Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pr1ncess Alia
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:20:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 11/04/2010 15:22:40 Been hearing some interesting things regarding recent events and it's given me some flashbacks to fights from days of yore (lol i love that word)
It seems the lag issues that the north are experiencing are probably here to stay for the time being. We've been here before....
We all know that no matter how solid the servers are (let's say they can handle 1000 ppl) that factions will simply bring more (1001+). The only way to win the fight against the game breaking itself is to deter the formation of such large groups in one location to begin with. That logic is sound.
The fact that the game seems to be repeating history would seem to indicate ccp didn't learn a valuable lesson and now are doomed to repeat that lesson. The very reasons we brought the DD into the game has returned, where blob tactics aren't simply a matter of whoever has the most wins the fight, but that bringing enough makes a fight impossible?
Blob tactics have always been blob tactics. Before we had more of a deterrent. After we have more of a blob.
In fact, is could be said that since ccp announced the removal of the dd, some(one?) group(s) exercised some forethought and decided to make blobbing their one and only strategy (not naming any names you know who you are). "Load up the wagons, no more dd's!! We are a go for overwhelming w/ pointless numbers!" This group gained their initial successes through 'fighting' by breaking the game and now are hampered by that very same tactic
SO... looking back are we glad it's gone? Did it's removal make 0.0 combat worse off or better? Was it simply a stupid weapon / overpowered and the solution to blob deterrence must reside elsewhere in the Eve game mechanics?
ON THE LAST POINT, IF YOU HOLD THAT TO BE TRUE AND (ASSUMING THERE IS NO MAGIC SERVER SOLUTION TO ALLOW 2bagillion MAN FIGHTS), WHAT DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD IMPLEMENT TO BREAK UP THE BLOB
"A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game." |
Poses
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:31:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Poses on 11/04/2010 15:31:42 there is no blob fix, there were epic ****ing blobs pre-DD nerf too (49-u anyone?)
people will always strive to bring the most numbers they can in the biggest ships they can, since assuming all else is equal that will determine who wins. (there are exceptions but those exceptions never won a pos war).
the issue people are having right now is that somehow the lag has gotten worse.
reports come in of 200 man fleets jumping into a reinforced node and crashing it. And while large, 200 people is hardly even in the realm of large 'blob' fights.
tl:dr its not gonna happen, there is no fix DDs weren't a fix they were just annoying.
|
Alt Tabbed
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:46:00 -
[3]
Economically Blobs make more sense than small gangs.
Until they incentivise small fights(no I'm not talking about hand outs), Blobs will remain.
And those "rock surgeons" out there....no I'm not using the word "economically" to imply any relation to isk/hr.
|
Stuart Price
Caldari The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:49:00 -
[4]
There is a blob fix - more gates; particularly more 0.0 entry points.
The more routes through a region there are, the more points need defending.
This means that opposing forces can no longer just build humongous deathblobs either side of one gate because at any time, one side can send forces through another direction to either set up flanking attacks or attack other systems.
It also benefits raiders and piratey types who will have greater mobility in nullsec. Defending forces would be forced to defend multiple routes and move in smaller groups instead of merely bubbling one or two entry systems and sticking monster fleets on them.
Gosh, it might actually bring some tactical and strategic thinking into higher level decisions and emphasize a bit more pilot (and particularly FC and scouting) skill on the field (both things I know most nullsec dwellers will disapprove of greatly). Putting the 'irate' into 'Pirate' |
Hung Wang
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 16:04:00 -
[5]
Force nullsec nodes to shut down when more than 100 pilots enter the same system. Instant blob fix; all the blobbers quit. |
Poses
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 16:59:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Stuart Price stuffs
i like it... theoretically, but wouldn't this cripple a small alliance trying to defend against a larger?
|
TheBlindBandit
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 17:08:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Poses
Originally by: Stuart Price stuffs
i like it... theoretically, but wouldn't this cripple a small alliance trying to defend against a larger?
No, because a small alliance shouldn't (logically) be expected to hold the same amount of space as a large alliance.
That being said, various other in-game factors prevent such a simple fix from having a noticeable effect on blobbing (cyno fields, reinforced mode, local channel, etc).
|
HoboHunter1001
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 17:11:00 -
[8]
Give bonuses to smaller fighting forces or penalties to larger ones. That's the only way I can think of.
|
Poses
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 17:21:00 -
[9]
Originally by: HoboHunter1001 Give bonuses to smaller fighting forces or penalties to larger ones. That's the only way I can think of.
that's too meta for ccp to go for it i think.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 18:16:00 -
[10]
Remove sov direct ties with structures.
|
|
Mike712
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 19:00:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Mike712 on 11/04/2010 19:01:11 Brining back a DD is a horrible idea.
The DD wasn't only used against blobs but small hac gangs too, the AoE DD made 0.0 PvP turgid and stale, things have got better since it's been gone.
If people want to blob they should be able to and the servers should be able to handle it, this is supposed to be a sandbox afterall, everything should be possible.
|
Amy Crest
Kermit Space Industies
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 19:26:00 -
[12]
Doomsdays never even slowed down blobbing. All it did with make BS tank more, and increase the ratio of heavy units vs light units.
The only single way to effectively break blobbing would be to harshly limit alliances sizes, remove standings, and make it impossible for one player to know the name and alliance of that hostile ship on his overview. But I don't see CCP ever doing that much changes to social interactions.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 21:03:00 -
[13]
I believe the following factors contribute to blobbing: 1) lack of terrain - 100% line of sight from any point to any point 2) long range weapons - making formations and positioning less important 3) increasing defensive vs offensive capabilities. As defense/offense ratio grows, blobbing becomes more important to successfully dispatch the target 4) instantaneous weapon hits - this goes hand in hand with long range weapons. If weapons, such as missiles, required considerable amount of time to hit target over long distance, blobbing would be much less effective
I'm willing to bet all this can be proven mathematically, with complex statistical formulas. Unfortunately statistical math was never my strong side, and it would take weeks to work it all out. Computer simulations with adjustable parameters for the 4 factors described could also be used to find most successful behaviors of large vs small. Again it would take weeks to write
If we look at EVE history, we will see that CCP have modified game factors #2 and #3 in favor of blobbing tactics, while other factors remain uncharged but with initial condition favorable to blob creation.
|
Koshs SC
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 21:21:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Stuart Price There is a blob fix - more gates; particularly more 0.0 entry points.
The more routes through a region there are, the more points need defending.
This means that opposing forces can no longer just build humongous deathblobs either side of one gate because at any time, one side can send forces through another direction to either set up flanking attacks or attack other systems.
you have no idea how 0.0 warfare works do you? that wouldn't change a thing
you still have to attack fixed structures once you get to that system you want. and that structure have a timer, and whoever you're attacking will be waiting for you when the timer hits 0. they dont need to camp gates
nobody uses gates these days anyway.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 21:33:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Zarnak Wulf on 11/04/2010 21:33:46 There was something mentioned last year at fanfest that did hold promise:
Formations.
Noone knows how it could work but it should offer interesting possibilities.
|
Zhilan Sun
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 21:53:00 -
[16]
If you want to split up the blob you have to make tangible reasons for it. why would smaller gangs be more effective than a massive fleet that no one could possibly defend against?
It could be done with limitations, for example you could put SOV units in dead space that only X amount of ships can get to. Another idea is to make penalties to the size of the fleet, the more friendly ships are in the area the greater your guns Sig radius becomes, the more shots being fired drastically complicates ballistic control.
and you don't even have to put a limitation on weapons or the actual size of the fleet, you could increase time it takes for a larger fleet to jump into warp and slow there warp speed down, giving more time for people to react.
only if you give a real and absolute reason for people to use smaller gangs then nothing will change.
|
Poses
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 22:03:00 -
[17]
i think the main problem with this thread, is that CCP has a fleet fight fetish
its apparent if you look at both their patches and the promotional media they release.
its never 'small and elite' its 'bigger then yourself'
as well they have stated that they don't like meta solutions to pvp. The exception to this is of course FW, but they said they aren't going to implement mechanics in 0.0 that force combat to unfold in a certain way. This is both interesting and terrible, since it allows for more creativity in strategy, but it does but a certain emphasis on numbers.
As such you can stop suggesting using dead space zones and organized battles as fixes for this. What you can do is suggest logical upgrades to current combat mechanics that would reduce the effectiveness of large numbers. But even that isn't enough since adding extraneous collision detections or AOE weapons adds to the already substantial server lag.
And while you could argue that increasing lag would reduce members in fleets, the FCs in eve have been more then willing in past to use lag as a weapon. Deliberately crashing nodes and putting enough people on a gate that the opponant cannot jump through.
|
Zhilan Sun
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 22:11:00 -
[18]
you do have a vary good point.
|
Reem Fairchild
Minmatar Punic Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 23:03:00 -
[19]
The old fleet-killing DD is not an incentive to bringing smaller fleets. It never was, and it never will be.
A smaller fleet would get wiped out just as easily as a large one, if not more so. The only thing it can deter people from is from fighting at all. ----- 'In Eve, as in real life, if you are bored it's your own fault.' |
Pr1ncess Alia
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 23:29:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 11/04/2010 23:31:34 i hope i didn't come off too much as "bring back dd's" because as they were they were stupid (in all renditions) but i think the current one shot o' doom is kinda silly and uninspired.
i won't lie, i'd like to see an AoE DD that perhaps doesn't clear an entire grid?? i'd also like to see (and hear, thus the thread) other ideas.
as it's apparent ccp hasn't done jack all to address this issue and it really limits this otherwise limitless game it's up to us to put the bug in their ear and show them how many other possibilities there are out there than 'open a fleet fight notification' or whatever logs don't show nothing b.s. they pass off as 'working on it'
Originally by: Poses Edited by: Poses on 11/04/2010 15:31:42 there is no blob fix, there were epic ****ing blobs pre-DD nerf too (49-u anyone?)
i think we can do better than that
Originally by: TheBlindBandit
Originally by: Poses ...wouldn't this cripple a small alliance trying to defend against a larger?
No, because a small alliance shouldn't (logically) be expected to hold the same amount of space as a large alliance.
That being said, various other in-game factors prevent such a simple fix from having a noticeable effect on blobbing (cyno fields, reinforced mode, local channel, etc).
i was thinking of a system where to siege someones space you would have to attack 2/3, 3/5 whatever elements simultaneously in different systems (and vice versa, to install and reap rewards of structures you've established, they must network with X other ones in other solar systems)
opening up more routes might not be a bad idea, however i can think of some situations where it would make for less confrontational travel though routes (and less confrontation is ALWAYS bad )
Originally by: Amy Crest
The only single way to effectively break blobbing would be to harshly limit alliances sizes, remove standings, and make it impossible for one player to know the name and alliance of that hostile ship on his overview. But I don't see CCP ever doing that much changes to social interactions.
Originally by: Poses
Originally by: HoboHunter1001 Give bonuses to smaller fighting forces or penalties to larger ones.
that's too meta for ccp to go for it i think.
-there should be some penalty for having an epic blue wave all under one umbrella. i think we should be able to separate social interaction from working fleet mechanics, but i be damned if i know how
-yes and yes. the idea is a good one and ccp is probably too afraid of something like that (plus we would find an easy way to exploit it)
Originally by: Furb Killer Remove sov direct ties with structures.
hmmm. so what would dictate our sov?
Originally by: Ephemeron stuff
all of this is completely naii on the head and the crux of the problem
Originally by: Zarnak Wulf
There was something mentioned last year at fanfest that did hold promise:
Formations.
Noone knows how it could work but it should offer interesting possibilities.
it seems such a far cry from how we currently fly... i'm not holding my breath. it sounds like it would be such a fundamental shift from established piloting to be a different game. akin to going from doubleclickspace/rightclick/menu piloting to using a joystick
if they did it though... cool. anything really.
good stuff guys. what do you think of my idea? simultaneous points across multiple systems? isn't there a place anymore for the DD? as it was yes, very ghey. AoE is a powerful tool (see bombs used properly). it doesn't break up the blob for system as a whole, but bomb a gate camp and they WILL spread out, still a good tool.
i think DD was a great idea, just implemented terribly and given further black eyes by not being nerfed properly when that was realized. if a titan offered say a 50km safe pos-like shield for its fleet OR able to sacrifice it's shield and fire a 75km DD... this would make for MUCH more interesting strategy
but again, plenty of other ways to skin a cat
"A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game." |
|
Jotobar
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 00:08:00 -
[21]
Well the counter weapon of chooice up in the north from both sides are bomber fleets which honestly is more fun and agile for both sides than dd ever was. 30 bombers can do some serious damage when done right.
|
mingmin
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 03:57:00 -
[22]
Its pretty simple.
New fleet organiser is terrible, when im in a 250 man fleet, nothing loads theres to much info for server to handle, when i drop fleet on same grid my game becomes 'playable'. Something about, fleet finder/fleets is causing issues.
CCP need to fix that from the dominion patch.
Also capitals cause massive lag problems, espically ones with corp hanger arrays.
CCP need to fix moons/pos's as you cant take ships back out the game.
They want more accounts/players, like the op said problem will just get worse.
CCP need to invest more time and attention, into these new jita nodes for whole server and good link ups, but this wont happen as new content, means new shiney EVE advert to drool over.
|
Headerman
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 04:05:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Amy Crest The only single way to effectively break blobbing would be to harshly limit alliances sizes, remove standings, and make it impossible for one player to know the name and alliance of that hostile ship on his overview. But I don't see CCP ever doing that much changes to social interactions.
Why not limit the number of alliance ships outside of Sov systems?
|
Amy Crest
Kermit Space Industies
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 06:24:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Headerman
Originally by: Amy Crest The only single way to effectively break blobbing would be to harshly limit alliances sizes, remove standings, and make it impossible for one player to know the name and alliance of that hostile ship on his overview. But I don't see CCP ever doing that much changes to social interactions.
Why not limit the number of alliance ships outside of Sov systems?
IF you limit the attacker size without putting one to the defensor, wouldn't the defensor then be able to get a crushing numerical superiority? And even with limits on both sizes, each blob would just be divised in two: one part doing the fight, the other waiting in line in a nearby system to replace loses.
No, the thing that need to be cut down isn't the physical number of ships possible in a single system, way too easily exploitable, it's the size of the mega-alliances, and that mean breaking up the possibility for alliances to make buddies.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 06:58:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 12/04/2010 07:02:05 Create a system where a blob is not the only way to get things done.
How it might be done: - Move spawn points after a gate jump to grids around a sun to kill off the gate camp blob. Maybe in jammed systems only to increase the hair-loss of those responsible for strategy/tactics. - Create independent sections/modules on the iHubs (think station services) so that a smaller fleet can forcefully affect system indices temporarily . Will be reinstated upon rebuilding so no time loss from index loss as "normal". - Limit capitals ability to affect sub-capitals even further to hamstring the ever increasing cap-blobs. - Delay local.
Will have the added bonus of the obese alliances needing to contract or devote all their forces to defensive operations 23/7. ISK cost for sovereignty failed hard in that regard, might as well do it the hard way - want space, better be able to protect it (not merely hold it).
Only by changing the way wars are fought and the cost of failing to adapt can one hope to defeat human nature.
|
Saietor Blackgreen
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 07:03:00 -
[26]
Yet no sniping setups given, because they, apparently, suck. --- EvE online. New game every 6 months. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 09:26:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 11/04/2010 23:11:13 Been hearing some interesting things regarding recent events and it's given me some flashbacks to fights from days of yore (lol i love that word)
It seems the lag issues that the north are experiencing are probably here to stay for the time being. We've been here before....
We all know that no matter how solid the servers are (let's say they can handle 1000 ppl) that factions will simply bring more (1001+). The only way to win the fight against the game breaking itself is to deter the formation of such large groups in one location to begin with. That logic is sound.
The fact that the game seems to be repeating history would seem to indicate ccp didn't learn a valuable lesson and now are doomed to repeat that lesson. The very reasons we brought the DD into the game has returned, where blob tactics aren't simply a matter of whoever has the most wins the fight, but that bringing enough makes a fight impossible?
Blob tactics have always been blob tactics. Before we had more of a deterrent. After we have more of a blob.
SO... looking back are we glad it's gone? Did it's removal make 0.0 combat worse off or better? Was it simply a stupid weapon / overpowered and the solution to blob deterrence must reside elsewhere in the Eve game mechanics?
ON THE LAST POINT, IF YOU HOLD THAT TO BE TRUE AND (ASSUMING THERE IS NO MAGIC SERVER SOLUTION TO ALLOW 2bagillion MAN FIGHTS), WHAT DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD IMPLEMENT TO BREAK UP THE BLOB?
AoE Titans did nothing to "break up blobs". In fact they caused blobs. What AoE Titans did do was make it impossible to run roaming gangs through the space of large alliances.
The only way to prevent blobbing is to depopulate 0.0
As long as there is an advantage - however small - to adding another ship to the feel, there will be "blobs". All other things being equal, more ships will beat less ships, so people will bring what they can. Deal with it.
|
Ap0ll0n
Gallente Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 09:28:00 -
[28]
How about they (CCP) focused on fixing their game, instead of implementing new, useless planet mining?
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 09:51:00 -
[29]
Nerf power blocks.
|
Qorthas
Caldari Eternal Profiteers SRS.
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 10:24:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Qorthas on 12/04/2010 10:26:33
Originally by: Malcanis stuff Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
AoE Titans did nothing to "break up blobs". In fact they caused blobs. What AoE Titans did do was make it impossible to run roaming gangs through the space of large alliances.
The only way to prevent blobbing is to depopulate 0.0
As long as there is an advantage - however small - to adding another ship to the feel, there will be "blobs". All other things being equal, more ships will beat less ships, so people will bring what they can. Deal with it.
how the hell does AoE titans cause more blobbing?? it doesnt.
further more, did you even bother to read through the thread? because there are several things that, if done right, could be good for the game, and decrease the incentive for blobbing. you just seem to not care about the game, and like blobbing as it is.
oh and how would you just "depopulate" 0.0????
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |