Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
knobber Jobbler
200
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 14:29:00 -
[91] - Quote
To the OP and other with no common sense or experience:
The mount daily 250 man fleets you need an Alliance of thousands.
If you limit fleets in system, the larger alliance will rotate fleets in and out, you still lose.
Sov is a numbers game, its about building relationships, politics. Apart from structure mechanics and a few balance issues its working as intended. Sorry. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4528
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 14:30:00 -
[92] - Quote
10 guys want this constellation for themselves
100 other guys want the same constellation.
CCP should obviously side with the 10 guys because Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Solstice Project
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1730
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 16:30:00 -
[93] - Quote
I really wonder in what kind of real worlds most people live in, to come up with such logic. Inappropriate signature removed. Spitfire |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
255
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 18:19:00 -
[94] - Quote
Gillia Winddancer wrote:Currently large numbers hold no disadvantages in any real way whatsoever. Or rather, small numbers lack logical advantages.
Then once again, that is all thanks to local, gates, current ship detection system, cyno system and so on which pretty much entirely denies the advantages that small numbers should have. And which also is the cause for the high-sec versus low/null-sec debate...amongst several other issues that are constantly mentioned.
But what do I know. The big blobs obviously like the way things are now and since they are in the majority, it's an impossible feat to bring any changes whatsoever. Add on top the massive rehauls of game mechanics in a few places that would be required and you can forget about any solution to these issues coming anytime soon let alone at all.
What is clear is that CCP missed out quite a few factors when they designed the sandbox. I don't blame them because the issues at hand today are such that would be extremely hard to predict the outcomes in the first place. I'm going to bet that you've never tried to move 300 pilots from point A to point B. I know this because you seem to think that this is somehow an easy process without the sort of hurdles that smaller groups do not have to deal with. In fact, it seems that your actual contact with 0.0 and fleet movements are so lacking as to question why you consider yourself an expert on the status or direction of nullsec. Plans and statements built on false statements and assumptions are not things to be relied upon. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
255
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 18:27:00 -
[95] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Gillia Winddancer wrote:Andski wrote:Gillia Winddancer wrote:Currently large numbers hold no disadvantages in any real way whatsoever. you can't be serious Go right ahead. Start listing them please. And make sure you list points that are valid from a game mechanic point of view. That excludes voice chat, logistics issues (as in time taken to form large fleets), lag issues and so on. Game mechanic disadvantages ONLY please. So we can't take into account the fact that it takes a long time to form large fleets (which is a real problem), logistics issues (which, again, is a real problem) because of the amount of fuel it requires, the number of titans required , cap fuel, ammo etc, we can't take into account people being dumb and not aligning properly because they feel safe in larger fleets, or derping and warping to the wrong gate, more jumping through when the FC says gate red etc, or the fact that the bigger the fleet, the harder it is to get people to be in the right ship? Well, shucks, you're right, there's absolutely no disadvantage to large fleets, and since numbers are the only thing which counts, smaller fleets should never, ever, be able to win against larger fleets. Which is weird, because that happens all the time. vOv Well hell, looks like somebody already did my work for me. |
Malphilos
State War Academy Caldari State
154
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 20:25:00 -
[96] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Well, shucks, you're right, there's absolutely no disadvantage to large fleets, and since numbers are the only thing which counts, smaller fleets should never, ever, be able to win against larger fleets.
Which is weird, because that happens all the time. vOv
What's even weirder is that given all the nearly insurmountable disadvantages of the blob, it continues to prosper. And grow. You'd think the dimmies would have figured out that numbers aren't actually numbers, and the whole "make friends" thing is a short trip to logistical ruin.
Unless of course, you overstate your case ever so slightly.
|
Lord Zim
1297
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 10:13:00 -
[97] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Well, shucks, you're right, there's absolutely no disadvantage to large fleets, and since numbers are the only thing which counts, smaller fleets should never, ever, be able to win against larger fleets.
Which is weird, because that happens all the time. vOv What's even weirder is that given all the nearly insurmountable disadvantages of the blob, it continues to prosper. And grow. You'd think the dimmies would have figured out that numbers aren't actually numbers, and the whole "make friends" thing is a short trip to logistical ruin. Unless of course, you overstate your case ever so slightly. Actually, no, the weird thing is that you seem to take my post as "holy **** numbers don't mean anything", when what I said was "smaller fleets can, and often enough do, win against blobs". One reason would be that the blobs tend to be the tactic of choice for the players who are bad at eve, and fuckups aren't as visible in a 250 man fleet as it is in a 100 man fleet, which doesn't dissuade people as much from ******* up in the bigger fleets than it does in the smaller fleets. Another reason would be that smaller gangs are often flown by people who are more enthusiastic about PVP, have worked closer together over a longer period of time, etc.
In short, while numbers may be seen as an automatic advantage, the reality is that there are disadvantages which must be (and also often are) overcome. It isn't an automatic win, and people who say it is, are wrong.
Ask Gypsy Band about how our numbers in fleet grant us automatic victories. |
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
147
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 10:37:00 -
[98] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: In short, while numbers may be seen as an automatic advantage, the reality is that there are disadvantages which must be (and also often are) overcome. It isn't an automatic win, and people who say it is, are wrong.
Ask Gypsy Band about how our numbers in fleet grant us automatic victories.
Listen to that man.
Btw: Much respect for Gypsy Band, you guys know how to PvP, hands down. Always GFs. |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
325
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 10:42:00 -
[99] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Ask Gypsy Band about how our numbers in fleet grant us automatic victories.
Please don't remind me. It's too painful. |
Aareya
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 10:56:00 -
[100] - Quote
The problem smaller alliances have is that they want to go to 0.0 to grow and become a well run alliance. If you're alliance isn't run well, getting into 0.0 (and staying there) is substantially harder. |
|
Ptraci
3 R Corporation The Irukandji
616
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 11:08:00 -
[101] - Quote
Frank Gallagher wrote:I just thought i'd get a discussion going on how you could possibly fix 0.0 so that smaller alliances could get out and take on the bigger alliances for their sov.
There is an easy fix. Go play on the test server.
Seriously just re-reading your request should show you how clueless you are. Perhaps "CCP figure out a way so that it's not so easy for a large alliance to smash a smaller one and take their sov" would have more merit. But "let me be able to destroy someone bigger than me - just, because..." yeah right. Grow your alliance how's that? Go step on some little guy and take his sov, with the blessing of a larger alliance. Impress them. Show them you are worth having as a neighbor.
|
Malphilos
State War Academy Caldari State
154
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 11:10:00 -
[102] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Actually, no, the weird thing is that you seem to take my post as "holy **** numbers don't mean anything", when what I said was "smaller fleets can, and often enough do, win against blobs". One reason would be that the blobs tend to be the tactic of choice for the players who are bad at eve,...
Actually I suggested you overstated your case, something you've apparently tried to address here by limiting the scope of your meaning.
Can a smaller fleet win a limited engagement? Sure. But in the big picture the current narrative of EVE is precisely the story of numbers. The advantages of the blob quite obviously outweigh the difficulties of getting the herd moving.
And did you mean to say that a 100 man fleet is what you mean by "small gang"? If so, that in itself kinda makes the point.
|
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din Dark Therapy
1016
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 11:11:00 -
[103] - Quote
Make more space. More nullsec and lowsec.
Make 'different' areas, like nullsec that is an island and is out of jump range of any current null or lowsec, make islands of lowsec in the middle of nullsec, make islands of nullsec in teh middle of lowsec, mix it up and get variation.
Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
Lord Zim
1297
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 11:26:00 -
[104] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Actually, no, the weird thing is that you seem to take my post as "holy **** numbers don't mean anything", when what I said was "smaller fleets can, and often enough do, win against blobs". One reason would be that the blobs tend to be the tactic of choice for the players who are bad at eve,... Actually I suggested you overstated your case I did not.
Malphilos wrote:Can a smaller fleet win a limited engagement? Sure. But in the big picture the current narrative of EVE is precisely the story of numbers. The advantages of the blob quite obviously outweigh the difficulties of getting the herd moving. What you're looking for here is tenacity, not just numbers. We've lost whole fleets to gypsy bombing runs, but we reshipped and kept up the pressure, and won. We've gone up against ev0ke back in cloud ring, when we outnumbered them fairly heavily, and they still won because they reshipped and we couldn't/didn't.
Numbers are not an automatic win, stop trying to pretend it's an automatic win.
Malphilos wrote:And did you mean to say that a 100 man fleet is what you mean by "small gang"? If so, that in itself kinda makes the point. I said "100 man fleet", I did not say "small gang". I couldn't give less of a flying **** whatever some ~elite pvp~ guy thinks the definition of "small gangs" are today, even if I tried.
There's more people playing, this is leading to an inflation in numbers in fleet, more shocking news at 11. |
Malphilos
State War Academy Caldari State
155
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 11:42:00 -
[105] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:What you're looking for here is tenacity, not just numbers.
Not "just" numbers, but numbers. Again, that's the current narrative regardless of your "automatic win" strawman. Make friends, eh?
Lord Zim wrote:I said "100 man fleet", I did not say "small gang". I couldn't give less of a flying **** whatever some ~elite pvp~ guy thinks the definition of "small gangs" are today, even if I tried.
My mistake. "smaller gangs":
Lord Zim wrote:Another reason would be that smaller gangs are often flown by people who are more enthusiastic about PVP, have worked closer together over a longer period of time, etc.
Still makes the point pretty clearly.
No need to be defensive, no one is saying it's bad or evil. Well, I'm not anyway. But to deny it's the truth is just stupid.
|
Lord Zim
1298
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 11:54:00 -
[106] - Quote
Malphilos wrote:Not "just" numbers, but numbers. Look up the word "tenacity". It has nothing to do with numbers, or friends.
Malphilos wrote:Again, that's the current narrative regardless of your "automatic win" strawman. It's not a strawman, the fact of the matter is that numbers aren't an automatic I win button.
Malphilos wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Another reason would be that smaller gangs are often flown by people who are more enthusiastic about PVP, have worked closer together over a longer period of time, etc. Still makes the point pretty clearly. A smaller fleet with higher skilled (no, not skillpoints) players can easily engage a larger fleet of chucklefucks and win. This has happened time and time again, the latest northern war has been amass with such skirmishes where the "smaller fleet" has won the skirmish against "the blob".
Malphilos wrote:No need to be defensive, no one is saying it's bad or evil. Well, I'm not anyway. But to deny it's the truth is just stupid. To insist that numbers are the only thing that matters is what's stupid. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
255
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 17:00:00 -
[107] - Quote
Alright guys, I've got a real question for anyone who thinks that "small alliances" need their hands held to move out to 0.0 space. What the hell do you expect to do in 0.0 in the first place? Lets assume a hypothetical here and imagine some future where your little 100 man alliance has moved into Tribute or wherever the hell you want. What then? You enthusiastically rat in your system or pair of systems? You camp both gates you control? You set up a pos and mine coablt until its coming out of your ears? Realtalk here. What is the goal here?
Also OP, curious how you think that CCP would ever make your plan possible. From a purely mechanics standpoint its nearly impossible to imagine. Please share with the class the means by which you think that your proposal would be possible. I don't think you quite "get" 0.0 but would like it changed for your benefit when you arrive. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
255
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 17:02:00 -
[108] - Quote
Rico Minali wrote:Make more space. More nullsec and lowsec.
Make 'different' areas, like nullsec that is an island and is out of jump range of any current null or lowsec, make islands of lowsec in the middle of nullsec, make islands of nullsec in teh middle of lowsec, mix it up and get variation.
Or you know, wormholes. |
Random Majere
Rogue Fleet
15
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 19:22:00 -
[109] - Quote
At the turn of 2009/2010 ( I was just a noob), our corp joined a small alliance called Wayfarer Stellar Initiative. I guess you could categorized it as a small alliance at that time (probably around 60 active dudes back then if I remember correctly) . We managed to grab ONE system in Cloud-Ring. The region was occupied back then with a few alliances that were not necessarily blue to each other. I remember Evoke had a few systems, there was also Solodrakesomething and a I dont remember the others. There were also a few systems that were not claimed. I remember most of us were all excited just to own ONE system and it was fun to be there (and I died so many times flying in and out that region). Then IT and the southern block attacked the NC and things evolved from there (we were eventually invited within the NC and were offered some space in Fade).
Anyways, in todays 0.0 space, I wonder if a small 70-100 member alliance can manage to take sov anywhere in null sec, on its own like we did and keep it. I guess that is where diplomacy would come into play here.
By the way, I am not complaining about big alliances here. Just trying to figure out if it is not harder today for a small alliance to own a few systems (not renting), compared to three years ago. Harder? Easier? Same? Just wondering. |
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra Gallente Federation
194
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 20:49:00 -
[110] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Gorilla warfare. :v:
So chest beating and posturing threat displays? Isn't that what CAOD and Kugu is for? "I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
|
|
Johan Civire
Dirty Curse inc.
109
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 23:48:00 -
[111] - Quote
Frank Gallagher wrote:I just thought i'd get a discussion going on how you could possibly fix 0.0 so that smaller alliances could get out and take on the bigger alliances for their sov.
The blob has always caused the lag issues and node crashes, for which you gave us TIDI. The outcome of all battles will be decided on who has the most numbers in system. But what about the smaller alliances in game, how do they get a foothold in 0.0 to grow their alliances ?
Fleets have a maximum number, and i think that should be all that you are allowed to bring to the fight. 250 vs 250 in a system would reduce TIDI and probably the stress load on the sever, plus fights would come down to skills and FC's abilities. Just imagine going into fights knowing that your 5 years of skill training and pvp experience will have some sort of outcome on a fight rather than it being who has the greater number of pilots.
Give the minnows and skill based pvp a chance please.
Sounds like you playing to many high sec space...... |
Kari Juptris
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:28:00 -
[112] - Quote
Rico Minali wrote:Make more space. More nullsec and lowsec.
make islands of nullsec in teh middle of lowsec, mix it up and get variation.
This is pretty much what NPC nullsec already is, minus the gate guns. There's a bunch of regions that house NPC nullsec smack in the middle of them (Fountain, for example) that pirates and solo/small gang pvpers can base out of to prey on nullsec carebears.
edit: granted, you still need to deal with bubbles in NPC nullsec. |
Kari Juptris
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:31:00 -
[113] - Quote
Frank Gallagher wrote:
Fleets have a maximum number, and i think that should be all that you are allowed to bring to the fight. 250 vs 250 in a system
All this would mean is that you'd be fighting the pimpest faction/deadspace fit faction battleships you've ever seen, plus capital and supercapital support. |
Ayn Randy
Dark Falcon Operations
17
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 14:39:00 -
[114] - Quote
I dont think anybody understands what broke nullsec and it wasnt CCP.
CCP gave us the tools to build empires and we did. All thats broke about nullsec is that one alliance is bigger than another.
Stop complaining, its happened before, it will happen again. Those empires will fall, more will rise. Over time CCP will add new game mechanics to nullsec. But before that happens just get on with it and stop complaining. |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
255
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 17:49:00 -
[115] - Quote
Random Majere wrote:Solodrakesomething SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO [LODRA] aka Goonswarm shortly post Delve |
Senshi Hawk
Occupational Hazzard Get Off My Lawn
44
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 18:23:00 -
[116] - Quote
This problem that the OP is having, which I am not acknowledging as an actual problem, is not unique to EVE. This is how a political structure works in video games. Strength in numbers. A small alliance can only "win" by doing very specific things.
- Rent from or join the bigger alliance, bolster both of your numbers.
- Refugee style. Quietly take space. Do not overcommit. Know your role and leave when it is no longer safe.
- Liberate. Run a gimmick and form a coalition with many similarly sized alliances, with a heading to "butt heads with a bloc", while secretly doing so for personal gain rather than the good of the coalition. In my experience in other games, the "personal gain" I speak of is the public recognition that you had the balls to fight the big boys. This usually translates to new members. But, like the refugee style, make sure you get out when it's time to get out. You're not there to win the war.
|
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
314
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 18:30:00 -
[117] - Quote
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:Frank Gallagher wrote:
Give the minnows and skill based pvp a chance please.
Just negotiate with an already established alliance to live in their area and prove yourself useful, then when you have earned their trust negotiate your own system (or help them win the land for you to live in). Realistically in EVE as in real life politics you need friends on the international stage or you'll struggle to get anything done. Swallow your pride and cozy up to a "big" alliance while you establish yourself as a nullsec alliance. Bam! Kitchner nailed it.
If you can't be good at something, then what makes you think that you deserve to be in space "held" by those who have put in the time, effort and resources to acquire that space?
Groom your pilots to be excellent at something. Anything. Then you will find your niche, people will notice and conversations might start taking place. 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284 Characters 284286 |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |