EVE Search - Castles vs Crashers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Castles vs Crashers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2011.03.21 19:44:00 - [1] Currently I have seen alot of suggestions concerning territorial warfare on alot of boards lately, many of either complaint, fixes, suggestions. Everything from cloaking, resources, logistics, and communications. Yet seems that most of these quibs are seemingly shallow in compairson to the overly daunting task of preserving Castles vs Crashers concept. Castles are designed to be safe in. Crashers are designed to break Castles. If you make a castle too hard to crash why bother breaking them? If you make a castle too easy to crash why bother building them? Currently, in a messed up sense its 'balanced'. Despite there seems to be an awfully steep requirement to crash a castle these days with battles massing easily into the thousand participants. This is paritally okay especially if this is supposed to be the very last part of the castle to bring down. Yet this is all what the game consists of as of now, there is very little to no need to nibble away at the 'walls' of castles. Yet from a massive picture out look there are alot of suggestions that seemed better at smaller scale that dont fit to well with the biggest picture. For example, Afk cloaking is along the lines of making castles too easy to crash, yet removing cloak all together wouldnt make crashing any harder or 'easier'. The counter suggestion for afk cloaking was removing local. This is directly on the line of making castles too easy to crash. Yet its presence makes crashing a castle a bit daunting at times as its an easier for defenders to pick up early attacks. removing local would only cause players to refresh their map often though looking for blobs in thier sector. Yet as we continue to come up with new ideas and new suggestions we have to be careful which side of the castle wall we are pushing on, push it in too much one direction would cause the wall to fall over into the result of why even bother? So I would like to open a disucssion about ideas that you may have once thought was good on the smaller picture but doesnt fit too well with castle vs crashers concept. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 25FEB11
baltec1	Posted - 2011.03.21 19:56:00 - [2] I would use these for attacking a castle
Shurikane	Posted - 2011.03.21 19:59:00 - [3] A good deal of the whole crux lies on the how-many-people-are-online fulcrum as far as I'm concerned. Regardless of defenses, a castle becomes brittle if too little alliance members are online, and too strong if too many are online. Since there is no limit to the amount of persons in a single given fight, this all boils down to "How many sheer numbers can I send into the bloodbath?" I'm not going to start mentioning every tiny little exception here - just that in general, a fleet will chase a smaller fleet around, or seek to avoid a bigger fleet, that's it that's all. I've been in favor of limited-player battlezones for a long time. Some way, any way that restricts the factions to field in a limited number of craft so that you end up with the sort of decision-making you'd see in the Alliance Tournament. Unfortunately, this goes against pretty much everything that makes an MMO an MMO, and hence any mention of it either largely gets ignored or earns me a slew of 'lol gb2WoW, noob' comments. AFK cloaking breaks one of the prime principles of EVE, which is "You're not safe anywhere whatsoever". If it's taking so long to get a response to that, I assume it's because the devs are looking for a way to make the practice viable, but not invincible, while at the same time keeping the fix from stepping on the toes of other cloaking practices.
Barakkus	Posted - 2011.03.21 20:03:00 - [4] Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle This tbh. - - [SERVICE] Corp Standings For POS anchoring
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2011.03.21 20:28:00 - [5] Numbers to play a big part and the thing is its the killer to any new idea, that comes up. If I where to get 1000 players with ablity x how would other 1000 players feel or manage without ability x? However making castles too hard to crash may have resulted in such massive numbers in the first place however I would partially disagree with the statement as one other person pointed out a small fleet of 100 pilots (by today's standards not in my veteran days in GW1) could take one out in 2.5 minutes yet we get 1500 player battles spawling to kill the similar target to assure its safety or destruction. I picked cloaking because its one of the easier ones to pick at as it has a suggested solution on both sides of the wall. Where as oh say jump bridges/cynos are a bit iffy. Removing said items may just make it very hard to defend the castle on the other hand would it really matter, thier removal would just mean players would show up in even greater numbers just to get in thier capitols. But alas its not the only subject in question though, super capitols come to mind and roles for small ships in the grand scheme of warfare being so undervalued lately Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 25FEB11
rootimus maximus Caldari	Posted - 2011.03.21 20:35:00 - [6] Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle Do they do an Amarr version?
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2011.03.21 20:41:00 - [7] Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle Classic example of castle vs crasher here honestly. The solutions to this was to build higher walls. build moats, and catapults. All which resulted in making crashing the castle a bit harder but thats when the other side got more innovative with thier towers. From a game prespective it can be easily balanced my making moats or building a catapult inside the wall to knock it down because that just further denies the defender mobility and options inside the castle yet the outsider can easily just play pick away at it. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 25FEB11
baltec1	Posted - 2011.03.21 20:51:00 - [8] Originally by: rootimus maximus Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle Do they do an Amarr version? I hear they use trumpets and wait for the walls to fall over. I did find the minmatar version though.
Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon	Posted - 2011.03.21 21:06:00 - [9] Castle Crashers I've always kinda wanted to try this. Oh, and Fat Princess. But alas I am not a filthy console peasant.
Rastor Tian	Posted - 2011.03.21 21:20:00 - [10] Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle How does horse climb ladder?

Sisohiv Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2011.03.21 23:50:00 - [11] Originally by: rootimus maximus Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle Do they do an Amarr version? Same is this one only you get a nice flashlight.
Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2011.03.22 04:33:00 - [12] Posting in a stealth afk cloaker whine thread, the way afk cloaking was shoehorned into an otherwise clever analogy is a dead giveaway. - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
GizzyBoy	Posted - 2011.03.22 07:40:00 - [13] castle can easily become a prison when under siege. defenders can be at disadvantage versus well planned and motivatied attack / siege either through denial of isk or resources. castle only buys you time.
Vito Antonio	Posted - 2011.03.22 08:09:00 - [14] castles bro
Cidwm	Posted - 2011.03.22 10:18:00 - [15] In medieval siege warfare, it was usually better to starve your opponents out. wait for resources to crash or for the enemy to get desperate and paranoid. Full scale assaults were farely rare and usually happened as a result of the siege taking too long, defenders cut down to a certain number, or possible re-enforcements arriving or sheer stupidity on the command level. Granted, with the size of some of the territories held in EVE, that kind of traditional siege warfare doesnt apply with the amount of resources available within, but what about this... If Alliance A blob fleets with even 80% of there forces in one system... why not send in a slightly smaller force, skirt around them/cyno in behind them and start causing havok in there territory or block off there gate escape route? That was only an example. but if you want to avoid blob fleet warfare, theres probbaly a number of ways to do it, making it easyier to crush or defend a castle. Blod warfare is popular because it works in theory: opponent brings gun. You bring more gun. Im not a 0.0 pilot, so i could be talking out of my arse to some other pilots and this could even be happening anyways. Just basing a suggestion from some of the research ive done in the past. So please, be gentle with critism here :P
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2011.03.23 18:05:00 - [16] True having a large assormtent of resources inside the castle makes it one of the harder factors to crash it, however time and reinforcment timers seem to counter this mostly. A sever segreation of resources could cause castles to be crashed to easily but this is very unknown territory to what it would do entirely to 0.0 warfares. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 25FEB11
Mister Smithington	Posted - 2011.03.23 18:16:00 - [17] Originally by: Aloe Cloveris Castle Crashers I've always kinda wanted to try this. Oh, and Fat Princess. But alas I am not a filthy console peasant. Castle Crashers is a really fun game. You should find a friend with an xbox and play through it some saturday afternoon. And that's all I have to say on the topic of sieging null sec.
Prideful Caldari Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.03.23 18:20:00 - [18] Hold on, I thought this was a spaceship game?
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2011.03.23 19:11:00 - [19] Originally by: Prideful Hold on, I thought this was a spaceship game? It is, but we're making metaphores there. IE Dreadnaughts can be seen as the trubechete against a castle like Starbase. But the Castle concept is being applied in the term of an entire territory in eve, just there are so many bad ideas that would destroy the concept entirely in one side of the wall or the other. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 25FEB11
Val'Dore Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided	Posted - 2011.03.23 19:39:00 - [20] The best defense of a castle has always been the defending military. ~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ Tiericide

Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon	Posted - 2011.03.23 19:49:00 - [21] Originally by: Val'Dore The best defense of a castle has always been the defending military. I thought it was the surrounding moat full of poop (local chat).
Awesome Possum Original Sin. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS	Posted - 2011.03.23 20:12:00 - [22] Originally by: Val'Dore The best defense of a castle has always been the defending military. The best defense is a good offense. -Mel, cook on "Alice" ♥
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2011.03.24 04:48:00 - [23] No the best defense is making the enemy lose as many units as possible while losing the fewest of your own. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 25FEB11
Jekar Karok	Posted - 2011.03.24 11:12:00 - [24] Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle No way, man. It's all about the trebuchets.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.03.24 11:30:00 - [25] Originally by: Jekar Karok Originally by: baltec1 I would use these for attacking a castle No way, man. It's all about the trebuchets. Yes I saw some of these but I don't think the men would like that plan for getting onto the walls.


Pages: [1] :: 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.