EVE Search - The crux of Eve - to POSspam or not to spam

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The crux of Eve - to POSspam or not to spam

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.10 14:14:00 - [1] Originally by: Nafri I still prefer the combination of my idea and the other idea Give Stations reinforced mode, make POS modules which increase station HP, and take away the need to kill the POSes first. POSes should not be the only target in a war, as it is now. Sorry but most of you going "best idea ever" haven't really thought this through and/or have expereince in planning and operating with Capital Fleets. This will not alievate the situation at all, in fact it will make it worse. You will simply bring in more Dreads - say 40-50 and therefore more forces to protect that investment. Futhermore, the worst part about this is you will go back to the bad old days of Station ping pong. Rather than being able to claim soverignty and therefore not being able to target a Station/Outpost, you will have entire systems camped for weeks on end with Dread, Carrier and BS fleets a.k.a. Blob wars. This in turn leads to boredome and will end up killing Eve because people will simply stop logging in. Now I agree that the lag is bad but with careful planning it's not intollerable. There's a lot of mass hysteria floating around. CCP have said that the new Dragon Code that's coming in a week or two will enable better load balancing. Couple this with sensible planning a.k.a NOT blobbing and you'll alievate a lot of problems. Finally, CCP need to wake up. BM copying/spaming to artificially increase lag is bad mkay? Make it a bannable offence once and for all. When I attack a POS I don't want to wait 10 minutes for the grid to load up because my opponent is ejecting shuttles with hundreds of BMs in their cargo hold. You need to make anyone artificially increasing lag subject to a warning and then possible sanctions/banning from Eve. Make a Difference
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.10 18:07:00 - [2] Originally by: Nafri There wont be any pingpong when the station has a reinforced mode, it will come out of it like a POS, just the difference is that you will have a real battle for the station, and not another POS attack Of course it will, unless I'm totally not understanding what you mean? So what if it goes into reinforced mode? It comes out, it's lost. Defender goes in, puts it into reinforced mode, it comes out, it's retaken. Rinse and repeat. Like I've said, I've been involved in both the planning and the taking of POS and Outposts (as a Military Commander, FC of Support Fleet and a Dread/Carrier Pilot) and the lag, with well thoughtout tatics isn't as bad as it can be. The biggest problem we've had has come from stretching the limits of what's not exploitable (and I'm not making judgement on this, simply stating fact). If CCP make it clear that artificially generating lag is not tollerated, then you'll be in a position to assualt a POS without fear of loosing your entire Capital ship fleet. As for the idea of limiting what ships can enter a POS shield, that won't help because you'll just have 150 shuttles outside the shield ranther than in. What would be better is to have all unpiloted ships inside (or outside) the POS shield start to "decay" and self destruct. Cure the damn problem of people leaving shuttles outside the station due to lazyness as well and this will have a positive effect on reducing the lag. Soverignty isn't the problem, it's the way Soverignty is abused that is. Solve that abuse and Soverignty will act as it was originally intended. Make a Difference
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.10 18:10:00 - [3] Edited by: John McCreedy on 10/08/2006 18:15:30 Double post due to laggy forums. Obviously someone's attacking POS on here Make a Difference
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.11 12:54:00 - [4] Blob warfare has tatical advantages in certain situations. We where promised that Eve's new hardware would be more than capable of acomodating large scale fleet battles. Funny how Eve's laggier than ever since its implementation. Small, mobile gangs can currently change Soverignty which in itself is an entirely different discussion. The issue here is not Blob warfare. I've been in battles of 200 vs. 200 at a gate where the lag was no where near as severe as 40 vs. 40 at a POS. It's POS as an item that's the issue. POS cause lag. To blame the lag on blobbing is a falacy. Make a Difference
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.13 00:44:00 - [5] Originally by: Rynthran Thrandyr Edited by: Rynthran Thrandyr on 12/08/2006 23:18:29 I really like the idea of colonies/population. Why not go a totally different way for gaining sov in a system. Every system has a population. Having sov in a system means having the support of the majority of the population. Gaining and loosing this support could be done by various different actions/events, like: gaining popularity/support: - killing Ships and Assets(POS) of another Alliance in the system (and maybe neighboring systems) - killing NPC Pirates - mining, producing things / building up an industry - anchoring and maintaining POS - showing presence in large numbers over longer timeperiods (also showing military presence at the gates or station while the other Alliance is sitting at their POS) - colonizing planets in the system with billions of brainwashed fanboys of your alliance loosing support - loosing Ships and Assets to NPCs or Players of other Alliances - showing no presence All this would mean, that there would be many ways of gaining and maintaining sov in a System and would also generally help to encourage non blob warfare with smaller roaming gangs for example to keep the upperhand in a number of neighboring systems. Also it would make it difficult for an alliance to claim huge amounts of space without actually being there. And it would mean that continuously loosing large fleetbattles or not showing up to fight over a longer period of time would loose you sov eventually. This is a really great idea and makes 0.0 more interesting but not for claiming Soverignty. Prehaps something for Advanced Soverignty, assuming CCP haven't scrapped it all together. But at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, killing POS is still ridiculously difficult due to the tatics employed in so-called "Lag Stars" where you have 100 shuttles/frigs behind the POS sheild to maximise lag. Until such time as it's declared an exploit or game mechanics are changed so you cannot do that, no amount of changes to soverignty will work so long as POS are involved. Remove POS from the Soverignty equation and you negate any point in Dreadnaughts. People will simply take over a system and starve a POS offline because it's easier. People are getting off track with ways to "fix" Soverignty when Soveriegnty works fine. It's POS that are the problem and the associated lag that comes with them due to the aforementioned tatics employed by certain Alliances. Address the underlying cause of the problems involved in POS assualts, i.e. lag, and you fix Soverignty issues over night. Make a Difference
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.13 13:40:00 - [6] Hermia, I keep saying this. When lag is not artificially increased, POS assualts are a viable option. Yes things are laggy but laggy within acceptable tollerance levels. The problems arise when you have 100 shuttles behind the POS shield and your client is trying to render all of that on the screen. It can take 10-15 minutes for the grid to load then you have module lag on top of that. System Soverignty works perfectly fine as it is. It's the lack of will to do something about these tatics that's the problem. Make a Difference
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.15 19:06:00 - [7] Originally by: oveur I just came back from vacation but we have a lot of Infrastructure documents internally that I wanted to blog about, but it also need to address Instas. Oh, and system scanning. And upgradeable Outposts. And meaningfull Constellation Sovereignty. Let's not forget hitpoints of ships (especially capital ships) Well Oveur, it's time for you (CCP) to put aside a lot of things and get back to talking to your customers. Eve used to be so much better when we all talked to each other Make a Difference
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.15 21:57:00 - [8] Originally by: Zenst POS's as they stand at the moment lack the realtime interaction beyond onlining/offlining. What is needed is a level of interative control, thereby if you have somebody with skills, they can interact with the POS. Possisble area's are: POS gunenry control - can have targeting, skills to improve dmg and range (hard skills but still there). Just makes LagStar owner's job easier. Warp your Dreads in, wait 10 minutes for Grid to load, wake up in Medical Facility and 90 bn ISK is down the drain. Make a Difference

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.