EVE Search - The CSM wants to get rid of Jump Bridges.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

The CSM wants to get rid of Jump Bridges.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2011.01.16 23:09:00 - [121] Originally by: Pirokobo Edited by: Pirokobo on 16/01/2011 22:46:16 Originally by: TZeer With a change there would be no need to NAP every brother and sister in the vicinity. And you could actually fight your neighbour and not all their friends/cousins/brothers etc. Unless your neighbor naps everyone you didn't and then kills you. You seem to be under the delusion that the absence of bridges changes politics. It doesn't. A single region or ten, for some alliances DISTANCE SIMPLY DOESN'T MATTER, they'll go where the fights are to be found, and they'll NAP whoever they like or whoever they need to in order to win depending on their attitude towards NAPing in general. There are many ways to field multiple armies around the map and jump bridges are only one of them. Every login has three character slots and it only takes a month to train a T2 shield drake pilot. That's instantly three potential locations for you to have characters waiting for a fight to occur. True, but drakes are just another FOTM. And theoretically, yes, you could have 3 drake pilots in 3 different locations. But that will be 3 **ty/average skilled drake pilots in 3 months. Quote:** DISTANCE SIMPLY DOESN'T MATTER Specially when people can move through jumpbridges it`s very easy. It`s a low obstacle. But without bridges the fleet that just travelled 30-60 jumps for a massive defensive/gank operation, would either need to travel 30-60 jumps back. Or clonejump back, but be stuck for 24 hours. Or just pod jump yourself, but then you would also be far away from the inital operating area if killed.
Pirokobo Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.01.16 23:16:00 - [122] Edited by: Pirokobo on 16/01/2011 23:20:37 Originally by: TZeer But without bridges the fleet that just travelled 30-60 jumps for a massive defensive/gank operation, would either need to travel 30-60 jumps back. Or clonejump back, but be stuck for 24 hours. Or just pod jump yourself, but then you would also be far away from the inital operating area if killed. Or log out and log into a character in that theater. Rolling a drake alt is just an example of how a completely shobun newbee can have three blob capable characters in three months. For most of us bitter old vets that's not a necessary step, we can already deploy in multiple theaters because we've got the characters to do it and we've got the money to podjump and the offices around the galaxy to land close by. But that's giving your argument too much consideration. We've proven a foreign legion deployment is possible and practical in the pre-bridges era, and we've done it in the bridges era without using bridges. Your whining about the feasibility of it is why we hold space and you don't.
Gamst The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.01.16 23:21:00 - [123] Edited by: Gamst on 16/01/2011 23:23:17 Tzeer I think your missing the obvious point in that I have no intention of fighting people that I have fought alongside. My allies are my allies. Your vision for Eve is not what a sandbox should be. I don't understand your logic in that this is like doing me a favor or something. There are plenty of targets in my neighborhood. I mean this whole discussion has just boiled down to JB's are making the larger entities to powerful blah blah blah. Half the time for fleets (larger) we are using gates and stuff. I mean do you really think a smaller alliances are going to be able to displace anyone in the north (or anywhere) and hold that territory without JB's. I don't think so. PL has had some success in being a pain in the ass, but newer alliances to 0.0 are going to get smashed and bottom line even if this does happen it won't change anything on the sov map for any of the big coalitions. This is just a hindrance on the causal gamer and will make it hard to impossible to commit time to this for finding actual good fights.
Bromothymol Ixion Defence Systems Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.01.16 23:32:00 - [124] This suggestion is what I like to call window dressing problem solving. I see it all the time IRL from industrial safety departments. A problem is identified that everybody would like to see fixed, but the true solutions are too complex, or difficult to implement, so policy makers focus on things that they can change quickly and easily to make it seem like they're doing something. So the problems here are that blob warfare is too prevalent and small alliances have no way of getting a start in 0.0. The identified sub-problem is that it is too easy to project power across long distances, and so jump bridges (and seemingly capital jump drives) are oggled suspiciously. Jump bridges and jump drives certainly contribute, but they are not the root causes. Blob warfare occurs because stacking DPS kills things faster, and allows you to win. That is all. It is not limited to 0.0 by any means. My life in high sec saw war decs against alliances larger then us, where we were simply incapable of fielding a force to oppose them. The difference being once the war dec was over, we were able to undock and use the space as we had before. If you were to eliminate jump based logistics, it would encourage bloc level alliances to enforce control over pipes to high sec, in effect encouraging even larger blocks of space to be controlled and blobbed. In addition, because everybody would need to use all the gates in the region, small gangs would be less likely to slip in unnoticed. So it would encourage alliances to develop defence outposts at their perimeters so the guards could keep eyes on the boarders, and the inner systems could continue with life as usual, secure in the knowledge that nobody could hop right over the outer defenses. The problem of the "little guys" not being able to get a start in 0.0 is based in one thing. Isk. In order to obtain 0.0 sov space you need to be able to fight off an opponent who has likely been established in 0.0 for some amount of time. For the duration of that time, they were able to mine their moons, generating more income then you ever could during life in empire. So you likely have one or two cap ships, and no ship reimbursement program, while they have been able to build up the means to beat you back. And that's not even considering the costs of Sov structures, Sov system rentals, etc etc. If, by ingenuity, luck, diplomacy, or sheer force of will, you do manage to claim a system or two, there won't be any r64 or Tech moons there. So you're going to be scraping a living off corp taxes from rats and what minerals you can harvest. Until a cap fleet wanders by and decides to kill your structures for fun (I've been on both sides of that equation). The presence or absense of jumping via bridges, titans or capital jump drives will not change either of these issues. To fix blobbing the basic mechanics of fleet damage need to be inspected. To enable small alliances to compete for sov requires that the manner by which Isk is earned needs to be inspected. These changes are not going to be a quick "let's remove one transport mechanic" from the game type fix. These are based on systemic issues and will need systemic solutions. That was a wall of text. Yuck.
Pirokobo Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.01.16 23:38:00 - [125] Originally by: Bromothymol If, by ingenuity, luck, diplomacy, or sheer force of will, you do manage to claim a system or two, there won't be any r64 or Tech moons there. So you're going to be scraping a living off corp taxes from rats and what minerals you can harvest. Until a cap fleet wanders by and decides to kill your structures for fun (I've been on both sides of that equation). Or you could read the map upside down and make a good first impression with your neighbors.
Antihrist Pripravnik 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.01.16 23:51:00 - [126] Originally by: Bromothymol That was a wall of text. Yuck. A good wall of text, if I might add. One interesting point you mentioned is separating border from core systems. It'll most likely happen: border area will be blobbed even more and core systems will become even safer than they are now. That's just wrong.
Batolemaeus Caldari Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.01.17 00:04:00 - [127] Originally by: Bromothymol Jump bridges and jump drives certainly contribute, but they are not the root causes. Blob warfare occurs because stacking DPS kills things faster, and allows you to win. I hope nobody is under the delusion that simply removing all jb is a magic bullet. It's a part of a greater problem that would have to be tackled at the same time and goes down to the very basis of 0.0 income, force projection, the ehp grind, the sov system; in short, the entire 0.0 complex including its relations to highsec and lowsec. I'd be very happy if CCP showed an interest in redesigning 0.0 from the ground up with some player input. It has become very stale, and the utter failure of dominion just further cemented bad design choices.
fukier The Unpodable Supermen	Posted - 2011.01.17 00:20:00 - [128] Originally by: Batolemaeus Originally by: Bromothymol Jump bridges and jump drives certainly contribute, but they are not the root causes. Blob warfare occurs because stacking DPS kills things faster, and allows you to win. I hope nobody is under the delusion that simply removing all jb is a magic bullet. It's a part of a greater problem that would have to be tackled at the same time and goes down to the very basis of 0.0 income, force projection, the ehp grind, the sov system; in short, the entire 0.0 complex including its relations to highsec and lowsec. I'd be very happy if CCP showed an interest in redesigning 0.0 from the ground up with some player input. It has become very stale, and the utter failure of dominion just further cemented bad design choices. hmm... perhaps whith a black ops boost and some sort of limited-delayed 0.0 local this could see a ressurection of black ops hot drops... i mean if most of the defence will be in choke systems and the main home systems ripe with carebears... this could lead to some interesting developments... well atleast for small time pirates who base out of faction 0.0 space i dont think removing all jb is the solution... but perhaps making it so you cant deploy a jb in a constilation that has upgraded systems (the ones that get 2 sanctums and havens running all the time) could be an interesting solution...
Batolemaeus Caldari Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.01.17 00:38:00 - [129] Originally by: fukier hmm... perhaps whith a black ops boost and some sort of limited-delayed 0.0 local this could see a ressurection of black ops hot drops... i mean if most of the defence will be in choke systems and the main home systems ripe with carebears... this could lead to some interesting developments... well atleast for small time pirates who base out of faction 0.0 space Yay more afk cloakers to gank people before a defence fleet can react. I severely dislike all the instant cyno drops all over the place. It's already bad enough with rapid deployment all over the place with titans. Fly around in a small roaming gang, get dropped by bridge. We're trying to reduce this problem here, not further augment it. A proper bo boost would resolve around their ewar capabilities and combat usefulness, probably even giving them carrier-alike abilities for longer deployment out in deep space, instead of just even more bridging crap. They suck as combat ships for their survivability and cost; increasing their bridging ability doesn't change that. By the way, if we're going the way of encouraging local production in 0.0, there must be a way to either keep a resource acquisition operation highly mobile or able to properly lock down and secure systems. Otherwise the opportunity cost will be too high again, and importing will still be the standard modus operandi. Covert operations as a form of area denial are fine, as long as there are countermeasures against the disproportional time investment required to secure industrial operations.
Evelgrivion Ignatium.	Posted - 2011.01.17 00:39:00 - [130] The entire situation of 0.0 warfare needs to be looked at; to quote a September 2009 devblog: Originally by: Greyscale The current sovereignty system, for example, mechanically prescribes a certain path to conquest, which limits the number of command decisions to be made. The sentences referencing the evils of the old sovereignty system are equally applicable to its current replacement. There is a lot of damage that has been done by releasing the system and not iterating upon it. Iteration is pretty much a dirty word in this community anymore, and is not an acceptable route. If we and CCP are going to fix what's wrong with EVE, those fixes needs to be delivered in a whole and playable state from the get-go. Under her current task masters, I don't think many Eve features will get the go ahead for further iteration once they're running on Tranquility. It is indeed worth pointing out that Jump Bridges are a big part of an existing problem with 0.0's game design. They need to go though, as they are a major enabler of the worst wrong in 0.0; the ease of force projection. Removing them are a good potential part of an overarching solution, but it's definitely no silver bullet.

TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2011.01.17 00:58:00 - [131] Quote: Your whining about the feasibility of it is why we hold space and you don't. If I wanted to hold space I would join an alliance, or be in one. Quote: Or log out and log into a character in that theater. Rolling a drake alt is just an example of how a completely shobun newbee can have three blob capable characters in three months. For most of us bitter old vets that's not a necessary step, we can already deploy in multiple theaters because we've got the characters to do it and we've got the money to podjump and the offices around the galaxy to land close by. I see your points. But moving by yourself with POD jumping or having multiple characters, is a big difference from moving in a big coordinated fleet/blob. And although your example with 3 chars within 3 months is perfectly within reach of most people, it would be interesting to see how many of thoose in a 200 drake fleet actually had 2 backup drake pilots waiting in another spot for some action. Quote: I mean do you really think a smaller alliances are going to be able to displace anyone in the north (or anywhere) and hold that territory without JB's. I dont think a smaller entity can displace another small entity up north as long as the coalition is there to back it up. On the other side, I dont think any entity would have a problem to hold sov without jumpbridges. But I think they would have problems controlling large amounts of space if they dont actually use it. What a removal of jumpbridges or redesign of jumpbridges could do is increase the reaction time of reinforcement or coordinated move of bigger fleets. Example: You have fleet "A" in cloud ring, shooting stuff. You are just about to wrap up and reports come inn that someone is shooting your/your alliance stuff in geminate. With bridges, it`s not a big deal to move your fleet over there to reeinforce the defence or completely outblob the opponent. Without bridges you would either have to jump the old way, or use titans and cynochains to get there. Or podjump/log on another char that is closer. And I have been up north fighting NC and know that peeps dont jump through normal gates unless they ABSOLUTELY have to. To be fair, that goes with every alliance. Quote: This is just a hindrance on the causal gamer CCP could alter the jumpbridge mechanics. Put a cap on how many could jump in amount of time. Like Mass Vs Time. They could make the bridges hold less fuel, so you would need to refuel more often. Make it so any CAP ship with a jumpdrive itself could not use the jump bridge etc. There is a lot of ways to tweak it. Personally I would either see the bridges burned to the ground or moved away from the cover of POS`s... And a complete denial of service for any cap ship.
Cassus Temon	Posted - 2011.01.17 01:10:00 - [132] Originally by: Gamst Edited by: Gamst on 16/01/2011 23:23:17 Tzeer I think your missing the obvious point in that I have no intention of fighting people that I have fought alongside. My allies are my allies. Your vision for Eve is not what a sandbox should be. I don't understand your logic in that this is like doing me a favor or something. There are plenty of targets in my neighborhood. I mean this whole discussion has just boiled down to JB's are making the larger entities to powerful blah blah blah. Half the time for fleets (larger) we are using gates and stuff. I mean do you really think a smaller alliances are going to be able to displace anyone in the north (or anywhere) and hold that territory without JB's. I don't think so. PL has had some success in being a pain in the ass, but newer alliances to 0.0 are going to get smashed and bottom line even if this does happen it won't change anything on the sov map for any of the big coalitions. This is just a hindrance on the causal gamer and will make it hard to impossible to commit time to this for finding actual good fights. I think the point is, that if you have less time for 'good fight'; you, and others, will have to make choices between that, and maintaining your Industry. With the requirements of additional logistics, for Nullsec alliances; forces will be redirected to managing and maintaining routes to highsec. Forces will be required to pull back from the front lines, less their sovereignity be brought down by shortages elsewhere; and sovereignity takeover attempts, and defense, will be slowed down by additional logistical requirements. Lowsec pirate corps, will again have the means to increase income; by trapping and destroying Nullsec vessels transporting valuable materials to Highsec markets. They will then be able to increase their operations; and become a greater problem for Nullsec alliances.
Pirokobo Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.01.17 01:11:00 - [133] Originally by: TZeer I see your points. But moving by yourself with POD jumping or having multiple characters, is a big difference from moving in a big coordinated fleet/blob. And although your example with 3 chars within 3 months is perfectly within reach of most people, it would be interesting to see how many of thoose in a 200 drake fleet actually had 2 backup drake pilots waiting in another spot for some action. Well that ultimately boils down to running a coordinated campaign. Mittens has recently written a wall of text on the topic of choices. If you give people a clear goal to work towards (train for a Maelstrom, or in my example, train three characters for drakes and move one of them to X and one of them to Y), they'll do it. Quote: Meanwhile, we told our thousands of members to train for one battleship, of one race, with one fit - and two support ships. Goonswarm would use Maelstroms and Scimitars with Scorpions in support, and thatÆs it. In a game with a fetish for freedom of choice, the reaction was a shock: our pilots, a notoriously fractious lot, leapt on the direction we provided with gusto.
fukier The Unpodable Supermen	Posted - 2011.01.17 01:11:00 - [134] Edited by: fukier on 17/01/2011 01:16:42 Originally by: Batolemaeus Originally by: fukier hmm... perhaps whith a black ops boost and some sort of limited-delayed 0.0 local this could see a ressurection of black ops hot drops... i mean if most of the defence will be in choke systems and the main home systems ripe with carebears... this could lead to some interesting developments... well atleast for small time pirates who base out of faction 0.0 space Yay more afk cloakers to gank people before a defence fleet can react. I severely dislike all the instant cyno drops all over the place. It's already bad enough with rapid deployment all over the place with titans. Fly around in a small roaming gang, get dropped by bridge. We're trying to reduce this problem here, not further augment it. A proper bo boost would resolve around their ewar capabilities and combat usefulness, probably even giving them carrier-alike abilities for longer deployment out in deep space, instead of just even more bridging crap. They suck as combat ships for their survivability and cost; increasing their bridging ability doesn't change that. By the way, if we're going the way of encouraging local production in 0.0, there must be a way to either keep a resource acquisition operation highly mobile or able to properly lock down and secure systems. Otherwise the opportunity cost will be too high again, and importing will still be the standard modus operandi. Covert operations as a form of area denial are fine, as long as there are countermeasures against the disproportional time investment required to secure industrial operations. one of the things that always atracted me to 0.0 big alliances was the fact that home defence would always tell me when a incomming gang was comming... and all i had to do was either dock up or fly to a safe pos switch ships and join the gang... i personally think that a there needs in tandum a afk cloaker nerf whith a BO boost (to thier combat ability) and a 0.0 local delay would be the best thing for 0.0... as it stands one podder can make way too much isk in a day doing sanctums... me i can pull in over 300 million in a day... and over a billion if i scan out some 8/10 or 10/10 complexes... making farming more dangerous is a good thing... the thing to is if you take away force projection via jb( or titans) you limit the home field defence boost... basically forces like the NC (which your a member of) usually win a long term war/fight because they are able to reinforce thier troops at a greater capacity then invading forces... this is usually because of JB... but if you removed jb's from core systems because they are fully upgraded... then re supplying your forces would be much more difficult... futhermore there are already too many positive reasons to live in 0.0 and high sec but not nearly enough to live in low sec... if you boosted 0.0 ability to get low end mins then you would never see a resurection of low sec...
Batolemaeus Caldari Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.01.17 02:01:00 - [135] Originally by: fukier the thing to is if you take away force projection via jb( or titans) you limit the home field defence boost... basically forces like the NC (which your a member of) usually win a long term war/fight because they are able to reinforce thier troops at a greater capacity then invading forces... this is usually because of JB... but if you removed jb's from core systems because they are fully upgraded... then re supplying your forces would be much more difficult... Gee, thanks for reminding me that the hilarious ease of force projection to hold vast tracts of space and defend it easily is one of the reasons why the NC can repel serious threats all over the place. I would have never thought that making that harder would make this harder. Could it be that this is the entire point of why I want force projection to be harder?
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services Novus Ordo Mundi	Posted - 2011.01.17 02:03:00 - [136] Edited by: northwesten on 17/01/2011 02:05:49 One thing people really annoy me about the debate over JB Logistic going to be a nightmare..... NO it wont you have titian and jump freighters. I use too move Freighter around in 0.0 with a large team of scouts... To be honest it was scary with billion in the hold but it was work and so what it was part of the game. Now what worry's me here is I starting to hear and see this more "I pay $15 a month I shouldn't work for it".... Bull crap you do. Everything in EVE requires Effort as a corp/team. Now JB seems to making so easy I see we heading to the WoW effect. Easy = more fun? yer lack of risk that's for sure. Also you want to join a big fight? Well get in a fleet and have titian bridge you there if you really need to help your friends. I been away from 0.0 for 2+ year come back and it really is easy to live in 0.0... little too easy that I go on roams and you hardly catch someone now = Boring. look at the NC map it proves that 0.0 is easy. Hell you have ihubs to upgrade for mining and ratting. you can drop station everywhere and refine build and sell else where. Originally by: Cassus Temon Lowsec pirate corps, will again have the means to increase income; by trapping and destroying Nullsec vessels transporting valuable materials to Highsec markets. They will then be able to increase their operations; and become a greater problem for Nullsec alliances. Answer too that ESCORT Or jump freighter..
fukier The Unpodable Supermen	Posted - 2011.01.17 02:20:00 - [137] Originally by: Batolemaeus Originally by: fukier the thing to is if you take away force projection via jb( or titans) you limit the home field defence boost... basically forces like the NC (which your a member of) usually win a long term war/fight because they are able to reinforce thier troops at a greater capacity then invading forces... this is usually because of JB... but if you removed jb's from core systems because they are fully upgraded... then re supplying your forces would be much more difficult... Gee, thanks for reminding me that the hilarious ease of force projection to hold vast tracts of space and defend it easily is one of the reasons why the NC can repel serious threats all over the place. I would have never thought that making that harder would make this harder. Could it be that this is the entire point of why I want force projection to be harder? yes so make it so any core system constliations cant deploy a jb (ones that are fully upgraded +5 systems) ... that way if there is a cyno jammer you cant bring in more caps and you have to bring in conventional forces via star gates (unless the jammer is down)... right now, being able to bring in more ships while the jammer is up is a clear advantage that should be taken away... i mean one of the problems for me back in the frege days (a time before jb's) was that i would have to fly large amounts stargate to 1. get to my home system. 2. find any fights... having a jb network that can get me to lets say 5-6 jumps from where i am going is still a better option then having to fly 30 plus jumps...
Gamst The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.01.17 02:27:00 - [138] Originally by: northwesten Edited by: northwesten on 17/01/2011 02:05:49 One thing people really annoy me about the debate over JB Logistic going to be a nightmare..... NO it wont you have titian and jump freighters. I use too move Freighter around in 0.0 with a large team of scouts... To be honest it was scary with billion in the hold but it was work and so what it was part of the game. Now what worry's me here is I starting to hear and see this more "I pay $15 a month I shouldn't work for it".... Bull crap you do. Everything in EVE requires Effort as a corp/team. Now JB seems to making so easy I see we heading to the WoW effect. Easy = more fun? yer lack of risk that's for sure. Also you want to join a big fight? Well get in a fleet and have titian bridge you there if you really need to help your friends. I been away from 0.0 for 2+ year come back and it really is easy to live in 0.0... little too easy that I go on roams and you hardly catch someone now = Boring. look at the NC map it proves that 0.0 is easy. Hell you have ihubs to upgrade for mining and ratting. you can drop station everywhere and refine build and sell else where. Originally by: Cassus Temon Lowsec pirate corps, will again have the means to increase income; by trapping and destroying Nullsec vessels transporting valuable materials to Highsec markets. They will then be able to increase their operations; and become a greater problem for Nullsec alliances. Answer too that ESCORT Or jump freighter.. I don't know of any JB's that go into NPC 0.0, low sec, or high sec. There is no easy mode. Ask the logistical pilots in said big alliances. They already give up so much to satisfy my need to fight as well as others. What this is going to essential do is make life and this game a terrible burden on their RL's and that is not what a game should do. I know people that stay in fleets for like 6+ hrs clearing towers or removing threats from our places of operation and yet this game needs to be more time consuming. Really????
Nahkep Narmelion Gallente CALIMA COLLABORATIVE	Posted - 2011.01.17 02:41:00 - [139] I haven't read all the replies, but most people have focused on jump bridges, but a careful and thoughtful reading of the linked document shows that the range of nerfs could be substantial as in all of the following Jump freighters freighters titan bridges jump bridges To quote CCP Greyscale: Quote: Greyscale: The harder we can make logistics, the better for the game viewed as an abstract system. It would be much better for the game if we got rid of freighters, but we have to balance what is good for the game at a higher systemic level with making the player's lives a living hell. Forcing people to do convoys with lots of industrials would, from a higher level systemic view, be awesome. But for the individual players, it would ôsuck balls.ö ôCCP has gone [too far] in the direction of making players lives easy û we've got jump freighters and jump bridges and all this [stuff] û and I think there is an agreement here [at CCP] that we want to pull back from that. We would like to pull back as far as we can get away with. But how far can we go?ö The underlying point is the need to get a balance between avoiding frustration and getting desirable macro-scale outcomes. In other words, it is possible that all of the 4 items above could be gone from the game. Now that is the most extreme outcome, but from reading the document it has a non-zero probability. Quote: Greyscale feels that reduction in mobility will decrease need for big coalitions, because huge coalition blobs won't be able to move as fast; result should be smaller local wars. Or not. While rapid deployment might be an issue, having a large group of allies you can call up might be even more valuable. Sure it will take them longer to get there, but when they do they'll be there for a very long time. The dynamic in this game is to induce lag in contesting 0.0, we all complain about it, but in the end we all do things to ensure that there will be lag. If CCP tinkers around so that we can get 500 people in a system and fight lag free, we move in with 750 or 1,000. Move the limit up to 1,000 and soon we have well over 1,000. Its an arms race, if you will. No amount of f-cking around on the edges of the way 0.0 life works will change this dynamic. People living deeper in 0.0 will have a stronger incentive to blue those between their space and empire to help secure their supply lines. Being able to call up a blob, even if it arrives later than currently will still be desirable....maybe even more so. Serious question, have any of the dipsh!ts who work on this game and part their fat a$$es on the CSM ever spent any time at all looking at game theory. Do you even know what a Nash equilibrium is? Blobbing/lag appears to be a very strong one so much so that any attempt to get away from it might be futile.
Samjack2	Posted - 2011.01.17 04:29:00 - [140] Or in simple terms. CSM can go to **ing hell. A. Cyno spool up... ok a get it. But a frekin 30 second spool up means your cyno ship better be a *in carrier itself unless you want it dead. Cyno on the field means people are gunna want to run or fight. Nothing was more awesom than dropping SC's onto the heads of invaders. B. Titan bridging HAS to remain specific to titans. Otherwise you might as well make them 10 isk. A titan=dred+rorqual. It can fit a clone vat bay, mindlinks, XL guns, and the new* DD. Basically you say a supercap is a 'i win button' bull**. A TITAN is an 'i win' button. And even now they are getting swamped and taken down. C. SC's shouldnt be nerfed. They are dying just fine. You nerf them and we're gunna see ing 2000 man battles of drake/male blobs... or a crash in the market for minerals. I want my 20bil ISK back if your gunna THINK about touching my wyvern. D. Bot miners. GET RID OF THEM. Simple. CCP throws them to the side and says 'we'll deal with it'. Well you better deal with it soon. i used to be able to actually mine ice and make a killing. Now we got bot miners in mackinraws that undock in blobs of 20-30 with an orca+links in a safe spot and they just sit there and up the market. TL;DR CSM pull your head out of your ass and get to know your players. Who the ** even let 7 year olds on the CSM? BRING BACK CCP CLAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Marlona Sky Global Criminal Countdown	Posted - 2011.01.17 05:32:00 - [141] Originally by: Samjack2 Or in simple terms. CSM can go to **ing hell. A. Cyno spool up... ok a get it. But a frekin 30 second spool up means your cyno ship better be a *in carrier itself unless you want it dead. Cyno on the field means people are gunna want to run or fight. Nothing was more awesom than dropping SC's onto the heads of invaders. B. Titan bridging HAS to remain specific to titans. Otherwise you might as well make them 10 isk. A titan=dred+rorqual. It can fit a clone vat bay, mindlinks, XL guns, and the new* DD. Basically you say a supercap is a 'i win button' bull**. A TITAN is an 'i win' button. And even now they are getting swamped and taken down. C. SC's shouldnt be nerfed. They are dying just fine. You nerf them and we're gunna see ing 2000 man battles of drake/male blobs... or a crash in the market for minerals. I want my 20bil ISK back if your gunna THINK about touching my wyvern. D. Bot miners. GET RID OF THEM. Simple. CCP throws them to the side and says 'we'll deal with it'. Well you better deal with it soon. i used to be able to actually mine ice and make a killing. Now we got bot miners in mackinraws that undock in blobs of 20-30 with an orca+links in a safe spot and they just sit there and up the market. TL;DR CSM pull your head out of your ass and get to know your players. Who the ** even let 7 year olds on the CSM? BRING BACK CCP CLAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wow you're dumb.
Samjack2	Posted - 2011.01.17 05:37:00 - [142] Thank you. My little way of venting rage :D I personally believe it all can be linked to bot miners.
Diomedes Calypso	Posted - 2011.01.17 05:38:00 - [143] What's the point of fighting to win territory if you can't fortify it and build resources available to only those that control it? Jump bridges are player built stargates private owned and maintained I hear the reasons that some people don't like them. But I don't hear anything prosper to replace them with alternative Warfare isnt just about a squirmish that lasts a few hours. It's about about amassing industrial might logistics politics of geography and many other things that have been reflected pretty well in the game How you fly a ship or the experience of a fight is only one part of the game and it doesn't make much sense to me to try to improve it at the expense of other types of pvp that take months to develop and might be more like pvp in Sid Meyers civilization
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services Novus Ordo Mundi	Posted - 2011.01.17 06:02:00 - [144] Originally by: Gamst Originally by: northwesten Edited by: northwesten on 17/01/2011 02:05:49 One thing people really annoy me about the debate over JB Logistic going to be a nightmare..... NO it wont you have titian and jump freighters. I use too move Freighter around in 0.0 with a large team of scouts... To be honest it was scary with billion in the hold but it was work and so what it was part of the game. Now what worry's me here is I starting to hear and see this more "I pay $15 a month I shouldn't work for it".... Bull crap you do. Everything in EVE requires Effort as a corp/team. Now JB seems to making so easy I see we heading to the WoW effect. Easy = more fun? yer lack of risk that's for sure. Also you want to join a big fight? Well get in a fleet and have titian bridge you there if you really need to help your friends. I been away from 0.0 for 2+ year come back and it really is easy to live in 0.0... little too easy that I go on roams and you hardly catch someone now = Boring. look at the NC map it proves that 0.0 is easy. Hell you have ihubs to upgrade for mining and ratting. you can drop station everywhere and refine build and sell else where. Originally by: Cassus Temon Lowsec pirate corps, will again have the means to increase income; by trapping and destroying Nullsec vessels transporting valuable materials to Highsec markets. They will then be able to increase their operations; and become a greater problem for Nullsec alliances. Answer too that ESCORT Or jump freighter.. I don't know of any JB's that go into NPC 0.0, low sec, or high sec. There is no easy mode. Ask the logistical pilots in said big alliances. They already give up so much to satisfy my need to fight as well as others. What this is going to essential do is make life and this game a terrible burden on their RL's and that is not what a game should do. I know people that stay in fleets for like 6+ hrs clearing towers or removing threats from our places of operation and yet this game needs to be more time consuming. Really???? I guess you haven't been playing EVE long enough. Let me explain I use to do Logistic in 0.0 as well and all I had was escorts in a normal freighter. We plan a day to move it like a fleet op. I don't see a real reason why this is a nightmare on logistics when you have 1 Titian to bridge to low sec 2 JUMP freighter to jump to low sec... you still can jump passed the gate camps so I really don't understand how it can be a nightmare.... I mean if a corporation is unable to deal with logistic in 0.0 then you should not live in 0.0 if you nor smart enough to plan ahead. JB's are a easy ride and Titans can be used for fleets. Their no real argument because people just love the fact their is low risk traveling in 0.0. I hate large fleets but I love roams and too be honest Roaming sucks balls because of JB's. Unless the region is a war zone like fountain. I hear people say we need to get to a fight quick.... AGAIN titans I mean if the alliance going to send a fleet to help an ally use a freaking titian. We have plenty going around in eve.
Massive Dragon HAIL DRAGONS	Posted - 2011.01.17 07:04:00 - [145] im going to say something very true, but something most of you will refuse to believe: these changes dont scare you because they will limit your play time or limit your pvp instances, these changes scare you because you will lose engagements more. these proposed changes will actually encourage instances of pvp far more than are encouraged atm, both attackers and defenders of "convoys" will benefit from the pvp instances provided by these changes. the loudest voices against this come from it/nc and from my experiance, these are alliances which believe in not scouting their logistics chains and not engaging without completely overwhelming odds. changing logistics back to the days were (as was intended) people would have to work in groups to move things, would encourage players to actually PLAY this game. and that scares a lot of you. because you arnt used to playing and in turn losing. you are so used to either being completely safe in your journeys or being able to call a 1k man gang from 60 jumps away to join you in massacring a 100man gang in a matter of mins. its time that people realised that logistics are a part of this game, they arnt a boring part either. besides how would you know... most of you didnt live through the old days.
Samjack2	Posted - 2011.01.17 07:27:00 - [146] Originally by: Massive Dragon im going to say something very true, but something most of you will refuse to believe: these changes dont scare you because they will limit your play time or limit your pvp instances, these changes scare you because you will lose engagements more. these proposed changes will actually encourage instances of pvp far more than are encouraged atm, both attackers and defenders of "convoys" will benefit from the pvp instances provided by these changes. the loudest voices against this come from it/nc and from my experiance, these are alliances which believe in not scouting their logistics chains and not engaging without completely overwhelming odds. changing logistics back to the days were (as was intended) people would have to work in groups to move things, would encourage players to actually PLAY this game. and that scares a lot of you. because you arnt used to playing and in turn losing. you are so used to either being completely safe in your journeys or being able to call a 1k man gang from 60 jumps away to join you in massacring a 100man gang in a matter of mins. its time that people realised that logistics are a part of this game, they arnt a boring part either. besides how would you know... most of you didnt live through the old days. ^^Highsec carebear That makes it so that there will be MORE engagements. Screw logistics. As stated. If you cant handle logistics. GTFO of null. Its the capital nerfs that are going to effect people. We will see more stratigic capital positioning. People wont leroy it in if it takes 10 seconds to cyno out. Usually if u see someone appear on your overview you can cyno out.... If it takes 10 seconds your gunna be pointed before you can get to warp. I think ill hang around this thread and watch it
Diomedes Calypso	Posted - 2011.01.17 07:28:00 - [147] If the goal is to try to chip away at mega nap etc Instead of eliminating jump bridge I'd start first with the standings function This is a game and of course you tweak the rules and dynamics To create game play. Not everything needs to make exact sense If you only allowed a corporation to set two other corporations above neutral and maybe only two red. You'd cause all sorts of chaos for larger groups. Change jump bridges to only work for people actually blue to the owning corporation Restrict Corp membership to 250 members. Restrict alliances to three corps You wouldn't restrict players from making agreements yet you'd deny them the in game tools making it so easy It would leed to huge numbers of friendly fire episodes. Noses bent out of shape when a Corp didn't get on smothers limited friend list etc You could still help each other in battle sorting by Corp name etc. But the bigger the blob and the grater you out numbered the others the more times you'd hit yourown Limitting jumpbridge use to the limited number of blues a Corp had eliminates pilots access to as vast sweeps Just a start there of a better way of reducing the negative aspects greatly while keeping the interesting aspects of the politics and logistics wrapped up in them
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy Spreadsheets Online	Posted - 2011.01.17 11:09:00 - [148] Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro Originally by: Jason Edwards My suggestion is change amarr outpost bonus from 30% time to 30% mineral. This gives a huge boost to manufacturing in 0.0 as opposed to elsewhere. People then do it there. You then need minerals there and mining in 0.0 becomes further boosted. What Would Actually Happen: People build 425mm railguns 24/7 at the new stations for 70% of the usual cost. Haul them to refinery outpost in neighbouring system ??? Profit! Net result - even less mining / hauling than at present Since my post wasnt a troll and you made a good point. Then perhaps the opposite? Nerf high-sec slots by the 30%, lowsec by 15% and leave 0.0 the way it is. Leaving POS the same as ever. This would make highsec pos manufacturing competitive and perhaps there will be big wars waged over highsec moons. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.01.17 12:01:00 - [149] If force projection is the issue that needs solving but in doing so we hit basic logistics (gotta have that toilet paper in time!) then a 'solution' like that proposed by the MM guy (sorry can't remember and too lazy) is near perfect: Restrict bridge networks to industrial ships (Haulers, Transports, ORE, Freighters(?)). We can go even further and add a mineral compression module for POS's or outposts plus allow transports and even JF's to haul compressed materials. Military projection is already being handled quite handily by Titans, although the range with which they can do it is questionable. Limiting range (ex. swap bridge range with BO) or adding some sort of delay to the cyno mechanics could both help alleviate the force projection part. It would negatively impact ratters that habitually rat a bazillion jumps from their base of operation but not a lot of sympathy for creatures of luxury like that from me.
Jagga Spikes Minmatar Spikes Chop Shop	Posted - 2011.01.17 12:29:00 - [150] Originally by: Samjack2 Or in simple terms. CSM can go to **ing hell. A. Cyno spool up... ok a get it. But a frekin 30 second spool up means your cyno ship better be a **in carrier itself unless you want it dead. Cyno on the field means people are gunna want to run or fight. Nothing was more awesom than dropping SC's onto the heads of invaders. ... or you could light up multiple cynos. objective division = blob divison. ________________________________ : Forum Bore 'Em : Foamy The Squirrel - [jedi handwave] "There is no spoon."



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.