| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lallante
   |
Posted - 2005.02.07 17:25:00 -
[1]
I would like an answer please
Currently, FA have a POS with a great deal of defences in YZ-
The Coalition opposing FA, could, on a whim, probably get 200 BS pilots into YZ to attack this POS, and realistically, something of this magnitude WOULD be needed to bring it down without huge losses.
The question is: How can we EVER take down POSs through direct assualt (and there HAS to be a way), if the number of pilots required to do so will WITHOUT DOUBT bring down the node for that area?
Either sort out Lag (which could be impossible), or make killing active POSs more realistic.
And please dont give me crap about "starving them out". If they have 2 weeks fuel and ONE t2 indy can refuel it, then youd need about 10 frigates on each gate all day (7 strength t2 indies) everyday + a force of BSs to counter anything the enemy sends, FOR 2 WEEKS! Its not realistic or even possible.
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
ShinRa
|
Saladin
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 17:31:00 -
[2]
I'm sorry Lallante but they can't change the game to satisfy 200 pilots over the remaining thousands. You will just have to admit to this test of resolve and adapt to the game in its current form. |
Eddie Gordo
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 17:32:00 -
[3]
To the best of my knowledge POS were intended to be overpowered when exodus first came out. This was to encourage people to actually use them. Maybe when POS get more profitable (I heard they were getting boosted in some way) The defences can be looked at and balanced a little better. Having said all this, I thought that drednaughts and titans were supposed to be the anti POS ships...
Instas??
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 17:36:00 -
[4]
"I'm sorry Lallante but they can't change the game to satisfy 200 pilots over the remaining thousands."
Am fairly sure if the game was changed so that engagements at that scale were less lagged (to the point of being actually playable) none of the remaining thousands of pilots would really complain... ^^;
|
Urfin
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 17:39:00 -
[5]
I don't even understand why people bother killing POS right now in the first place. The isk loss/time you cause the enemy is laughable, the effort - enormous, the fight - well, can't call hours upon hours of shooting the same object a fight. POS are clearly not meant to be killed right now, it's simply pointless.
So the 'first make them profitable and desired, THEN make then killable' sounds logical.
|
empire nublette
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 17:43:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Lallante
I would like an answer please
Currently, FA have a POS with a great deal of defences in YZ-
The Coalition opposing FA, could, on a whim, probably get 200 BS pilots into YZ to attack this POS, and realistically, something of this magnitude WOULD be needed to bring it down without huge losses.
The question is: How can we EVER take down POSs through direct assualt (and there HAS to be a way), if the number of pilots required to do so will WITHOUT DOUBT bring down the node for that area?
Either sort out Lag (which could be impossible), or make killing active POSs more realistic.
And please dont give me crap about "starving them out". If they have 2 weeks fuel and ONE t2 indy can refuel it, then youd need about 10 frigates on each gate all day (7 strength t2 indies) everyday + a force of BSs to counter anything the enemy sends, FOR 2 WEEKS! Its not realistic or even possible.
imaginary scenario 
|
FoRGyL
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 17:47:00 -
[7]
Don't think they even have an answer.
Or dare show that they don't.
-out-
*********************************************************
Ohhhh iyayaayaya puff ohh iyaayaya puff puff
PVR =Player vs Roid! Burr, scary peps!!! |
Face Lifter
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 18:04:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Face Lifter on 07/02/2005 18:10:33
There's more to games than positive and negative cost / benefit analysis. There are matters of principle
a respectable large alliance / corp wouldn't want enemy POS in their space.
I fear there's no good solution to the POS situation, since devs don't want to allow any chance of just a few players killing a defended POS. And at the same time, large group of players will never take a defended POS out, cause of massive lag. All those sentry guns got the "best" connection and frame rates, lag favors station defenses.
Trying to balance POS strength based on these factors would be like trying to balance a ball on a cone.
Once dreadnouts come out, it'll change tho. Then it would be possible for ~4 people to take out a pos, since lag won't be an issue and the combined cost of those dreadnouts would be far greater than entire POS. Just a hypothesis, but it seems logical to assume the devs will use the old "risk vs reward" and "cost vs benefit" cards.
|
Lallante
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 00:42:00 -
[9]
Well there HAS to be a solution, the question is, what is it?
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
ShinRa
|
sutty
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 00:50:00 -
[10]
Would need more BS erm more like 500.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 00:51:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Nyphur on 08/02/2005 00:52:15
Originally by: Lallante
Well there HAS to be a solution, the question is, what is it?
First, you need a Dev to come answer this simple question: Is the game client restricted in the amount of data the server will send it?
If it is, that's the cause and a variable bandwidth allottment system needs to be put into place. If not, we can rule it out and go on to finding the real cause. I do recall the devs once saying the game is locked to 28.8kbps per player to assure dialup users can play unhindered. The problem with this is that large numbers of players in the same place would produce too high a bandwidth requirement and the 28.8kbps wouldn't be enough, thus lag would steadilly increase and the server would become backlogged with data to send to people. That would make everyone on that node lag and although I'm not sure if this could take a node down, it is possible.
Bandwidth restriction is unnececary, though. It's entirely ineffective at preserving gameplay for dialup users. Any restriction would cause bandwidth problems. The only time people would have an advantage by not being on dialup if that system is in place would be if they were in fleet battles. If you made a variable bandwidth system, all the members of teh fleet battle's bandwidth usage would go up during teh battle, but the battle wouldn't run with any noticeable extra lag, unless you were on dialup. So, in effect, restricting bandwidth getting from the server to the client causes the very problem it is set to stop and it causes it for an entire node isntead of for those on dialup.
Like I said, squeeze that answer out of the devs first.
|
The1
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:00:00 -
[12]
Guys, seriously, do you really think a DEV is going to answer this question...or even respond to this thread in any way? They have a problem, they know it, but they will never admit to the player base that they know it. 
|
jamesw
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:05:00 -
[13]
Originally by: The1
Guys, seriously, do you really think a DEV is going to answer this question...or even respond to this thread in any way? They have a problem, they know it, but they will never admit to the player base that they know it.
Originally by: Dev Blog
recently started major optimizations to core systems to improve server performance, focusing on combat performance such as in combat and larger fleet battles
They know, have admitted (in a round-about kind of way) to it, and are working on it.
--
jamesw
Rubra Libertas Militia
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
I fly a dominix, its like a portable blob in a can
|
Cmdr Sp0ck
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:11:00 -
[14]
According to what i read, Dreadnoughts will be the anti-POS ships. They will be able to fit XL weapons i think
Titans will NOT be attack ships. They will simply be mobile refineries (according to CCP). |
Adhamhnon
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:20:00 -
[15]
Actually, you can take down a POS with a lot less ships, its actually pretty easy if you can blockade the POS owners from the system.
1)Get as many (30-40 would be best, but you can do it with less) long range damage battleships.
2)Get a couple of scorpions fill the mid slots with dampers and sensor boosters.
3)Get a fast ship to set a long range bm to the POS.
4)Warp in your scorps at the range bm, have them immediately lock and damp the control tower.
5)Bring in your long rangers near the scorps and start hammering... in a few hours, bye bye POS.
You'll also need a couple haulers full of ammo to resupply the attackers of course.
|
jamesw
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:29:00 -
[16]
So damps on control towers affect the range of the sentry turrets?
--
jamesw
Rubra Libertas Militia
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
I fly a dominix, its like a portable blob in a can
|
kurg
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:30:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Nyphur
First, you need a Dev to come answer this simple question: Is the game client restricted in the amount of data the server will send it?
If it is, that's the cause and a variable bandwidth allottment system needs to be put into place. If not, we can rule it out and go on to finding the real cause. I do recall the devs once saying the game is locked to 28.8kbps per player to assure dialup users can play unhindered. The problem with this is that large numbers of players in the same place would produce too high a bandwidth requirement and the 28.8kbps wouldn't be enough, thus lag would steadilly increase and the server would become backlogged with data to send to people. That would make everyone on that node lag and although I'm not sure if this could take a node down, it is possible.
Bandwidth restriction is unnececary, though. It's entirely ineffective at preserving gameplay for dialup users. Any restriction would cause bandwidth problems. The only time people would have an advantage by not being on dialup if that system is in place would be if they were in fleet battles. If you made a variable bandwidth system, all the members of teh fleet battle's bandwidth usage would go up during teh battle, but the battle wouldn't run with any noticeable extra lag, unless you were on dialup. So, in effect, restricting bandwidth getting from the server to the client causes the very problem it is set to stop and it causes it for an entire node isntead of for those on dialup.
Like I said, squeeze that answer out of the devs first.
Im fairly sure the client bandwidth is not the problem as such..
But Imagine the server/node has to service 200 ships
that means recieving the 200 chunks of info from the 200 clients, which should by the turn based nature only be a heartbeat and something whenever an action occurs, like firering a gun, changing course etc.
In itself not a problem...
But the server has to take this info process it, and distribute _all_ of it to the 200 clients
that 200 chunks incoming turning into 40000 outgoing...
Now add high rof guns (creating lots of actions), drones and missiles to that soup, and youll see even 1 fps turning into a nightmare since even with a 100 mbit outgoing connection dedicated to that node, you would only have space for 328 bits of info from each client going to the other clients per second!
THe only real solution is forcing clients to do less 'events' for instance lowering rof (in return for more dmg).
even the paranoid has real enemies...
|
Trey Azagthoth
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:35:00 -
[18]
The way I see it, there comes a point when a POS is invincible. Think about it, an alliance such as FA which makes a lot of ISK, does have the manpower to have insanely large POS's running. Put some hardeners on the shield and some EW and such, complemented with a lot of turrets and missiles/torps. And you are looking at an impregnable fortress. But I do give credit to the Devs for making POS's a possibilty. Just as with all other things, the kinks need to get worked out and that will take time and of course, feedback such as Lallante is giving. I think that feedback like this is key to making changes.
Vin Diesel claims he has never hailed a taxi. He just runs up to them at stop lights, opens the door, shoves the current passenger over, and tells the cab driver what his new destination is. |
kurg
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 01:41:00 -
[19]
might need to buy a mole in their corp get him or her to breach the defences?
even the paranoid has real enemies...
|
Chade Malloy
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 02:04:00 -
[20]
Originally by: kurg
might need to buy a mole in their corp get him or her to breach the defences?
now that truly opens up a number of possibilities...if timed right, one single person can bring doom over a fully operational pos...he has just to switch the control tower offline in the right moment 
Patience wins. |
Lallante
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 02:07:00 -
[21]
Good luck finding a spy with Station Equipement Deployment Role....
Dampening the control tower does NOTHING. You cant realistically outrange a POS and take it down.
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
ShinRa
|
Eleska
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 02:23:00 -
[22]
blockading the system is not a solution.
Before a few patches ago you could just leave an alt character fully stocked with fuel inside the shield.
However if you log/re-log in space now you seem to warp to the last object you had contact with be it a stargate or a station (not sure on planets/moons/fields)
So I'd suggest you leave unmaned indies, several of them inside the station shield.
Alt character logged in system in pod, warps to pos, boards industrials and resupplies ammo/fuel.
There goes your hard worked 2week blockade :)
down with alts 
TBH XL guns should not have been released as they are obviously suited to destroying far larger targets than currently exist. POS and STATION shields/hitpoints should not be at this level untill the bigger hitting ships are launched.
Take a fleet of 100ships 4hrs to drop the shields on conquerable stations, which have same hitpoints as POS. (not all thoes 100 were shooting as it was a mixed fleet but still far too long, considering you need to provide a fleet presence for the shields to recharge, more time woo! otherwise the station can be recaptured instantly)
|
jamesw
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 02:30:00 -
[23]
Maybe they want you to anchor a POS at the moon next door, then give it a nudge in the general direction of the target POS.
PVP = Pos v Pos
--
jamesw
Rubra Libertas Militia
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
I fly a dominix, its like a portable blob in a can
|
Adhamhnon
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 02:47:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Lallante
Dampening the control tower does NOTHING. You cant realistically outrange a POS and take it down.
Well, it worked when some of us tried this on the test server, so unless they radically changed something... yes it does.
|
Lallante
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 03:56:00 -
[25]
do it on TQ, take pics and come back.
Its not realistically possible to do.
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
ShinRa
|
kurg
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 07:17:00 -
[26]
now now , no reason to be grumpy, hes just offering a possible solution.
even the paranoid has real enemies...
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 07:24:00 -
[27]
Lallante, mate, Rens, in the middle of Empire (where server resources are most available), cannot handle 200 people doing agent missions.
What makes you think CCP are likely to put more resources to YZ than Rens or are even capable of managing resources to the extent that 500 people can attack a station?
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Balthamael
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 08:19:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Nyphur
First, you need a Dev to come answer this simple question: Is the game client restricted in the amount of data the server will send it?
Im fairly sure that there is no restrictions on amount of data the server sends. Ive been running NetMeter while playing Eve and I've had WELL over 28.8kbps when playing.
"The GM might tell you to jam it where the drives don't warp"
drunkenmaster |
Lallante
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 15:35:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Lallante, mate, Rens, in the middle of Empire (where server resources are most available), cannot handle 200 people doing agent missions.
What makes you think CCP are likely to put more resources to YZ than Rens or are even capable of managing resources to the extent that 500 people can attack a station?
You misunderstand, I would MUCH rather they divided station shields by 5 or more.
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
ShinRa
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.02.08 17:59:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Balthamael
Originally by: Nyphur
First, you need a Dev to come answer this simple question: Is the game client restricted in the amount of data the server will send it?
Im fairly sure that there is no restrictions on amount of data the server sends. Ive been running NetMeter while playing Eve and I've had WELL over 28.8kbps when playing.
That's reassuring. I was going to conduct a similar test.
So it's back to the devs, I guess. It's a server problem.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |