Oh wait...
Culmen Caldari Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:23:00 - [9] Originally by: The Crushah I have a brilliant suggestion: Ninja smoke for solo roamers. The blob got you? Drop the Ninja smoke! POOF, youre gone! Thats actually a better idea then you might think Give it a sci-fi name saaay... Emergency Jump Drive High slot module Jumps you to a random system within 5 light-years. Special: 100% damage on the module when used (IE you have to dock up and repair it to use it again) Of course jumping out of high sec with concord aggression is a bannable offense Otherwise it works. and further more why do i even need a sig?
Intense Thinker Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:25:00 - [10] Ninja smoke wins Eve for the week Originally by: Hamshoe Don't **** down my back and tell me it's raining.
Lazarann Mercury Nation House of Mercury	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:26:00 - [11] Originally by: Culmen Thats actually a better idea then you might think Give it a sci-fi name saaay... Emergency Jump Drive High slot module Jumps you to a random system within 5 light-years. Special: 100% damage on the module when used (IE you have to dock up and repair it to use it again) Of course jumping out of high sec with concord aggression is a bannable offense Otherwise it works. That's an awesome idea. Finally something to do with that extra high slot aside from a salvager. ---------------- A million faces, each a million lies
Benedict Carol	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:34:00 - [12] Originally by: Katsuri Minamoto The problem is, people are never inclined to play fair when something of value is at stake. Surprisingly, even in a video game as it would seem. Only in romantical circumstances (or in sport) is the "fair fight" honored and true. What we see day to day is the nature of real conflict, and it expresses itself in games like EVE as a "BLOB", where it is directly in opposition to the user expectation of fictionalized conflict, where the odds should be kept the same, and for a lack of a better word, "fair". Adjusting or promoting mechanics to diminish the BLOB as we know it won't realistically solve anything, as player ingenuity will (afterall, this is one thing eve always promotes) inevitably seek out new conventions of exploiting simple numbers, or other aggragate mechanics in their favor. I really want to see clever ways of thinning people out in Dominion, but I really doubt the simplest and easiest answer as far of tipping odds in your favor won't continue to be to just add more pilots to your fleet. Simple solution - have ship collisions do massive damage. Net result - blobs are either more spread out or diminished in 0.0. Jita becomes a ship graveyards as people discover the joys of MWDing frigs into freighters. Ships litter the undocking zone in high-traffic systems.
Jaarin Kuor Metalworks Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.11.06 21:54:00 - [13] Originally by: Benedict Carol Simple solution - have ship collisions do massive damage. Net result - blobs are either more spread out or diminished in 0.0. Jita becomes a ship graveyards as people discover the joys of MWDing frigs into freighters. Ships litter the undocking zone in high-traffic systems. That'd be awesome. Massive boost to suicide ganking ftw
Magnus Orin Minmatar United Systems Navy Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2009.11.06 22:30:00 - [14] Since the dawn of time, the easiest way to stack the odds in your favour during a war or battle has been to "bring more dudes". I see no problem with this, nor see it changing in the future.
Barakkus Caelestis Iudicium	Posted - 2009.11.06 22:49:00 - [15] Ninja
Jarna Amarr Angelus Degeneris	Posted - 2009.11.06 23:00:00 - [16] Originally by: Benedict Carol Simple solution - have ship collisions do massive damage. Net result - blobs are either more spread out or diminished in 0.0. Jita becomes a ship graveyards as people discover the joys of MWDing frigs into freighters. Ships litter the undocking zone in high-traffic systems. Yeah, if ships had damage on collision, it would definitely spread people more thin. People always ask when we will get collision detection. We already have it, we just need damage applied. Of course, coming out of a station would be solved with during that "pushing out" timer, you can't take damage, meaning before 30 seconds is up, you better start moving away from the station. This also could introduce a neat aspect of kamikaze frigs and stuff. Have like proportional damage based on two colliding ship sizes. And, obviously, it would force people to spread out in fleet engagements. ------------------------------
SlayerOfArgus Gallente The Industrial Federation	Posted - 2009.11.06 23:12:00 - [17] Originally by: Benedict Carol Simple solution - have ship collisions do massive damage. Net result - blobs are either more spread out or diminished in 0.0. Jita becomes a ship graveyards as people discover the joys of MWDing frigs into freighters. Ships litter the undocking zone in high-traffic systems. This is a bad idea because it would ultimately make suicide ramming an easy way to make cash. While I know the whole "bump" aspect is not realistic it keeps people from putting on mwd's and just bumping people to death (although yeah that definitely would be more realistic). Now if you were able to shoot people who did this to you then that sounds good maybe or if the person who bumped you also took damage then yeah I could maybe see this maybe being able to work out. It could bring a whole new aspect to pirating. But then what about an accidental bump that happens outside a station? Someone could just blow you apart for something that you didn't mean to do. But then the whole question of realism comes into play. Wouldn't you think that they would have dedicated docking and undocking lanes for space stations? It would make sense. It would be very difficult for freighters though unless the frigates who were doing damage to you also damaged themselves and blew up trying to suicide ram you to death. That'd make me lol.
Cors It's A Trap	Posted - 2009.11.07 00:15:00 - [18] Edited by: Cors on 07/11/2009 00:16:24 The only REAL way to counteract the "blob" form of combat, is to make it so individuals can become vastly more powerful then others. Example. Back when BOB first took over Delve, and they were the powerhouse on the block, the reason they were so powerful is their individual players were more experienced/coordinated/had better ship fittings then anyone else they came up against. Their BS fleets would be mostly "vetrans" with 15-30 mil sp players in T2 fit ships would come up against "noob" fleets with 0-15mil sp in T1 and T2 fleets with poor coordination. They had a clear and concise advantage over others. They were able to take on more opponents then they had members, fighting "against the odds" as it were becuase their fleet had a noticable advantage over their opponents. Fast forward to today, where you have Goon fleets of "veterans" with 50+ Mil sp vs AAA fleets of "Veterans" with 50+ Mil sp, all in T2/Faction fit ships, all with "Usually" experienced FC's, using standardised tactics.. There is no clear advantage for one fleet over another other then in ships(Caps vs Subcaps, T2 vs T1) or in numbers(Blobs). And seeing as it's easier to get a bigger blob via allies then it is to increase the quality of your fleet significantly, the all mighty blob wins out. Maybe make it so we have skills that go from lvl 1-10, with VERY long skill training time for the higher skill levels, with LARGE advantages, THEN you might see quality over quantity again. But when everyone is homoginized into T2 fit fleets with similar tactics, the BLOB wins out. Thing is, most lvl 5 skills give you only about a 20% bonus to that skill's affect. if we extended it out to 10 skill levels, upping that effect to say 100% at lvl 10(Which may take 6 months to train) THEN you'll see fleets of HIGH skill pilots defeating larger fleets of less skilled pilots. But that'll only last for a few more years till everyone has trained to lvl 8-9, then it'll be the same issue all over agian.
Merdaneth Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.07 00:31:00 - [19] Originally by: Magnus Orin Since the dawn of time, the easiest way to stack the odds in your favour during a war or battle has been to "bring more dudes". I see no problem with this, nor see it changing in the future. I believe the problem rests not with bringing more dudes, but all of those dudes being able to focus their fire unerringly on a single hostile dude. One thousand archers firing all their arrows at the immediately and unmistakenly identifiable commander of the hostile army has not been used since the dawn of time. Blobs are irritating, but acceptable, perfect focus fire is just bad. ____ The Illusion of Freedom \| The Truth about Slavery
Xander XacXorien	Posted - 2009.11.07 00:46:00 - [20] Originally by: Magnus Orin Since the dawn of time, the easiest way to stack the odds in your favour during a war or battle has been to "bring more dudes". I see no problem with this, nor see it changing in the future. This isn't true. Tactics have been a must in all battles regardless of the numbers involved. Look into some of the battles of Alexander the Great. Having "more dudes" in one place can lead to a massacre, see the Iraq mechanised infantry caught by allied war planes. I don't see things changing though, CCP have allowed gank rules ok since day 1 along with a lot of other baised play,,, if you can't beat em join em,,, Having said this though, the day a game comes out with a better combat system Eve is going in the bin asap.
Adamantor	Posted - 2009.11.07 00:48:00 - [21] I'm a noob when it comes to large fleet engagements but it seems to me that another thing to consider is friendly fire. If your own missiles/guns could hit friendly ships it might deter some of the larger fleets and force more coodination. This might limit some sizes or atleast encourage more coordination (smaller fleets). I like the idea of collisions if the mechanics of it were done properly. I'm sure most of these proposed solutions would be limited by server CPU/bandwidth.
Torpir Lee Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2009.11.07 01:48:00 - [22] I think the problem is that the current reinforce timer mechanics encourage alliances to focus on one strategic target at a time and eliminates any element of surprise. Taking over a starbase by guerrilla and surprise tactics is replaced by "honor" fighting with each force bringing whatever they could muster in a specific time and hammering it out. A well coordinated surprise offensive that can have a major effect is hard to find, and IMO it's due to the RF timer mechanic.
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2009.11.07 03:11:00 - [23] Originally by: Rancideous What I find lacking is that the single largest problem with EvE warfare; the "Blob" or the overwhelming tactic of "Blobbing" has not been addressed. It is, partially, addressed. You need to place STOPS(?) at each gate, which will need defending at each gate. Means you have to split the fleet. And yes, the attacker can blob a single STOP, but the rest of the defender fleet is only a warp away. And with other places undefended due to blob at single STOP, it's awfully tempting to split of a wing of the attacking fleet... It's going to add a new level of strategy and tactics in which will hopefully be a less often used solution. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2009.11.07 04:04:00 - [24] Originally by: Washell Olivaw Originally by: Rancideous What I find lacking is that the single largest problem with EvE warfare; the "Blob" or the overwhelming tactic of "Blobbing" has not been addressed. It is, partially, addressed. You need to place STOPS(?) at each gate, which will need defending at each gate. Means you have to split the fleet. And yes, the attacker can blob a single STOP, but the rest of the defender fleet is only a warp away. And with other places undefended due to blob at single STOP, it's awfully tempting to split of a wing of the attacking fleet... It's going to add a new level of strategy and tactics in which will hopefully be a less often used solution. Alternatively, the alliance can just place their OWN STOP's, but offline, at each gate, requiring the offense to destroy each STOP before they can anchor and online their own. OHGODS BELOW THIS LINE IS MY SIG !!!! SRSLY! Blane Xero > Lance is at -0.9 sec status with a 1 million bounty. Lance is also amarrian. Thats 3 evil points
Cre'tal The Scope	Posted - 2009.11.07 04:51:00 - [25] Bump damage, while realistic, would be bad because it'd be abused like crazy in highsec. It would definitely solve the bump problem, but it would create far more. Here's an alternative: Instead of bump damage, make line-of-sight damage and friendly fire. Yeah, yeah, it'd be a massive undertaking, but as long as we're dreaming, why not dream big? Simply put, if you're shooting at me, and I go behind your mate, you'll hit him instead of me. This would VASTLY change blob warfare. If you bring 100 ships to blow up 5 enemies, you'll definitely end up kiling more of your own than enemies. It wouldn't really affect highsec, because you already get CONCORD'd when you fire on someone. The rules would be no different, unless of course you fired on an outlaw or wartarget and hit a bystander by accident. But hey, this is true in real life, too, and I think it'd create a fun extra dynamic. You could roll around Jita during a war, and your enemies would go nuts trying to get a clear shot at you. :-)
Ryhss Caldari Sarum A Fortiori Sanctimony of Bellum	Posted - 2009.11.07 04:57:00 - [26] Originally by: Neliel Soifon +1 for the ninja smoke +2!
Sith LordX	Posted - 2009.11.07 07:15:00 - [27] Originally by: Rancideous It is refreshing to see in Dominion that sovereignty will no longer involve the mindless time waste of shooting player owned stations. I have read a bit about the Dominion expansion and have tested quite a few features and fleet combat on Singularity. What I find lacking is that the single largest problem with EvE warfare; the "Blob" or the overwhelming tactic of "Blobbing" has not been addressed. It is readily apparent that no amount of program tweaking or hardware upgrades will alleviate the lag that plagues EvE's fleet battles. Why has this not been accounted for? Surely there can be invented strategic ways of limiting "Blob" warfare that is so rampant. IE: If too many ships are close together their combined warp fields reduce their capability by such and such percentage, or when defending/attacking markers they react proportionally to the amount of ships on grid. I am sure there are hundreds of ideas that can be created. The lack of strategy and the overwhelming lag that follows' 0.0 alliance Blob warfare in my opinion has limited the enjoyment of one of the best aspects of the game and "one universe". Sure theres a counter, a bigger blob, surprise attacks with stealth ships, or sniper ships. Lag? Whats that, must be your computer... Time for a upgrade!
Kestrix	Posted - 2009.11.07 08:48:00 - [28] Edited by: Kestrix on 07/11/2009 08:48:57 Originally by: Rancideous It is refreshing to see in Dominion that sovereignty will no longer involve the mindless time waste of shooting player owned stations. And when you are trying to take/defend sovereignty are you simply going to ignore the large towers deployed by your enemy simply becasue they no longer effect sov? They will still need to be taken down! The mindless time waste of shooting POS is here for a while longer yet in my opinion. Kestrix
Isilwen Nightfall Caldari Insurgent New Eden Tribe Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.11.07 09:22:00 - [29] Pre-Dominion: Blobs aganins countless POSes Dominion: Blobs against a single, big POS named differently.
Aurora Nyx State Protectorate	Posted - 2009.11.07 10:47:00 - [30] Line of sight, friendly fire, collision damage... all subject to that special type of lag and de-synch mechanism we get so often in big fights. Calculating carefully, weighing up all the evidence for solutions, and re-checking my data, it's easy to arrive at only one conclusion.... NINJA SMOKE !!!
Anonymous Gallentean	Posted - 2009.11.07 11:54:00 - [31] line of sight damage would bring a whole new dimension to ninja'ing missions I flew thru ur lazor beam, now I can shoot u hehe.... Or bump ya to death
Doomed Predator Red Federation	Posted - 2009.11.07 12:08:00 - [32] Originally by: Aurora Nyx Line of sight, friendly fire, collision damage... all subject to that special type of lag and de-synch mechanism we get so often in big fights. Would really make EVE awesome, but the lag, OH GOD THE LAG.... The 'Fendahlian Collective' strikes again
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2009.11.07 12:41:00 - [33] Ninja Smoke is already in game, its called Covert Ops Cloaking Device II.
darkmancer	Posted - 2009.11.07 13:35:00 - [34] Collision won't work due to high sec, and the extra lag from the calculations, although it may help prevent remote rep hump fests. LOS won't work because even with large numbers of people due to the full 3d nature of the game it is extremely rare you shoot though another ship, even then the target will die long before you take sufficiant damage in most cases, plus short range ships would suck even more. The only thing I can see working would be a major overhaul of eve mechanics: 1) make repairs expensive 2) make it fairly easy to disable ship systems (not even if you don't get to pick which systems you shoot at) 3) make it extremely hard to destroy a ship completely. Then if you focus fire hey you'll take 3 or 4 ships out but your entire fleet will be disabled. Alll you'll be able to do would be warp out and let the guys with disabled warp drives be pummuled to death. What you'd have to do instead would be make small groups enough to incapacitate ships. The impact to the rest of the game would be enormas though, so I doubt it'd even be attempted, as a side beinifit though it'd make winning/losing a less 1 or 0 affair you'd at least do some damage to the attackers shiney ship : --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Buhhdust Princess Reverse Psychology. The Final Stand.	Posted - 2009.11.07 13:44:00 - [35] +1 for ninja smoke ________________________________________
shi'ako Gallente	Posted - 2009.11.07 13:45:00 - [36] Originally by: Cre'tal Edited by: Cre''tal on 07/11/2009 05:06:45 It wouldn't really affect highsec, because you already get CONCORD'd when you fire on someone. The rules would be no different, unless of course you fired on an outlaw or wartarget and hit a bystander by accident. :-) A simple solution to that would be add a LOS check option, just like the criminal action one or maybe a 3 option box, Only fire if shot is clear to locked target Fire if their is no friendly (fleet/blue) between you and target. or When you chose option one or two your guns hold fire on each volley until their is a clear shot. That would allow people to fight in empire/lowsec, but also duck and dive behind other players to avoid incoming fire. In 0.0 option 2 and 3 would more come into play.ways, u could just fire into an hostile fleet and hit your target or others, but run the risk of hitting your own guys. So really no one would use option 3, well.. maybe..
Dabljuh	Posted - 2009.11.07 13:57:00 - [37] EVE is extremely abstract. And I mean that in the bad way. A ship isn't a ship, it's a spherical entity that can move within a small number of predetermined parameters. You don't fly a ship, you give the circular entity one command of a limited list of predetermined commands to which it might respond within a while. Firing a turret at something isn't really firing a turret at something but more of a random deduction in hitpoints at the target in predetermined intervals. Everything else is just the eve client's graphical interpretation of these highly abstract ongoings. If EVE was a space flight simulator, i.e. less abstract, stuff like friendly fire, bumping damage and so forth could be worked into the game. However, I feel that the decision was made at the very beginning of the games creation to have this high level of abstraction, in order to allow a huge number of players in a single world. Yes. I'd like less abstraction. I don't think anyone wouldn't. Even at CCP, I imagine, they're sort of embarassed at the absurd results of some of their abstractions, but it's not possible to change it. You'd have to write a completely different game and then find a viable way to give 50'000 players a high degree of simulation (=less abstraction) at the same time in a persistent universe. Blob warfare is highly faciliated by this level of abstraction, but not enabled. With all other things being equal, 2 dudes are stronger than 1 dude. It's just not that 2 dudes are twice as strong as 1 dude, since they can't be in the same place at the same time and there's limits to parallelism. Adding a 3rd dude doesn't increase the effectiveness of a 2-man group by 50%. In EVE, due to the level of abstraction, this Grenznutzen doesn't exist, and 2 people are exactly twice as good as 1 and adding a third makes the 2 man blob 50% stronger. The only downside is lag, but that affects the enemy just as much, and is hence a non-issue. I remember a game that I played before EVE, it was "Jumpgate, the reconstruction initiative" or something. You flew your ship with a joystick. It was a space sim with trading, sort of a cross between elite and x-wing. I figured it was a much better game than eve, but the graphics were atrocious (somewhere in between x-wing and elite) and eventually the european provider ceased operations. Ideally I'd want eve's scope and graphics combined with JG:TRIs gameplay. We're nearing the year 2010. Maybe computers and the internet are now powerful enough to pull it off?
The Riddik	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:31:00 - [38] so in the end: whaaa whaaa, the most people wins. the end.
TimMc Gallente Brutal Deliverance Extreme Prejudice.	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:34:00 - [39] Originally by: Gnulpie Titans are excellent anti-blob weapons! Oh wait... Titans are expensive, resulting in only huge alliances (that could easily blob) using them against enemy blobs. I'm glad they aren't anti-blob anymore, it will make new alliances been on closer footing to older ones. Stealth bombers look like they will be the new anti-blob ships for the underdogs.
Blastil	Posted - 2009.11.07 16:00:00 - [40] I swear to god every time someone talks about blob warfare, some starry eyed carebear opens his gob about how introducing collision mechanics will solve blob warfare. These is like saying 'allowing cars to crash into each other on the freeway will reduce conjestion!' ffs, stop proposing this idea. 0.0 Alliance fleets are actually surprisingly spread out affairs, with most pilots flying no closer than 2000M of each other, and often aligned in the same direction at approximately the same speed. all collisions will do is introduce the ability for normal ships doing normal transit to and from stations and through gates to collide and destroy HIGHSEC industry. Suicide gankers will prefer smashing an even CHEEPER battleship with 8 T1 armor plates into a hauler and get their insurance back instead of even fitting GUNS. the only way, THE ONLY WAY to reduce blob warfare is to promote dividing fleets by requiring multiple objectives to be secured simultaneously for attackers. This actually gives defenders a natural home field advantage. Also to create real targets in PVP which can be damaged by marauding gangs. Ratters and miners used to fill this role until the AFK empire, and titan drive by's became the best way to defend your space.
Meridius Dex Amarr Gunship Diplomacy	Posted - 2009.11.07 16:30:00 - [41] Edited by: Meridius Dex on 07/11/2009 16:31:37 Discussing this right now in a thread over in W&T. Bottom line: Damage (and repping) should stack, the scan res of the target should affect the amount of incoming damage and repping before the stacking kicks in. Problem solved, EVE becomes awesome and moar fun. -- Meridius Dex Visit the Gunship Forums --
Cpt Branko The Scope	Posted - 2009.11.07 16:36:00 - [42] Originally by: Meridius Dex Edited by: Meridius Dex on 07/11/2009 16:30:51 Discussing this right now in a thread over in W&T. Bottom line: Damage (and repping) should stack, the scan res of the target should affect the amount of incoming damage and repping before the stacking kicks in. Problem solved, EVE becomes awesome and moar fun. No. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Jarik Utoni Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.07 17:06:00 - [43] NINJA SMOKE!!! +1 ---- d(^.^)b
Zartanic Red Federation	Posted - 2009.11.07 17:27:00 - [44] Its not just nul sec. When I was in FW for a while I lost interest fast. What happens is: 1. x up with some emo chat 2. Roam for ages for targets 3. Find targets 4. If similar size or larger, abort 5. If heavily outnumber attack That's not PVP with any meaning of risk or skill. I cant see how CCP can fix this until ship loss becomes almost meaningless which would break the game.
Cpt Branko The Scope	Posted - 2009.11.07 17:34:00 - [45] Originally by: Zartanic Its not just nul sec. When I was in FW for a while I lost interest fast. What happens is: 1. x up with some emo chat 2. Roam for ages for targets 3. Find targets 4. If similar size or larger, abort 5. If heavily outnumber attack That's not PVP with any meaning of risk or skill. I cant see how CCP can fix this until ship loss becomes almost meaningless which would break the game. On the other hand, you can just avoid horribly lame things like FW altogether. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Herzog Wolfhammer Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.11.07 17:44:00 - [46] Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer on 07/11/2009 17:47:17 Originally by: The Crushah I have a brilliant suggestion: Ninja smoke for solo roamers. The blob got you? Drop the Ninja smoke! POOF, youre gone! Do we get to wear those cool outfits? If you REALLY want to end the Blob, then require that clone vats need as much biomass coming is as is going out. I refer to the gate camp blob where smart bombs are spammed a lot. This kills frozen corpses. Corporations who use this tactic, and their clone vats as if it were a COD2 respawn point, will have to change their tactics or go and buy corpses on the market, which will finally have value. Lest they have to add beef the vats.
Chiastic Slide	Posted - 2009.11.07 19:26:00 - [47] Honestly I think we have a solution here: collision damage. Case closed. We should advocate for that. Originally by: Jarna Originally by: Benedict Carol Simple solution - have ship collisions do massive damage. Net result - blobs are either more spread out or diminished in 0.0. Jita becomes a ship graveyards as people discover the joys of MWDing frigs into freighters. Ships litter the undocking zone in high-traffic systems. Yeah, if ships had damage on collision, it would definitely spread people more thin. People always ask when we will get collision detection. We already have it, we just need damage applied. Of course, coming out of a station would be solved with during that "pushing out" timer, you can't take damage, meaning before 30 seconds is up, you better start moving away from the station. This also could introduce a neat aspect of kamikaze frigs and stuff. Have like proportional damage based on two colliding ship sizes. And, obviously, it would force people to spread out in fleet engagements.
Anghus McQuaid Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.07 19:50:00 - [48] Originally by: Katsuri Minamoto The problem is, people are never inclined to play fair when something of value is at stake. Surprisingly, even in a video game as it would seem. Only in romantical circumstances (or in sport) is the "fair fight" honored and true. What we see day to day is the nature of real conflict, and it expresses itself in games like EVE as a "BLOB", where it is directly in opposition to the user expectation of fictionalized conflict, where the odds should be kept the same, and for a lack of a better word, "fair". Adjusting or promoting mechanics to diminish the BLOB as we know it won't realistically solve anything, as player ingenuity will (afterall, this is one thing eve always promotes) inevitably seek out new conventions of exploiting simple numbers, or other aggragate mechanics in their favor. I really want to see clever ways of thinning people out in Dominion, but I really doubt the simplest and easiest answer as far of tipping odds in your favor won't continue to be to just add more pilots to your fleet. ^^ This! In other MMOs this phenomenon is referred to as 'zerg'. Just get as many people as you can and overrun the enemy. No strategy at all, just mindlessly tossing in cannon fodder and let the numbers do the work for you. I can't say I fancy this type of game play, but it is what most people go for. I agree that it would be nicer to see strategic battles of smaller groups, which actually favour a challenge, but those will be few and far between, knowing how the average MMO player likes to 'zerg' or 'blob' (as referred to in EvE). I recon it is something we will just have to accept. No matter what kind of things CCP changes, blobs will always exist to some extent. All we can do is hope that some day we will not suffer (or at least less) from all the lag that comes with it.
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2009.11.07 20:18:00 - [49] Edited by: fuxinos on 07/11/2009 20:19:43 Originally by: Benedict Carol Simple solution - have ship collisions do massive damage. Net result - blobs are either more spread out or diminished in 0.0. Jita becomes a ship graveyards as people discover the joys of MWDing frigs into freighters. Ships litter the undocking zone in high-traffic systems. Someone gonna put a frigate at Jita 4/4 and everyone scratching its paint would get concordokend? Nice isk sink.
Daedalus II	Posted - 2009.11.07 22:37:00 - [50] I think CCP is handling the problem automatically and cleverly in Dominion. The main idea is to make all 0.0 alliances LESS WEALTHY, and therefore less capable of throwing away huge cap fleet blobs. They try to make capital ships worth something again. There might still be blobs, but of weaker ships, making the playing ground a bit more even. Well that's what I think anyway
Meridius Dex Amarr Gunship Diplomacy	Posted - 2009.11.07 23:11:00 - [51] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Meridius Dex Edited by: Meridius Dex on 07/11/2009 16:30:51 Discussing this right now in a thread over in W&T. Bottom line: Damage (and repping) should stack, the scan res of the target should affect the amount of incoming damage and repping before the stacking kicks in. Problem solved, EVE becomes awesome and moar fun. No. Good counter-argument, well thought out, intelligent and compelling. -- Meridius Dex Visit the Gunship Forums --
Cpt Branko The Scope	Posted - 2009.11.08 00:40:00 - [52] Originally by: Meridius Dex Good counter-argument, well thought out, intelligent and compelling. Yes, I thought it was the perfect response to your detailed explanation of what is wrong with EVE, how to fix it and what would it result in, I'm glad you agree. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
MaxxOmega Caldari Wrong Indeed	Posted - 2009.11.08 00:49:00 - [53] I was in a blob once. Her name was "Bertha"...
MonwrathDisortium Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2009.11.08 01:00:00 - [54] If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didnÆt plan your mission properly Col. David Hackworth, United States Army, Ret. Give it some thought, people bring what they have at their disposal. Possibly there are alternatives to that but mostly it is up to the players. Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Newbear	Posted - 2009.11.09 05:49:00 - [55] When you jump into a new system from a stargate, you arrive at a random astroid belt. Gives gankers better chance of a kill and disperses blobs across many belts. Don't look at my employment history.
Rordan D'Kherr Amarr	Posted - 2009.11.09 06:24:00 - [56] The fleet with most ships wins? Oh well, that`s only 1/8 of the formula of ownage. But an empire nubbin cannot know better...
Ratchman	Posted - 2009.11.09 15:38:00 - [57] Why does blobbing happen? Because nobody wants to fight a battle that they might lose. People could counter blobbing by going out alone more, but they don't. And why's that? Because they fear the blob. Therefore, they start to blob themselves. Therefore, we have the escalation of warfare. This 'blobbing' only reflects the nature of warfare in real life. The larger force rarely uses tactics, and the smaller one has to in order to stand any kind of a chance (and even then, the odds are stacked against them).
Hibernator X	Posted - 2009.11.09 17:32:00 - [58] Ripple Laser from Lifeforce. moar multi-target weapons systems.
Dianna Soreil Internal Anarchy	Posted - 2009.11.09 19:54:00 - [59] Quote: Lag? Whats that, must be your computer... people who don't understand the concept of lag itt

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

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