EVE Search - Node Mechanics and JV1V Titan loss report

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Node Mechanics and JV1V Titan loss report

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Attonasi	Posted - 2007.02.16 09:02:00 - [1] This isn't a flame. RAGoon and numerous friends did a good job and just took JV1V and destroyed the POS where the LV Titan was being built. There wasn't a real fight, but they did a good job of coordinating the attack and moving forces in. I am going to describe what happened in this "battle" not because I want to flame or discuss the war. I want to request that any discussion of the war or attempt to hijack the thread in that way be cleaned please. The night started with 300-400 LV and friends in JV1V on the gate(there is only 1 in system). There were several large bubbles placed on the gate so you had to slow boat a minimum of 60km to warp. There were approximately 500-600 hostile forces that were trying to take the system. The hostiles jumped in in waves of 150-200 people. The first wave was completely whiped out. Also as expected a lot of pilots lost connection. During a subsequent wave the node crashed and of course everyone tried to log in. At this point more enemy pilots jumped in. The battle never really took place because pilots that lost connection in JV1V couldn't log in, but pilots in the adjacent system were able to log in and jump in because that system had less lag. I know people whined about jump queues, but if people cannot log into a system to defend it then it seems really stupid to let people from an adjacent system jump in and bypass defenses. If you are going to reset a node then you shouldn't be letting people jump through gates for a period of time while it comes back up. I also want to point out that the nodes are getting better. They would be able to hold up against past wars, but the current war is going to push the nodes too far as it did tonight. This is a craptastic way to lose a Titan and I do feel bad for the people in LV that lost that time and effort.
Shiv Katall Minmatar Ars Caelestis Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 09:10:00 - [2] Edited by: Shiv Katall on 16/02/2007 09:08:54 To be fair, it took just as long for us to jump in as it did for anyone else already there to log in. The very great majority of us waited over 3 hours before we could even log in to JV, then with the number of people there, to actually try to do something like warp or activate a module. It may have said we were in system, but I guarentee for most of us players, we saw nothing but black screen. We wanted to fight just as badly as LV did, it did not work out that way though. I dont blame anyone or any specific people, it is what happens when you try to throw so many people into a single place. Its a one gate system, we had to jump in that gate and if we did it very slowly then all of our forces would have been destroyed and rather pointless trip. LV had a huge force to defend it, we brought a huge force to take it. Was there any other way? Not really. ôNobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.ö
James Duar Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.16 09:12:00 - [3] The issue is simply the fact that JV1V held a target of opportunity that could not be ignored - an under-construction Titan. Frankly, EVE is going to continue to see battles like this so long as more ridiculously powerful singular targets continue to be added to the game, and the advantages of a single large force continue to outweigh the disadvantages. The Doomsday is not an anti-blob device, because the vehicle which carries it CANNOT be stopped by a small force, and nor can it be progressively damaged. Similarly, because of this, the chance to destroy a Titan under-construction is always going to be worth throwing every ship you have at both to attack and defend. Let's not forget, LV clearly threw everything they could find into this defense - the Coalition, knowing they don't have the SP, threw everything else and then some (the "I am going to be there" factor).
Tenschu	Posted - 2007.02.16 09:29:00 - [4] Out of interest, how does anyone know if there was a Titan actually being built in that POS? I thought Titan manufacturers tend to set up multiple capital assembly arrays to act as diversions?
FedEx Guy	Posted - 2007.02.16 09:39:00 - [5] Originally by: Tenschu Out of interest, how does anyone know if there was a Titan actually being built in that POS? I thought Titan manufacturers tend to set up multiple capital assembly arrays to act as diversions? It was confirmed by both posts on LV's private forums, and by spies who could see manufacturing jobs owned by the alliance. There was a 30+ day job on the only capital assembly array in the region. So unless LV was making a batch of 2 motherships, 4+ carriers or a whole ton of freighters at once, that job was a titan. Plus everyone knows they have an Avatar BPO so what else would they do with it?
Dafydd Merc Caldari White Nova Industries Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.02.16 10:01:00 - [6] Originally by: Shiv Katall Edited by: Shiv Katall on 16/02/2007 09:08:54 It may have said we were in system, but I guarentee for most of us players, we saw nothing but black screen. Thanks for your very level headed post. I agree with everything you said. Can you please repeat what I've quoted to those in your allied forces who are shouting "THEY HAD JUST AS MANY IN LOCAL AS WE DID!" With that in mind, is there not a possibility that while local numbers showed even, that you had more responsive pilots active than we did? Wait a second before anyone lights a blowtorch to flame, I'm not saying that was the case, I'm just asking if it was possible. I may have been in local, but I was in no way in game. I'm still not. How your allies managed to a) activate a cyno module, b) jump capitals in, c) warp to a pos, and d) activate modules on said capital ships, is completely beyond me. It would have been a fun fight. Some think 1000 v 450 is a foregone conclusion. They are not including our defensive posture nor our ability to resupply lost ships via local station in their calculations. Odds were a little over 2:1 - would it have been tough to defend, yes. Impossible? No. When CCP can make it happen, let's have them move us all to two private systems with one jumpgate and try it again, I'd like to find out the result. Eventually, CCP will respond to all of this, and one side will be disappointed. Let's see what happens.
McDeth187 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.02.16 10:21:00 - [7] Edited by: McDeth187 on 16/02/2007 10:18:32 This battle was definately won from the log in screen, sad enough. We would have much prefered to take it out the old fashioned way of fleet battles, but the truth of the matter is that that Titan would have been killed even if the node would have been 100% lag free. LV, you pulled great numbers for being right smack in the middle of US Primetime, but you can only ask so much of your members. To get upwards of 300 people to log in at 5 AM is something to be proud of, but going up against a force of more then 650 (Confirmed on Goonfleet Teamspeak alone) plus numerous friendly Alliances would have resulted in the same outcome. Ironically, this is probably the best way for that Titan to die. I'm sure most, if not all of the LV pilots in that system would have thrown every ship they had to at the attackers in order to save that Titan, but the truth of the matter is once your ship was destroyed and you had to dock and get another ship, it would have been all over. We had more then enough cap ships to take down that pos in less then 10 minutes, and we never even had our entire force in JV1V during the "battle" because we knew it would probably crash the node, and god forbid thats the last thing we wanted. (Hello node reset) So hey, at least you have ships to fly for the weekend, right? All in all, ****ty battle, but the outcome would have been the same even if there was 0 lag. I have never ever seen an Alliance turnout this large in my entire time in Goonfleet.
FedEx Guy	Posted - 2007.02.16 10:21:00 - [8] Edited by: FedEx Guy on 16/02/2007 10:21:54 Originally by: Shiv Katall How your allies managed to a) activate a cyno module, b) jump capitals in, c) warp to a pos, and d) activate modules on said capital ships, is completely beyond me. Out of the 65 capitals we had waiting to enter the system, about 40 made it into JV1V on the first cyno, and only 20 of those made it to the POS. Out of those dreads several dropped during the siege itself too. Luckily a POS leaving reinforced doesn't need much persuasion to fall over, and it was dropped within 20mins with a dozen dreads shooting it.
Li Shing	Posted - 2007.02.16 10:42:00 - [9] Originally by: FedEx Guy Edited by: FedEx Guy on 16/02/2007 10:21:54 Originally by: Shiv Katall How your allies managed to a) activate a cyno module, b) jump capitals in, c) warp to a pos, and d) activate modules on said capital ships, is completely beyond me. Out of the 65 capitals we had waiting to enter the system, about 40 made it into JV1V on the first cyno, and only 20 of those made it to the POS. Out of those dreads several dropped during the siege itself too. Luckily a POS leaving reinforced doesn't need much persuasion to fall over, and it was dropped within 20mins with a dozen dreads shooting it. Ahh, but we've already seen how easily a dozen dreads can die if they are properly taken care of.
FedEx Guy	Posted - 2007.02.16 10:49:00 - [10] Originally by: Li Shing Ahh, but we've already seen how easily a dozen dreads can die if they are properly taken care of. True, but even if LV had thrown every single ship they had at the dreads they wouldn't have killed them all before the tower went down. And once that happened we all know which side would have been on top ISK-wise.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.16 10:55:00 - [11] If CCP reimburses this or rolls back, I bet the next Slashdot article will be just hours away... -------------- In completely unrelated news, after careful research, the Guiding Hand Social Club concludes that no member of the Guiding Hand Social Club is guilty of corptheft.
Rennard Aku Soku Zan	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:00:00 - [12] CCP cannot reimburse LV losses, otherwise they have to reimburse all those ASCN losses because of node crashes.
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:17:00 - [13] Originally by: Rennard CCP cannot reimburse LV losses, otherwise they have to reimburse all those ASCN losses because of node crashes. Sure they can. They gave back all that ISK in the eve banking scam, and that wasn't the first scam like that to occure. So there is precedent for CCP to reimburse people even though they have not done so in the past. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Rennard Aku Soku Zan	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:34:00 - [14] node crash is the issue here, not a scam or anything else. ASCN lost few battles due to this and rather important ones.
DarkMatter Amarr Mineral Aquisition Group	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:44:00 - [15] CCP should be ashamed of themselves. All the work they have done over the last what, 10 years to make this game, and this is what we have? I hope there were some DEV characters involved last night on both sides, I hope they are embarrassed as hell this morning... CCP, when will we get real fleet battles? I'm guessing never, right? So why continue to pay for this, can you give us a good reason? Building the homestead That of which we do not speak of
Fubear Vogon Heavy Industries	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:50:00 - [16] Originally by: Rennard CCP cannot reimburse LV losses, otherwise they have to reimburse all those ASCN losses because of node crashes. I have been reimbursed for ships lost in Node crashes before. This was also around the time that ASCN we fighting BoB and 50v50 fleets were crashing the server.
Kirov VIII	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:03:00 - [17] This technic has been not use since some months by a "little" alliance ??? Jump in for crash the node and after you have the high priority for jump in and you can shoot ennemy one by one ? Sorry, but an alliance has been use this technic and destroy many other ... Now, It's good because this technic has been share to all ! The big advantage to use this technic is over and it's really good because all alliance can take this advantage and defend the territory. (The battle isn't inside the system but outisde :P)
Li Shing	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:54:00 - [18] Originally by: FedEx Guy Originally by: Li Shing Ahh, but we've already seen how easily a dozen dreads can die if they are properly taken care of. True, but even if LV had thrown every single ship they had at the dreads they wouldn't have killed them all before the tower went down. And once that happened we all know which side would have been on top ISK-wise. Assuming, of course, that LV did not have a force recharging the POS as well which would have made things a tad different...
Li Shing	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:54:00 - [19] Originally by: FedEx Guy Originally by: Li Shing Ahh, but we've already seen how easily a dozen dreads can die if they are properly taken care of. True, but even if LV had thrown every single ship they had at the dreads they wouldn't have killed them all before the tower went down. And once that happened we all know which side would have been on top ISK-wise. Assuming, of course, that LV did not have a force recharging the POS as well which would have made things a tad different...
Ghaelsto Kakram	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:59:00 - [20] If this is the way people think about using 'mechanics' the game really looses it appeal for all of us. But you can crash the node too? Well that's the most pathetic excuse I heared in a long time. When condoned I forsee way more node crashes and people loosing interested in not fighting.
Ghaelsto Kakram	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:59:00 - [21] If this is the way people think about using 'mechanics' the game really looses it appeal for all of us. But you can crash the node too? Well that's the most pathetic excuse I heared in a long time. When condoned I forsee way more node crashes and people loosing interested in not fighting.
Vansard	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:06:00 - [22] ;-) With all we have been thru recently, it seems like every important large scale military operation will be doomed for 'exploit accusations' (no matter if true or not). Would be nice if CCP could implement some policies to make sure the air is automatically cleaned after and the truth revealed. Otherwise with the upcoming wars we risk to leave in a stinky world of accusations.
Ascrethy Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:11:00 - [23] Quote: it seems really stupid to let people from an adjacent system jump in and bypass defenses. If you are going to reset a node then you shouldn't be letting people jump through gates for a period of time while it comes back up. Props to the OP, "hitting the nail on the head" without flame bait. As I walked through the valley of the shadow of death, I did fear no evil, as I carried a big stick, and was the meanest mofo in the valley
First Stotherd	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:11:00 - [24] They can't reimburse, or it would look quite obviously like they were taking sides on the war, as they didn't reimburse ascension in their war. CCP are in the middle of dev controversy and if they reimbursed it would be a very bad move.
hotgirl933	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:12:00 - [25] wanna take someones expensive ship construction down guys just zerg 2000 peeps onto a node
Tar om Minmatar Octavian Vanguard RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:13:00 - [26] stackless python :( We need a way to run a system on more than one processor. The way processor design is going, they're getting quicker but they're using multiple cores. Come on CCP, either fund some serious development by the python people or you're going to to have to look at another way to run the game. -- We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net "The belief in the possibility of a short decisive war appears to be one of the most ancient and dangerous of human illusions."
Cardassius Seraphin Technologies S.E.R.A	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:13:00 - [27] Originally by: Ascrethy Quote: it seems really stupid to let people from an adjacent system jump in and bypass defenses. If you are going to reset a node then you shouldn't be letting people jump through gates for a period of time while it comes back up. Props to the OP, "hitting the nail on the head" without flame bait. Funny thing is in the fight for 1V- we lost 1V- just because we couldn't get into the system after the DD killed over 200 Goons.
Ascrethy Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:16:00 - [28] Edited by: Ascrethy on 16/02/2007 13:13:33 Originally by: First Stotherd They can't reimburse, or it would look quite obviously like they were taking sides on the war, as they didn't reimburse ascension in their war. CCP are in the middle of dev controversy and if they reimbursed it would be a very bad move. the problem being that the loss was incured due to a fault in CCP systems, this is the very basis of a re-embursement claim. Had the node not crashed and the fight been allowed to continue, can I say for sure the outcome would not of been the same, no. But the fact of the matter is if you're reseting a system with a known war going on, not preventing jump in from the adjacent system is just plain stupid, byt doing so you ARE taking sides in a war by aiding the invading force. --------- As I walked through the valley of the shadow of death, I did fear no evil, as I carried a big stick, and was the meanest mofo in the valley
DarkMatter Amarr Mineral Aquisition Group	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:32:00 - [29] Originally by: Ghaelsto Kakram If this is the way people think about using 'mechanics' the game really looses it appeal for all of us. But you can crash the node too? Well that's the most pathetic excuse I heared in a long time. When condoned I forsee way more node crashes and people loosing interested in not fighting. Agreed! Why play this game if these are the "tactics" required to win... You don't even have to ******* train your damn skills if you can play this way and win... Instead of 0.0 alliance "playstyle" attracting players to EVE, it's now turing them away, execpt for the ones who believe this is a justified tactic... That just leaves cheaters cheating each other out of wins, not actually fighting for them... I'd like CCP to tell me why I should pay for this, plz give me your best sales pitch, I'm, really interested in hearing what you have to say... Building the homestead That of which we do not speak of
Strength Cow Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:53:00 - [30] Until a node can support the types of numbers in this battle, it is up to the players themselves to make a rule amongst themselves (for those who will accept it) that no gang can be larger than 75 in size in the same system. Large fleet battles will need to be a serious of mid sized fights until one side still has 75 pilots and the other side is out. Also, the OP was obviously written by a person who is on the LV side. I am neutral myself, but it was easy to tell he was a pro LV guy regardless of which side deserved to win or not.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.