EVE Search - [THE LONG-RUN]: How to restore the concept of corp pvp and improve EVE

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[THE LONG-RUN]: How to restore the concept of corp pvp and improve EVE

» 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)
Khutulu IV Amnesiatics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:01:00 - [1] Edited by: Khutulu IV on 23/06/2011 23:01:03 The issue of pvp being focused more on groups of 20+ players (blobs, depending on your definition) is the current norm. These groups are currently getting bigger and bigger as eve's subscription base blooms. I want to propose a mechanic that will make small 2-8 people based "corp groups" a reality once again. I propose that all lowsec and 0.0 gates have capacitor. This capacitor will recharge at a steady rate, costing a certain amount of cap per jump, possibly based on mass. The higher the lowsec security, the faster this cap recharges or the more cap their is. 0.0 capacitor would be able to jump lets say 10-12 people through without interruption all at once but the recharge would be fairly slow compared to lowsec systems. Capacitor recharge can be upgraded via the sov system. By now your probably saying "But Khutulu, how are we going to have blob fights, epic 1600 man battles, that sort of thing?" Well like everything else, cap can be transferred to these gates giving existing logi chains something to do while traveling, making it harder to move massive amounts of people, and balancing out the overpowered status of attackers in the sov game. I know there are a lot of lacking details but I guarantee that promoting the kind of combat eve was founded on, the concept of grabbing 4-8 of your buddies and getting some equal fights, is going to draw in a lot more people than space barbies/fubared monocles. I am aware there may be more pressing issues but a return to this kind of mentality would be a great one, allowing lag to be diminished and splitting up engagement zones instead of everyone pile on the supercap bundle and unleash fire. Jump bridges would defiantly have to be looked at to balance them with this proposed gate mechanic change.
Civ Zomas Jazz Associates	Posted - 2011.06.23 23:31:00 - [2] An intriguing idea... Perhaps with some fatal flaw, but right now I can't think of one. It seems worth investigating. Supported.
Khutulu IV Amnesiatics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.24 04:31:00 - [3] Originally by: Civ Zomas An intriguing idea... Perhaps with some fatal flaw, but right now I can't think of one. It seems worth investigating. Supported. In hindsight, I wish a waited to post this, I hope it doesn't get overshadowed by the whole Incarna debacle.
Dutarro Matari Munitions	Posted - 2011.06.24 13:29:00 - [4] Interesting idea, but for those who actually like blob-style PvP roams (not me, by the way) it would make their experience a bit tedious. Alternative: when a gate is activated more than 5 times in 30 seconds, an automatic alert is transmitted on some publicly visible channel. Big blobs could still move around freely, but their location would be broadcast to everyone nearby. Small gangs of 5 or less would therefore have an advantage of surprise.
Iggy Stooge	Posted - 2011.06.24 14:02:00 - [5] I would tend to think that the result of this would be less roaming gangs, and more camps. I fully support your wish to find a way to encourage people to get out in a 6-8 man gang and go looking for the ****, but this could have just the opposite effect.
Darryl Ward	Posted - 2011.06.24 16:23:00 - [6] One disadvantage would be that a huge blob can camp a gate, and you lack the ability to bring in a bigger blob to deal with it. This gives campers a numbers advantage that can't easily be mitigated, and time delays would give them all the warning they need to know that a blob is coming after them. I like the idea of discouraging blob warfare though, we need more thoughts like this.
Grath Telkin Amarr Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2011.06.24 18:20:00 - [7] No. I've gotten 100 kills in 2 days in 0.0 with 5-8 dudes, while fighting a force of 40-50 guys, from an alliance of thousands, in their home systems. If you want small gang PVP its out there, the trick to small gang pvp was never "Fair" fights, it was learning to exploit the other guys weaknesses and still get kills, no matter how many people he brought, while not dying yourself.
Khutulu IV Amnesiatics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.26 03:08:00 - [8] Originally by: Grath Telkin No. I've gotten 100 kills in 2 days in 0.0 with 5-8 dudes, while fighting a force of 40-50 guys, from an alliance of thousands, in their home systems. If you want small gang PVP its out there, the trick to small gang pvp was never "Fair" fights, it was learning to exploit the other guys weaknesses and still get kills, no matter how many people he brought, while not dying yourself. Alright well I dont know how you do it but I cant get solo fights unless its 10:1. Not everyone can be as cool as you guys.
Mattio11 Quantum Cats Syndicate	Posted - 2011.06.26 05:13:00 - [9] Edited by: Mattio11 on 26/06/2011 05:16:11 Edited by: Mattio11 on 26/06/2011 05:14:30 seems like a good idea.. BUT you do realise that you're asking ccp to create more code (more bugs) and complicate the game even further? probably cause more lag? What if it bugged and then suddenly you couldn't jump through the gate at all? While this idea is interesting and I kind of like it... I wouldn't want it to be implemented until many other issues in the game are fixed first and then i read this.. Originally by: Darryl Ward One disadvantage would be that a huge blob can camp a gate, and you lack the ability to bring in a bigger blob to deal with it. This gives campers a numbers advantage that can't easily be mitigated, and time delays would give them all the warning they need to know that a blob is coming after them. I like the idea of discouraging blob warfare though, we need more thoughts like this. yeah.. i think the OP may make things even worse actually... _____________________________________ "NO! TRY NOT!... Do. Or do not. ...There is no try!"
Herping yourDerp	Posted - 2011.06.26 07:57:00 - [10] alliance 1: we attack in 10 mins alliance 2: they can only have 12 ships come in at a time, camp with 30 ships alliance 1: Jump alliance 2: fire at will they are bubbled. * wave one is basically destroyed* alliance 2: lol killmails, reload guns for next wave.

Kripnlock	Posted - 2011.06.26 14:37:00 - [11] good idea , worth the effort to look into
Baaldor Ascendent. Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.06.26 15:24:00 - [12] Originally by: Khutulu IV Originally by: Grath Telkin No. I've gotten 100 kills in 2 days in 0.0 with 5-8 dudes, while fighting a force of 40-50 guys, from an alliance of thousands, in their home systems. If you want small gang PVP its out there, the trick to small gang pvp was never "Fair" fights, it was learning to exploit the other guys weaknesses and still get kills, no matter how many people he brought, while not dying yourself. Alright well I dont know how you do it but I cant get solo fights unless its 10:1. Not everyone can be as cool as you guys. Read what he says again, he tells you how.
Khutulu IV Amnesiatics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.06.28 03:56:00 - [13] Well in the case of blobs, logistics would be necessary to essentially keep the gate open, say a group of 25 ships have 5 logistics ships, under my model, those 5-8 logistics ships could help to move the 25 man gang relatively un-hindered. Say there is a giant gang on gate and you have a small invading force, it makes the roles of scouts much more important. Finding alternate routes as an attacking force, that sort of thing. AND, when you start pwning face the campers cant just jump through. Shooting down an idea on a basis that it will create bugs means theres something wrong with the game not the idea...
Baaldor Ascendent. Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.06.28 21:43:00 - [14] Originally by: Khutulu IV Shooting down an idea on a basis that it will create bugs means theres something wrong with the game not the idea... Essentially shooting down an idea based on putting arbitrary mechanics in game, because you can not figure out how to over come the issues when others can, is a great reason.
Hekira Soikutsu	Posted - 2011.06.28 22:16:00 - [15] Edited by: Hekira Soikutsu on 28/06/2011 22:20:05 Gatecamps will now have people on both sides constantly jumping through to deplete the capacitor. Unless you can tell if a gate is capped out from across system... Goodbye Buzzard and Viator. Additionally, you encourage more static pvp since people would rather have other people jump into their fleet rather than jump their fleet into others in ones and twos.


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.