Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Marak Mocam
|
Posted - 2010.12.01 10:33:00 -
[151]
Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha You won't accomplish it with effects, especially ones that make it harder to coordinate by jumbling your tactics up.
There is actually an awesome solution to the lag portion of the blob in assembly hall right now, which quite literally handles the lag issue with designed lag. With the lag out of the equation, you're stuck with arguing against "more numbers == more effective".
The only way to do it without being silly is to: A - Exponentially decrease effectiveness of more numbers. IE 2 on 1 gives 100% effectiveness to first person, 75% to second (175% vs 200%), then a third person would get 50% effectiveness (100 + 75 + 50 = 225% effectiveness vs 300%). The reality is far more complicated than this, but it's the only..methodology that could be used without breaking the game completely. or B - Institute the LoS physics. Though, when objects have magical contact boxes which make you dance on nothing this seems unlikely.
That makes the easiest methods forced operation on multiple fronts to split the fleets up, or smaller targets that quicker strike forces could hit (though this moreso encourages smaller ship size composition of fleets than smaller fleet numbers).
I don't know but something is needed or you will find 1000 vs 1000 going to 2000 vs 2000 on up and it will keep spiraling up as long as "more" wins the day. Look to the "lot of ships" post -- I believe one team said they had about 1000 or 2000 more they could bring but didn't?
Blobs won't end until something discourages using more and perhaps stacking penalties (diminishing returns) might be an answer. hull = can have x number "efficiently" shooting at it. After that, no extra damage nor effects apply. Who knows.
I don't know what would work but, again, something is needed to prevent the "more for the win" that causes the lag.
|
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Technomage Trilogy Comrades-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.12.01 12:28:00 -
[152]
I don't like repeating myself for no reason. If your issue is the lag, go check out http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1422034
That's the only solution I've seen that doesn't try and fix the lag by trying to stop people from grouping up or making some insane mechanic. It simply deals with the lag.
If your issue is the tactical and strategical considerations involved in the 'blob' process, I haven't seen a better idea than LoS for the tactical considerations of the battle itself. Making it strategically better to attack multiple locations is an easy enough theoretical process for changing the commitment of forces, but the details aren't going to be ironed out in discussion threads.
-More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
Kalle Demos
Amarr Hysteria Nexus
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 09:33:00 -
[153]
This was a reply I made on this thread, I figured it would be more appropiate here, I know it is todo with lag but as you can see lag and blobbing go hand in hand.
Originally by: Kalle Demos Ok well this is how I see it, bare with me here and I will try to be nice, I have noticed theres alot of damage control going on when supercaps or blobs are mentioned, I cant really understand the need for it either.
Obviously it is common knowledge that players are willing todo anything to win so it is understandable why they would as you say 'cram everything in one system', I am going to assume alot of players are fine with this. By the looks of it ccp are too which would probably explain why they are focused on increasing the limit of nodes, my question was is there was an eta on when this would be fixed.
I agree with what Akita T said, I am surprised theres little discussion on supercap blobbing (that really is the best way to put it), I know theres been a few comments that CTAĘs will eventually turn into Titans > Supercarriers > Rest, what concerns me and I would assume others is how much truth there is in this.
The other problem is ofc no one risking their fleets anymore but I guess thats a different story, so while ccp have declared a battle against lag I was wondering how long before they estimate victory?
|
Feyleaf
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 09:13:00 -
[154]
Strategy/diplomacy > Tactics =) As it should be!
Sadly knowledge of "lag mechanics" often becomes more important then actual tactical skill :(
|
Musical Fist
Gallente NAP Coalition
|
Posted - 2010.12.09 13:48:00 -
[155]
Blobbing is a thing of the past as of now, due to the struggles of inactivity the NAP Cancer is dead, thanks to those who supported this.
I shall now move on to my next campaign! --
Recruitment now open!! |
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.09 21:12:00 -
[156]
So, to sum up: no intervention by CCP at all, no game mechanics changes at all, but the "problem" is "fixed".
Thank you for admitting that you were wrong. ------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
Musical Fist
Gallente NAP Coalition
|
Posted - 2010.12.10 10:24:00 -
[157]
Originally by: FinnAgain Zero So, to sum up: no intervention by CCP at all, no game mechanics changes at all, but the "problem" is "fixed".
Thank you for admitting that you were wrong.
The funny thing is you actually are aware on a game mechanic being wrong and aware of a problem with blobbing, besides you never even read what I written and by the looks of it didnt read what anyone else wrote.
So I will do what I do always, grin sit back and laugh at you when the changes happen, but dont worry you can always be a forum warrior for your new alliance, I am sure it will be a spawn of NC too.
Cryptic? Well what else would expect this early on, I mean it isnt even 2011 yet, I cant just spell things out now can I --
No Combaters are dead teehee |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.12.10 14:14:00 -
[158]
Originally by: FinnAgain Zero So, to sum up: no intervention by CCP at all, no game mechanics changes at all, but the "problem" is "fixed".
Thank you for admitting that you were wrong.
Hey, Finn, did he send you a whiny, tearful email accusing you of stalking him as well? Or was it just me that got one? if so, I'll gladly forward it to you for your amusement.
PS Apparently I'm an "NC supporter"
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Musical Fist
Gallente NAP Coalition
|
Posted - 2010.12.10 14:27:00 -
[159]
[ 2010.12.09 13:22:24 ] Musical Fist > looks like finn and malganis are at it again, I bet if I made a thread on ah finn would instant reply to my blob thread [ 2010.12.09 13:23:29 ] XXXXXXXXXX > Blob whine thread which one :P [ 2010.12.09 13:35:47 ] Musical Fist > lol ill send that **** an in game message, chances are he will put it up on caod
Like I said, predictable and stupid --
No Combaters are dead teehee |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.12.10 15:32:00 -
[160]
ITT: We learn that a 4 hour gap is "instant".
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
|
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.10 18:23:00 -
[161]
Yah, forward that along please.
Originally by: Malcanis
PS Apparently I'm an "NC supporter"
Obviously I don't get the specific NC hate, but even beyond that I don't get the general hate for coalitions. They rise, and sooner or later in EVE they fall. It has always happened and almost definitely it always will, and in the process their life and times provides the meat of the player-created content that's in EVE. The rise and fall of BoB defined much of 0.0 warfare for close to half a decade, which is an eternity in EVE time. And while I enjoyed fighting against them, I simply can't grok raging against their effectiveness and the coalition that they'd built, or using the forums to try to fight them rather than getting a fleet together.
Ah well.
------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 00:28:00 -
[162]
Fix blobs by nerfing travel.
If it wasn't so easy for people to congregate from literally anywhere in the galaxy at a moment's notice, we wouldn't have such big blobs to begin with.
Cut back on capital ship jump ranges and jump bridge networks, and lengthen jump clone timers. Then sit back and watch 0.0 get interesting again for the first time in literally years.
|
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 02:40:00 -
[163]
Except, no. The recent battle in LXQ that saw the single largest combat group in a single system at once in the history of EVE began once the invading forces had set up forward logistics bases that were only a few jumps from the target system. All nerfing travel does is increase response times for the defenders. A well organized group of attackers can still have a massive fleet set up quite easily. ------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
Trebor Daehdoow
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 09:48:00 -
[164]
Originally by: FinnAgain Zero Except, no. The recent battle in LXQ that saw the single largest combat group in a single system at once in the history of EVE began once the invading forces had set up forward logistics bases that were only a few jumps from the target system. All nerfing travel does is increase response times for the defenders. A well organized group of attackers can still have a massive fleet set up quite easily.
It is a sword that cuts both ways, Finn. Right now, you can deploy a (super)cap blob across the map quickly -- faster than a subcap blob in the absence of jump/titan bridges. Nerfing travel for supercaps, and to a lesser extent, caps, turns them from tactical assets into strategic ones. The decision to deploy them to a particular area would then become a committing act -- the caps you just deployed to attack somebody are no longer available to you to defend against an attack back home.
Personally, I am not in favor of gimping the ability of caps to quickly maneuver within some reasonable range of a home-base, but the idea that moving that home-base ought to take some time is one worthy of serious consideration. If you deploy your aircraft carriers to the Straights of Hormuz, you do not get to use them to attack North Korea an hour later.
Confessions of a Noob Starship Politician The most expensive free trip to Iceland you'll ever win!
|
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 18:28:00 -
[165]
While that's somewhat true about supercap fleets (In my experience they're always deployed strategically, almost nobody just hot drops super-swarms these days), you can still have massive subcap fleets quite easily. Defends set up an "HQ" to defend from, attackers set up a "beachhead" to attack from. It doesn't matter if it takes them a little longer to get there, a few OOC highsec freighter run, a few JF/carrier runs, whatever, and you've assembled an invasion force.
------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
Kalle Demos
Amarr Hysteria Nexus
|
Posted - 2010.12.11 23:09:00 -
[166]
Titans > Supercarriers > Carriers > Rest
This makes me sad because I trained for dreads, commands and black ops
In fact the only two ships I avoided were Titans and Supercaps, does this mean 0.0 is not for me?
Originally by: Kool StoryBro <---
Originally by: CCP Spitfire Spam post removed.
Random forum moments ftw |
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.12 04:16:00 -
[167]
Black Ops ships are still very useful for cloaky-surprise-death gangs. I still make extensive use of Command Ships and never regretted putting the points into them that I did. Dreads are still used on occasion but have been somewhat eclipsed by supercarriers, however they do have their uses. ------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.12.12 12:33:00 -
[168]
Originally by: FinnAgain Zero Black Ops ships are still very useful for cloaky-surprise-death gangs. I still make extensive use of Command Ships and never regretted putting the points into them that I did. Dreads are still used on occasion but have been somewhat eclipsed by supercarriers, however they do have their uses.
I have to agree.
Blackops are awesome for various tactics, the problem is that for many people the only tactic they know is full frontal assault (for which I agree they are basically unsuited). They could still do with some tweaking, but they work as is.
Pure Command ships are not as popular now that cloaky T3 ships can provide slightly more boost for less (specialised) training time. I'm one of the rare people who have trained for all the combat mindlinks (yes, even information warfare can be exceptionally useful in the right gang) and don't regret the time spent. My only annoyance is that I get on very few killmails when flying a fleet booster
Dreads are only really used when you know there are no supers around. I'd quite like to see them get a boost but that depends on when/if CCP decide to look at supers and caps again.
TeaDaze.net Blog | CSM Database |
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.12 13:23:00 -
[169]
Originally by: TeaDaze
Pure Command ships are not as popular now that cloaky T3 ships can provide slightly more boost for less (specialised) training time. I'm one of the rare people who have trained for all the combat mindlinks (yes, even information warfare can be exceptionally useful in the right gang) and don't regret the time spent.
I hate, hate, hate the idea of losing skillpoints. So even though I can fly T3's, I don't. And yes, I have Command Ships V, FC V and all Warfare Specs to V as well. Also all racial Cruisers to V.
Originally by: TeaDaze
My only annoyance is that I get on very few killmails when flying a fleet booster
***** more. ;)I've got 377 kills in my Damnation. I really like my Damnation.
Originally by: TeaDaze
Dreads are only really used when you know there are no supers around. I'd quite like to see them get a boost but that depends on when/if CCP decide to look at supers and caps again.
It is true that dreads are kinda in limbo these days. A year or so ago, it would've been a no-brainer that I'd put my learning skill rebate points straight into Amarr Dread V. Now they're probably going to Carrier V. Then again, carriers are for POS repping and hauling stuff, and pretty much nothing else, too. I'm not sure what changes can be made without boosting them too much or nerfing the hell out of supers.
Maybe carriers are just destined to remain the most effective Sanctum eaters. ------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
Kalle Demos
Amarr Hysteria Nexus
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 09:59:00 -
[170]
I too love my damnation, seems to be the popular command like an EOM BC
It seems like supercap blobbing has become an open topic, I think once botting is somewhat fixed blobbing will become the new fotm
Now I dont mind people building or using supercaps I just dont like the idea that their used on subcaps often, like the C3N- battle the other day for example, what I would like to see is a mixture of caps and subcaps being used, I would like to be able to use my dread for a change, or be able to use my command or battleship without worrying about getting DD'd
Originally by: Kool StoryBro <---
Originally by: CCP Spitfire Spam post removed.
Random forum moments ftw |
|
David Lowell
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 00:48:00 -
[171]
On Blobs I have always thought of blobs as a faction massing their entire force for one attack. I view it as like the entire US army all attacking... Berlin- at once.
The idea of force concentration is a well known idea and in EvE their is no operational reason (that I can see at least) to have a group spread out their forces due to the mobility said forces have. The best bet for a group at this moment is to make a huge fist of ships and smash into their objectives in some sequence, one system after another. If my side tried to use 1000 pilots to take (or defend)three system at once along a front the other side would use their 1000 pilots on one group of 333 pilots then move on to my other fronts and roll them up in detail as well. As Carl von Clausewitz was able to conclude:
"...we may infer, that it is very difficult in the present state of Europe, for the most talented general to gain a victory over an enemy double his strength. Now if we see double numbers prove such a weight in the scale against the greatest generals, we may be sure, that in ordinary cases, in small as well as great combats, an important superiority in numbers but which need not be over two to one, will be sufficient to ensure the victory, however disadvantageous other circumstances maybe..." łOn War, Book 3, Superiority of numbers.
So there is no issue with how the game works it is just what the operational realities of the game cause. It is just that some people (or a lot) find the said reality ... less then ideal. Much like how some people look back at the operational realities of Napoleonic warfare (those great lines of troops caused by how inaccurate muskets were) stupid when we are used to accurate rifles.
---------------- Don't worry I'm sure this will work... |
Vmir Gallahasen
Gallente United Mining And Distribution
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 01:47:00 -
[172]
Originally by: David Lowell On Blobs I have always thought of blobs as a faction massing their entire force for one attack. I view it as like the entire US army all attacking... Berlin- at once.
So what happens when everybody's given in to the blob? Let's put this into real-life terms like you did: what if the US army all attacked berlin, but the bridges were too small to support all those troops at once so everybody had to go home instead?
I don't know about you, but getting blueballed out of a fight because the server couldn't handle it is a pretty good reason for CCP to start designing mechanics to reduce the blob. Stealth bombers were a good change. Let's see more stuff like that to prevent capital blobs
|
David Lowell
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 02:12:00 -
[173]
Edited by: David Lowell on 21/12/2010 02:12:43
Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
So what happens when everybody's given in to the blob? Let's put this into real-life terms like you did: what if the US army all attacked berlin, but the bridges were too small to support all those troops at once so everybody had to go home instead?
I don't know about you, but getting blueballed out of a fight because the server couldn't handle it is a pretty good reason for CCP to start designing mechanics to reduce the blob. Stealth bombers were a good change. Let's see more stuff like that to prevent capital blobs
I was merely offering an idea what a blob was since earlier in the topic there was a rather long debate on the nature of what a blob was. I later explained (or tried to at least) that the reason a blob occurs is due to that's the best tactic at the moment given how EvE combat works at these large scales. Much like how the inaccuracy of muskets resulted the massed fire of lines, the need for DPS and other factors has lead to the 'blob'.
To change this you either need to alter the operational reality that corporation leaders face. Much like how rifles lead to the end of the lines of infantry you need to make having huge 1000+ pilot fleets pointless. I'm not an expert of the top of my head but perhaps you could have an increase in how long it takes you to target an enemy based off every extra fleet due to the warp field that causes ships to fly through space like its WD-40. (seeing as a 1000 man group would have 4 fleets (at 256 people per fleet) at least this could work depending on the penalty) You could also make it so that ship mobility is less on the strategic level this would open up doing multiple attacks on several systems to spread out the defender and thus perhaps give you local numerical superiority in one area as they respond to one attack only for it to be a diversion and unable to respond in time.
I really don't know how to fix this I was merely pointing put my idea on why is is occurring and that is because it is the best tactic for the situation at hand. But that does not mean I don't think its an issue- tactics and strategy for the wars should be more then just about "how many pilots can we shove into this system?" ---------------- Don't worry I'm sure this will work... |
Kalle Demos
Amarr Hysteria Nexus
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 15:37:00 -
[174]
Red team says: We will bring 10 frigs Blue team says: Yeah well we will bring 20 frigs Red team says: We will bring 50 cruisers Blue team says: Yeah well we will bring in 100 cruisers Red team says: We will bring in 100 battlecruisers Blue team says: Yeah well we will bring in 150 battlecruisers Red team says: We will bring in 200 battleships Blue team says: Yeah well we will bring in 250 battleships Red team says: We will bring in 100 carriers (because dreads suck) Blue team says: Yeah well we will bring in 250 carriers (because dreads suck) Red team says: We will bring in 100 supercaps Blue team says: Yeah well we will bring in 250 sup.................................. AWW WTF BLACK SCREEN!!!
Red team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Blue team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Red team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Blue team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Red team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Blue team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Red team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Blue team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Red team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Blue team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Red team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Blue team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Red team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG Blue team makes thread: CCP FIX LAG
As for this thread
Half the people say they want fleet warfare where size doesnt control the outcome The other half say they prefer size to control the outcome of a battle and prefer lag (dont play with fire if you dont want to get burnt).
I guess we know why 0.0 is dead or full of botters, there isnt much a person can do without ******ed amounts of numbers / lag.
Originally by: Kool StoryBro <---
Originally by: CCP Spitfire Spam post removed.
Random forum moments ftw |
Artisan Botanist
Minmatar Hysteria Nexus
|
Posted - 2011.01.17 15:39:00 -
[175]
Edited by: Artisan Botanist on 17/01/2011 15:43:46 Do you know what the funny thing about this thread is, most of the issues MF and others raised got brought up in the CSM minutes and CCP have in fact said it is ridiculous AND have said it is blobbing.
As for me CCP have said supercaps are OP (in longer terms) and supercarriers are gimping dreads.
Furthermore jump bridges and logistics were also criticised by CCP and lack of combat
While I am against alt posting and ******ed trolling I got to hand it to Mini (assuming he is MF) for his comments, now CCP will focus on the issues.
Guess this is what he means by the problem being solved hehe
bahh I was going to congratulate him in game but it looks like he deleted his char :(
|
FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.01.17 18:47:00 -
[176]
Yah, CCP has it wrong. Put Zulu in charge of SC changes. ------------------------------------------------
Hohohoho, Mister Finn, you're going to be Mister Finnagain! |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |