Smells like Butthurt FC.

What's the warp bubble do? It does precisely what military strategists and tacticians have spent centuries trying to perfect GÇô it holds the enemy for you. Your tactics don't. Your skills don't. Your preparation doesn't. It does.

Want to follow the doctrine of having no choke points in your computer game?

. What's the warp bubble do? It does precisely what military strategists and tacticians have spent centuries trying to perfect GÇô it holds the enemy for you. Your tactics don't. Your skills don't. Your preparation doesn't. It does. There's no need to understand how to conduct warfare. There's no need to go to the extremes required to accomplish something. A little device introduced by CCP does it. You get to pretend you've conducted warfare.

GǪassuming you've done the required preparations and used skill to deploy it in a tactically sensible location. If you haven't it's rather trivial to defeat and won't hold anyone for long.
Why would they want that?

It does what? At MOST i've only everseen a warp bubble slow people down, never "hold" them. Holding them requires tackle, strategically spread, and the ability to keep tackle alive.

I might resonably assume you are referring to the experience of jumping through a gate only to find you can not warp off immediately on the other side. This is not your enemy holding you. You not surviving long enough to get out of the bubble, kill their tacklers, outrun their secondary tackle, and get into warp is what killed you (that and not having reliable intel via scouts or spies or whatever)

Bubbles slow people down and occassionally force them to engage in order to retreat. There are numerous real-world military tactics which do the exact same thing to an enemy, and they've been around since we were throwing sticks at each other.

Edit: Read a few more posts, now I think people are just trolling. I give up.

Bunch of pompous, quasi-intellectual, incoherent tripe

No one in real combat can instantly warp out either. Without warp bubbles, there's no way to inflict meaningful losses on an enemy fleet.

What would you propose instead?

Useful interdictors ?

In warfare on earth you had terrain, something non-existant in eve.

Bubbles don't shut off your MWD or your AB, they just shut down your ability to WARP. If you fleet gets cut down cause it was forced to retreat through the swamp would you be as angry? I liked your post up until you erroneously claimed bubbles were somehow more destructive then say the beaches of Normandy. We simply don't have such terrain effects here.

Well actually in eve is even worst.

Let me just tell you some of the occasions I have to put those:

Pipes leading/coming from NPC systems: I win, no matter their numbers I will win, believe me, with obvious alts you know what is coming thrum, is there any thing they can do? -obviously not.

Gates leading directly to high sec: take a close look at some of those, they're 100% eve time under bubbles

Then, you have null sec peeps, so stupid, so unbrained, so really meaningless to whatever you can consider has close to 'interesting" talking about "high sec" carebears not wiling to go to null....

Obvious stupid rabbits are really stupid, right?

In null sec: traffic systems betweens regions (you can't pass other way unless you choose it manually), if you don't have any bubble you can expect Sabres in less than 5 jumps for sure.

So, is this really appealing for high sec carebears? -you have to be kidding.

Edit: all this to say that dictors are really enough to make null sec not appealing and an excellent tool to neutralise entire fleets, no need stupid bubbles for no brained stupid rabbits that put them there and run out if you ever out number them at least by 1 ...

In warfare on earth you had terrain, something non-existant in eve.

Bubbles don't shut off your MWD or your AB, they just shut down your ability to WARP. If you fleet gets cut down cause it was forced to retreat through the swamp would you be as angry? I liked your post up until you erroneously claimed bubbles were somehow more destructive then say the beaches of Normandy. We simply don't have such terrain effects here.

Tippia. You're so good at rationalizing.

I must have better luck than you do. I watch my map, scout my routes and only occasionally get eaten, now mind you it takes a long time to be cautious and it is very frustrating when eaten, but I do enjoy the challenge. You can destroy the bubbles by the way, so I don't see it as perma terrain. if your experience is that on a certain route it is perma camped, then take a different one. If EVERY route is perma camped, then sure don't go into the grinder.

I'm not entirely sure what's going on here anymore.

Are carebears complaining they can't fly solo into null-sec? Or are pvp-ers complaining they can't fly solo into null-sec?

My GOD if only there was another way to get into null-sec! If only there was a way to move multiple ships through a gate at once, like, say, a "fleet," as they would call it in the real world! If only we had the power!

CCP! Make it possible to assemble fleets of ships! Give us the tools to see how many of our brothers and sisters have died in the system within the previous hour, heck give us ships that can move unseen through these dastardly "bubbles" which are RUINING the game we all pay dearly to play!

How is a solo player supposed to SURVIVE in null-sec, constantly running into these evil creations of yours!

Our cries fall on deaf ears, and as evidenced by the abnormally high number of people screaming "wtf is your problem OP?" in this thread! The disease is clearly spreading!

Repent! The End of Eve is nigh!

Since the inception of warfare a single goal of every field commander is to defeat the enemy in detail - to, in one decisive battle, destroy an enemy's ability to fight and so conclude a war unquestionably. Oddly enough, this is the most rare occurrence in the history of warfare. It has been done so few times no serious military structure even considers limiting their plans to such an event. The problem with this is a corresponding ambition GÇô he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day. Right along with the ambition to defeat an enemy is the primary goal of keeping one's army intact GÇô to not lose the army.

There are basically two types of warfare. The first is by agreement. Both sides intend to confront their opponent with the intention of roundly defeating them. The U.S. Civil War is one such conflict. Wellington's pursuit of Napoleon was another. The second is called "war of aggression." One side with military advantage invades the other in hopes of conquest. The invaded party (usually militarily inferior) is thrust into a survival mode wishing primarily to stay alive and viable, then secondly to achieve a significant victory in the field. In the first instance, it's unlikely either force will cut and run. In the second, the possibility of disengagement is crucial to the defender's strategy.

Every commander that's ever taken the field against an inferior force has secretly wished for a method, or device to absolutely hold the enemy on the field. Every commander has also planned a line of retreat. Force deployment has always included an attempt to cut off the enemy's line of retreat, and every force deploys to ensure their line of retreat remains intact. In fact, this is the most significant situation all military planning faces. Strategies and tactics specifically account for this above all other factors. Any plan not accounting for this is considered by all competent military commanders as incompetent and the object of ridicule. It is the nature of warfare. All doctrine addresses it, beginning with Sun Tzu's Art of War, all the way to Sandhurst and West Point of today.

Being able to pursue, or evade the enemy in this regard defines a power's ability to conduct warfare. If a force is unable to do it, that force is not prepared to conduct warfare. It defines a weak, unviable force that is easily defeated, or one that is not yet ready to take the field, this is until EVE. In EVE you get the warp bubble. What's the warp bubble do? It does precisely what military strategists and tacticians have spent centuries trying to perfect GÇô it holds the enemy for you. Your tactics don't. Your skills don't. Your preparation doesn't. It does. There's no need to understand how to conduct warfare. There's no need to go to the extremes required to accomplish something. A little device introduced by CCP does it. You get to pretend you've conducted warfare.

Such a device could only be dreamed up and implemented by people with no understanding of the nature of warfare. It's a ditty dropped into what has the potential to be a grand and sweeping arena to demonstrate capacities and capabilities turning it into nothing more than a "power up pill" in a child's computer game. Not surprisingly as a result it's fallen into promiscuous use. It's laughable enough the hallucination of "warp scramming" and "webbing" can be accomplished by another device, without having significantly damaged the function of a warship GÇô you can "damage" a ship's ability to move without having damaged the ship. With the bubble, you can do this to ships in a large area, having fired not one shot.

Proud warriors would be embarrassed to use such devices. Infantile savages would use them with glee. That they exist in the game at all is testimony to the ignorance, and delusional reasoning used by CCP game developers. Want to follow the doctrine of having no choke points in your computer game? Get rid of them. Want to take what has all the potential of a majestic digital creation and turn it to an object of ridicule? Keep them. The laws of physics have spoken.

I'm not taking a stand but what would eve be like if only dics and hics could bubble and only frigs could tackle? It would be interesting to say the least. And anchored bubbles do work to marginalize dics and hics.

It would be interesting in a way but bubbles are a defensive tool, hics, dics and frigates are more of an offensive tool... and can be used (depending on the situation) to bolster an anchored bubbles defensive area.

It's simply a matter of using the right tool for the job.

In a situation where you don't have the manpower to keep a hic sitting on a gate for a protracted amount of time, say in a system with only a few people in it during certain timezones, bubbles also serve the purpose of buying a few seconds grace to get to cover... if the locals are alert enough to take advantage of them.

This thread is pretty silly though. Gates provide what would be passable terrain features in other games (or in RL) which server to provide points of defense (points of conflict, essential for any game that includes a combat component).

Bubbles provide the function of a defensive fortification at those points, although they in themselves provide no actual protection... they simply keep an intruder from having the ability to instantly reposition anywhere they like. Compared to defensive fortifications in other games (and most certainly in RL) they are very, very limited. In truth, they are more like an area of limited mobility... like a swamp or very rough terrain.

We probably should not get into the variety of ways to circumvent them directly, or bypass them completely, as that would inject far too much logic into the thread.

Instead let me point out that if bubbles were the only thing keeping the bulk of the population of EVE in high sec space, then low sec would be full to the brim with care bears living high off the hog without a care in the world.

But as we know, that's not true.

You outline the desirability of gaining the tactical advantage of trapping a foe and then go off on some rant on how it is undesirable.

Quit posting. Seriously.