Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Takhion
|
Posted - 2007.05.02 20:23:00 -
[151]
Admitedly I did not read all 6 pages of messages. I did see some discussion of (without details) of using tactics.. But from proposals of new enhancements, I didn't see much. Maybe I missed them.
Have the following or similar been suggested already?
Fleet formation bonuses Frigates by themselves and fragile. Frigates flying in formation with a fleet should be allowed to share the shield benefit of their larger neighbors (battleships and larger). I'm sure someone can come up with other nifty things that would cause smaller ships to be useful in "fleets".. but make sure there's some active component to it. just just training a "gang shield bonus" skill.. boring!
Tactical locations/terrain Isn't it unfortunate that the only thing collidable objects do in the game is mess up your alignment for warp? Wouldn't it be interesting if asteroid fields had a good chance to block larger weapons fire? (also consider new space objects like dust clouds, comets, etc) And certainly fighting amoung asteroids should be fun for small frigates and destoyers as they can maneuver around the asteroids easily in order to get the angle on the target.. while still remaining hidden from large portions of the enemy. (o, but unfortunately, other than being an annoyance to warp alignment, asteroids and other collidables do not block weapons fire.. but they should!) Battleships and larger would be much less usefulin such a situation. At least not as large weapons platforms.
Space Anomolies Go to any sector of space and just pan around your ship. See all those wonderful sights in the cosmos? gas clouds, nebulas, pulsars, quasars, black holes, comets, dust clouds... Why shouldn't those have more reality to them rather than just being a painted backdrop on the skydome? We could use such objects for tactical advantage! This presents all sorts of interseting possibilities.. Fightnig in someone elses system could be a big problem as it is a certainty they have scouted it out far better than you.. They could draw you into a nebula that they have already scouted out and know for a fact causes huge capacitor drain (or shield depleation, or acidic corrosion of armor (or non titantium plate armor)... the possiblities are numerous for quite a bit of variety here.
|
Drosssk
Minmatar Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.05.02 22:31:00 -
[152]
The blob is the just in game incarnation of the herd animal's(Read: most humans') self defense mechanism.
Its not going away, in any game, or out, ever. In Eve its just more effective because a level 60 doesn't beat 5 level 50s.
Area of effect weaponry is the most viable solution the bring fighting in line with what most of us are looking for(Numbers, Skill, and SP together as deciding factors, not just one of them alone).
Let us all hope they just don't botch it. (Its quite the fine line to tread) __________________ Sig removed as it is inappropriate. -Conuion Meow ([email protected])
|
Ischia
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 01:52:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Drosssk
Area of effect weaponry is the most viable solution
I really dont see how; afaict the most obvious (and probably least significant) part of blobs is the fact that all ships are near each other.
Introduce a game aspect (LOS, AOE, large gang penalties) to discourage the herd mentaility, and they will spread out just enough to avoid the penalty. Nothing else will change.
Someone else has already said we're unlikely to discourage big fleet battles since, in some sense, that is what people want to do.
If we accept that huge battles are going to happen, what I think we need to do is provide reasons not to super-saturate fire and to provide decent tools to give FCs and gane leaders the ability to be *way* more effective.
To discourage super-saturated fire, Ive already said I'd just nerf it...and by supersaturated, I mean reducing the damage of subsequent attacks when (say) more than 10-20 cruise missiles successfully hitting one BS in one second. More missiles for bigger ships; less for smaller; more missiles if the blast radius is smaller etc etc. See other posts for details.
In terms of tools, we could have Fleet and Gang targetting: fleet targets appear in all fleet HUDs, Gang targets for your gang appear in HUD; FC and GL can see how many points are ECM etc are on each target. Same for members.
There's a raft of things that would be done here to make FCs and GLs more effective and thereby give them more choices. Similarly, sharing this information across the fleet (or at least to wing/gang leaders) will give them more autonomy.
Do any of the FCs out there have an opinion on (a) if more tools would help and (b) what they might be?
|
WarMongeer
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 02:39:00 -
[154]
I must agree with the OP here. The way they're moving tactical warfare isn't inspired.
I can understand the blob vs game performance issues, but nerfing smaller ships isn't the answer here. If you want people in smaller more organized gangs (for both the fun of the people involved, and the performace of the game. What can you use then to get people to stop blobbing?
Carrots.
1. Move in the opposite direction. Either make an implant or a mindlink or something attached to command ships and/or bc's that gives a vicious (better than anything ingame now) bonus to small gangs of ships. Max of like 10 or 15, say because the implant/mindlink/ship bonus has a cpu meltdown if it tries to disperse this bonus to more than the max number of ships. And attach distance parameters to the bonus as well (if you have another allied gang within 1 au the immense em energy generated by the effect of the item/mindlink/whatever cancels out itself and any boni of the gang within prox. blah blah blah etc or whatever reasonable idea you can think of to logically explain this bonus.
So here you have an incentive to give people to organize small groups, rather than just nerf nerf nerf until you've ****ed the entire population of the game off. I will say that many of the above are right about the POS situation and how this has caused necessary blobbing in order to play the game to win. I don't know how to fix that.
|
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 03:27:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Gemini Zero How hard is it for people to grasp the difference between a fleet and a blob?
Think a five lane highway where every car is moving in the same direction at very high speeds vs. Santa Monica Boulevard at rush hour and thereÆs a blackout so the traffic lights are not working.
Were you there on the Wolfpacks course when I needed Rells to explain the same maneuver to me five times before I was able to do it? Get ready to be very patient (sir).
There are two separate issues here. One issue is people who aren't having much fun because all they do is sit in massive gatecamps, or go on massive fleet battles where they get instapopped (if they're lucky) or spend an hour or two clicking as fast as they can in a lag-ridden interface (if they're unlucky). That's the 'blob problem'.
The second problem is disorganized fleets. In Agony, we call those 'blobs', and ours is not the conventional use of the term. As satisfying as it is to take 5 frigates against a group of 8 heavier ships and do more damage than we took (damn I had fun today), that's not 'the blob problem' as far as the forums are concerned.
The simplest way to win an engagement is to bring more weight to it - weight of numbers or weight of metal. As much as we might like to pretend otherwise, our success in PVP-BASIC classes depends heavily on superior weight of numbers. Yes, we organize those people well, and without the Agony fleet commanders and scouts they'd probably turn into mincemeat, but one of the reasons why we don't engage squadrons of six battleships with our 20 frigates is because we know we don't have the weight to survive the engagement.
The fact that Agony is able to achieve relatively more with relatively less weight than most of our opponents is actually irrelevant to the game design issue here. On the glorious day when Agony is theoretically able to field 600 ships vs 2000 (I'm betting the 2000 will control the field at the end of the battle, but we'd make them pay for it), we won't be practically able to have that battle. Because the lag will destroy the game experience for all participants. That's the blob problem as far as the forums are concerned.
As Rells said, AoE weapons completely irrelevant to the game-design blob problem, and are destructive to those alliances using lighter ships. Encouraging tactical dispersal with AOE weapons does absolutely nothing to diminish the power of massive sniper fleets, it just means they'll spend a bit more time positioning themselves. And it means that forces which operate on a basis of concentrating their lighter forces more quickly and efficiently are disadvantaged.
Besides, why are Agony officers getting worked up over whether we're being called blobs or not? Call it a blob, call it a gank fleet, call it a roving gang, I don't care. (Although I was really pleased when I met someone who compared us to Reavers.) The important thing regarding Agony is that we can unleash a surprising amount of pain on our targets. And the important thing regarding game design is that more players will enjoy themselves better when they feel like they can achieve something meaningful as part of a smaller and less lag-ridden gang.
------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. www.agony-unleashed.com
Some people kill for money. Some people kill for politics. Some people kill for religion. I kill because it's fun. |
James Duar
Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 04:44:00 -
[156]
Edited by: James Duar on 03/05/2007 04:43:51 The blob problem is the lag problem is the "fleets suck" problem.
Fix one of the latter 2 and the first one more or less disappears. Fleets as they are make huge amounts of lag. Their UI sucks, they're impossible to organize. Hence, no one ****s around with bonus' because you're just lagging to goddamn much for it to mean anything.
Lag - related to fleets, also general. Lag makes everything stupidly more blobby. You don't do drive bys, you do less tactical warps, you use big ass gangs because lag kills your ability to manoeuver and react to problems. You only give simple instructions because when you try anything more complicated lag kills you.
Which brings me to blobs. Blobs are so called because of the map. They are so called because yes, they are disorganized. They're also the only thing it's worthwhile doing anywhere ever because trying to be more sophisticated is impossible because of LAG. Lag prevents all the ingenuity and thoughtfulness of a pilot from actually being of any use in a battle, because chances are you can't even turn on your guns or that gang assist module.
EDIT: And the best part is, no matter what Agony says, they can do is exactly JACK ALL when it comes to territory claiming which is at least 90% of the reason blobs are considered a problem - because they are a NECESSITY to claim territory by the game mechanics.
|
FlamingPotatoJ
Caldari Vale Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 06:00:00 -
[157]
What about a large smartbomb that does no damage directly, but does an emp burst of sorts. Maybe another t2 dessy or something like that that when fired, shuts down ships for a certain time period in a large area. Couple that with stargates having a set limit of like 10-20 jumps in a similar time span, it would break gate camping, and make the blob spread out in systems, with gates more like tunnels than a solid wall.
Also, having the ability for carriers and motherships to deploy human piloted ships, like stealth bombers and various frigate variants to do small scale fast hitting ops deep in "safe" 0.0 areas.
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 08:22:00 -
[158]
Blobs are still necessary to take down POS's which is why they exist yet people ***** about them. AoE weapons will only make the problem worse (and have, Titans lol).
|
Kate Nexus
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 09:21:00 -
[159]
why cant intercepters kill motherships? they did it in star wars
|
Ash Vincetti
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 09:54:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Kate Nexus why cant intercepters kill motherships? they did it in star wars
Unfortunately, we don't have "The Force" to guide our rockets into conveniently placed exhaust ports. -----
|
|
Ischia
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 11:14:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Kate Nexus why cant intercepters kill motherships? they did it in star wars
lol...Im guessing the motherships weren't designed by George Lucas(tm). They might event have has a small amout of input from someone trained in engineering.
|
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 11:27:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Rells
Originally by: G*****Juice Edited by: G*****Juice on 01/05/2007 03:20:14 I think whoever posted 'Line of Sight' as a possible solution should be given a billion isk.
There's no reason that my missiles should go straight through my buddies and hit my target. Nope, none at all. Want to employ tactics and kill blobs? Introduce some more realism instead of using the nerf bat.
LOS would be impossible given latency issues and the complexity of calculations. Until we all run 40 GHz 16 core computers and have T1 nets speeds, that kind of data flow isnt feasible.
LOS would have to be calculated server side, it shouldn't matter what computer the client is running on, just whether or not CCP could build a server to cope with the calculations.. ----------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Ash Vincetti
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 11:38:00 -
[163]
Edited by: Ash Vincetti on 03/05/2007 11:35:10
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
Originally by: Rells
Originally by: G*****Juice Edited by: G*****Juice on 01/05/2007 03:20:14 I think whoever posted 'Line of Sight' as a possible solution should be given a billion isk.
There's no reason that my missiles should go straight through my buddies and hit my target. Nope, none at all. Want to employ tactics and kill blobs? Introduce some more realism instead of using the nerf bat.
LOS would be impossible given latency issues and the complexity of calculations. Until we all run 40 GHz 16 core computers and have T1 nets speeds, that kind of data flow isnt feasible.
LOS would have to be calculated server side, it shouldn't matter what computer the client is running on, just whether or not CCP could build a server to cope with the calculations..
It would make sense that if all our machines are running 40GZ 16 core computers with t1 net speeds (relevant bit right there), that the server hardware would have scaled proportionally. The biggest issue is not only server-side processing power, but the network synchronization required in keeping 688-1200 clients updated with all the calculations and positional information symultaneously.
edit: typos -----
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 12:49:00 -
[164]
Originally by: BluOrange
Originally by: Gemini Zero How hard is it for people to grasp the difference between a fleet and a blob?
Think a five lane highway where every car is moving in the same direction at very high speeds vs. Santa Monica Boulevard at rush hour and thereÆs a blackout so the traffic lights are not working.
Were you there on the Wolfpacks course when I needed Rells to explain the same maneuver to me five times before I was able to do it? Get ready to be very patient (sir).
There are two separate issues here. One issue is people who aren't having much fun because all they do is sit in massive gatecamps, or go on massive fleet battles where they get instapopped (if they're lucky) or spend an hour or two clicking as fast as they can in a lag-ridden interface (if they're unlucky). That's the 'blob problem'.
The second problem is disorganized fleets. In Agony, we call those 'blobs', and ours is not the conventional use of the term. As satisfying as it is to take 5 frigates against a group of 8 heavier ships and do more damage than we took (damn I had fun today), that's not 'the blob problem' as far as the forums are concerned.
The simplest way to win an engagement is to bring more weight to it - weight of numbers or weight of metal. As much as we might like to pretend otherwise, our success in PVP-BASIC classes depends heavily on superior weight of numbers. Yes, we organize those people well, and without the Agony fleet commanders and scouts they'd probably turn into mincemeat, but one of the reasons why we don't engage squadrons of six battleships with our 20 frigates is because we know we don't have the weight to survive the engagement.
The fact that Agony is able to achieve relatively more with relatively less weight than most of our opponents is actually irrelevant to the game design issue here. On the glorious day when Agony is theoretically able to field 600 ships vs 2000 (I'm betting the 2000 will control the field at the end of the battle, but we'd make them pay for it), we won't be practically able to have that battle. Because the lag will destroy the game experience for all participants. That's the blob problem as far as the forums are concerned.
As Rells said, AoE weapons completely irrelevant to the game-design blob problem, and are destructive to those alliances using lighter ships. Encouraging tactical dispersal with AOE weapons does absolutely nothing to diminish the power of massive sniper fleets, it just means they'll spend a bit more time positioning themselves. And it means that forces which operate on a basis of concentrating their lighter forces more quickly and efficiently are disadvantaged.
Besides, why are Agony officers getting worked up over whether we're being called blobs or not? Call it a blob, call it a gank fleet, call it a roving gang, I don't care. (Although I was really pleased when I met someone who compared us to Reavers.) The important thing regarding Agony is that we can unleash a surprising amount of pain on our targets. And the important thing regarding game design is that more players will enjoy themselves better when they feel like they can achieve something meaningful as part of a smaller and less lag-ridden gang.
Ah finaly somebody from Agony I can agree with. You nailed it AND written it very well.
One thing that can help is a sophisticated fleet UI. Right now organising a fleet is a PITA. You have no way of effectively telling what ships are there if that is not anounced by the gang members. Would be great if the FC/sqad/wing/whatever commanders could see shiptypes of members (bs, inty, cruiser etc ...). The organize them into squads by shiptype at least.
A rework to gang bonuses could help. A frig squad does not need the armor/shiled hp bonuses that much, because they don't get much hp out of it. However speed is important to them. Again long range ships need tracking etc. Just a few thoughts ...
Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
Solbright
|
Posted - 2007.05.03 23:40:00 -
[165]
Either you are talking about pilots massing together for combat or you aren't talking about blobs.
It's quite inappropriate to be using the term "blob" for something else when it has meaning assigned be the devs. And I don't recognise it as a common term outside of Eve so you can't claim the devs stole it.
And then accusing CCP of messing up with said blobs.
|
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.04 00:55:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Ah finaly somebody from Agony I can agree with. You nailed it AND written it very well.
Thanks!
Quote:
One thing that can help is a sophisticated fleet UI. Right now organising a fleet is a PITA. You have no way of effectively telling what ships are there if that is not anounced by the gang members. Would be great if the FC/sqad/wing/whatever commanders could see shiptypes of members (bs, inty, cruiser etc ...). The organize them into squads by shiptype at least.
An in-game tool for doing that would definitely be a help for most FCs. Personally, I enjoy these kinds of organizational challenges, and I think Agony handles them pretty well.
Quote:
A rework to gang bonuses could help. A frig squad does not need the armor/shiled hp bonuses that much, because they don't get much hp out of it. However speed is important to them. Again long range ships need tracking etc. Just a few thoughts ...
Skirmish Warfare gives speed bonuses. From a completeness point of view, weapon upgrades through leadership would be good. I suspect the reason why there aren't weapon-upgrade leadership skills is that they would tend to make battles shorter. Personally, I think the current pace of battles is pretty good.
------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. www.agony-unleashed.com
Some people kill for money. Some people kill for politics. Some people kill for religion. I kill because it's fun. |
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.04 01:02:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Solbright
Either you are talking about pilots massing together for combat or you aren't talking about blobs.
It's quite inappropriate to be using the term "blob" for something else when it has meaning assigned be the devs. And I don't recognise it as a common term outside of Eve so you can't claim the devs stole it.
And then accusing CCP of messing up with said blobs.
If you're going to get cranky about the definition of 'blob', you may as well consult dictionary.com. As you can see, the commonplace meaning is 'a disorganized mass'. Agony is a great many things, but our mass is rarely disorganized.
Agony also has a tendency to stay out of politics and the forum-warrior game. So Agony officers were more familiar with the non-Eve-forums definition of 'blob' than the Eve-forums definition. Hence the confusion.
------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. www.agony-unleashed.com
Some people kill for money. Some people kill for politics. Some people kill for religion. I kill because it's fun. |
Solbright
|
Posted - 2007.05.04 11:22:00 -
[168]
Originally by: BluOrange If you're going to get cranky about the definition of 'blob', you may as well consult dictionary.com.
Lol, that's barely even relevant. As was said earlier, the term was used by the devs to represent the growth and motion of fleets from system to system as it loaded up the various nodes and the ensuing combat that could screw over that node.
Doesn't really matter how organised the combat is. The effect of blobs on the nodes is the same - lots of simultaneous commands load up the node. That is the essence of what blobbing is for Eve.
I'll repeat. Any assertion that a blob is less than this is going to cause confusion. Especially in reference to blobs being an Eve design issue.
I'll make an assertion now. You have always known what a blob is for Eve. You are just a bunch of trolls hijacking a hot topic for your own agenda.
|
Solbright
|
Posted - 2007.05.04 11:35:00 -
[169]
Just to be complete, what I ment by "not a common term outside of Eve" was in reference to other possible named uses in MMOGs.
|
OneSock
PLuSQuAMPERFEkT iNc
|
Posted - 2007.05.04 15:13:00 -
[170]
Risk Aversion ? Too right. ships are too expensive and it takes too long grinding missions to be able to risk anything decent in combat.
Take a zero off the cost of a ship and I'd be out solo/gang PVP every day. It would be a blast.
I'd compare it to a FPS. Would you rather play an FPS where each round takes 1 hour and if you are shot once you are dead and have to wait another hour before you can play again. Or would you play an FPS where each round take 15 minutes and if your health reaches zero you have to wait 1 minute before respawning ?
I'd go with the latter choice every time.
|
|
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.04 16:14:00 -
[171]
Originally by: OneSock Risk Aversion ? Too right. ships are too expensive and it takes too long grinding missions to be able to risk anything decent in combat.
Take a zero off the cost of a ship and I'd be out solo/gang PVP every day. It would be a blast.
I'd compare it to a FPS. Would you rather play an FPS where each round takes 1 hour and if you are shot once you are dead and have to wait another hour before you can play again. Or would you play an FPS where each round take 15 minutes and if your health reaches zero you have to wait 1 minute before respawning ?
I'd go with the latter choice every time.
Then you just arent right for the game. This game is a game where the risk is what makes the pvp interesting. you would be much better off in a game like WOW where you risk nothing when you go into combat.
For those that actually enjoy the risk, I would suggest you fly something smaller and cheaper. You don't have to go out in the 200 million isk HAC but rather a simple tech 1 frigate or destroyer will do the trick.
|
Solbright
|
Posted - 2007.05.04 23:53:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Rells For those that actually enjoy the risk, I would suggest you fly something smaller and cheaper. You don't have to go out in the 200 million isk HAC but rather a simple tech 1 frigate or destroyer will do the trick.
Had to engage on this one ... What makes it risky, and OneSock made this point pretty clear, is the cost of replacement. You aren't playing a risky game when your whole kit is only worth a few mil.
Agony plays Eve for no risk.
Or is this another twisted definition? :P
|
Dez Erichs
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 01:17:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Solbright
Agony plays Eve for no risk.
Or is this another twisted definition? :P
Had to rise to the bait here.
We play Eve our way, and we obviously think our way is superior. You can play Eve any way you like.
If you think grinding for a 200M BS every week just to lose it in a laggy fleet combat is fun, go to it. Personally I'd rather fly T1 fitted frigs and cruisers and not have to grind at all. That way I can have fun and avoid the grind. And I get a kick out of blowing up someone else's expensively fitted ship. T2 does have an edge over T1, but I think it's not so great that I feel compelled to always fly T2 kitted out ships. --- PvP Training: www.agony-unleashed.com "Veni, Vidi, Caedi" |
James Duar
Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 01:25:00 -
[174]
Originally by: Dez Erichs
Originally by: Solbright
Agony plays Eve for no risk.
Or is this another twisted definition? :P
Had to rise to the bait here.
We play Eve our way, and we obviously think our way is superior. You can play Eve any way you like.
If you think grinding for a 200M BS every week just to lose it in a laggy fleet combat is fun, go to it. Personally I'd rather fly T1 fitted frigs and cruisers and not have to grind at all. That way I can have fun and avoid the grind. And I get a kick out of blowing up someone else's expensively fitted ship. T2 does have an edge over T1, but I think it's not so great that I feel compelled to always fly T2 kitted out ships.
You play EVE your way, and feel a strong need to tell everyone else they're doing it wrong, and how awesome you are, here, because in CAOD you'd get flamed to hell in less words.
|
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 01:56:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Solbright
Originally by: BluOrange If you're going to get cranky about the definition of 'blob', you may as well consult dictionary.com.
Lol, that's barely even relevant. As was said earlier, the term was used by the devs to represent the growth and motion of fleets from system to system as it loaded up the various nodes and the ensuing combat that could screw over that node.
Doesn't really matter how organised the combat is. The effect of blobs on the nodes is the same - lots of simultaneous commands load up the node. That is the essence of what blobbing is for Eve.
Yes. That's what I was saying in my post where I attempted to identify and address the confusion regarding the definition of 'blob'. Your follow-up point regarding MMO usage of the term blob does nothing to support your claim that Agony has wilfully misunderstood the usage of the term in EVE. I used the word 'blob' for many years before I started playing this game, and I believe that's the case with many other Agony officer.
Quote: I'll repeat. Any assertion that a blob is less than this is going to cause confusion. Especially in reference to blobs being an Eve design issue.
I agree with you.
Quote: I'll make an assertion now. You have always known what a blob is for Eve. You are just a bunch of trolls hijacking a hot topic for your own agenda.
I personally knew what a blob is for Eve before this conversation started. However, most Agony pilots have not spent a lot of time in big alliances. Those who have experienced large-scale alliance warfare have memories of it being a large and disorganized mass. Hence their tendency to use 'blob' in its negative sense.
------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. www.agony-unleashed.com
Some people kill for money. Some people kill for politics. Some people kill for religion. I kill because it's fun. |
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 02:11:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Solbright
Originally by: Rells For those that actually enjoy the risk, I would suggest you fly something smaller and cheaper. You don't have to go out in the 200 million isk HAC but rather a simple tech 1 frigate or destroyer will do the trick.
Had to engage on this one ... What makes it risky, and OneSock made this point pretty clear, is the cost of replacement. You aren't playing a risky game when your whole kit is only worth a few mil.
Agony plays Eve for no risk.
Or is this another twisted definition? :P
No risk? More like 'a different risk'.
We don't often risk much money, and that is the most popular way to measure risk in this game. (That said, we have taken capital ships into combat - that's a reasonably significant financial risk.)
The biggest thing we risk is our egos. Here we are with our t1 frigates and cruisers and we're taking on more expensive opponents. And while we like to talk about how good we are at winning, we do lose from time to time.
The thing about flying cheap ships is that you're no longer accepting a risk of losing your ship, you're accepting the certainty of losing your ship. If a t1 frigate is primary, it's almost certainly dead. A great many pilots would rather lose an expensive ship than get podded.
The fact that we openly risk losing means we don't have to risk so much money.
------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. www.agony-unleashed.com
Some people kill for money. Some people kill for politics. Some people kill for religion. I kill because it's fun. |
Ischia
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 02:45:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Solbright You are just a bunch of trolls hijacking a hot topic for your own agenda.
This is laughable in a thread started by one of the Agony ppl...esp. when it has probably been (up until now) the most constructive blob/ff/lag/whatever thread I have read.
The dev's apparent solution to blobs is to introduce AOE weapons. This will not fix blobs (unless the AOE is greater than the max range of all existing weapons), and will break all kinds of tactical combat.
If anyone hasn't read the whole thread, it is probably worth reading since most of the issues are covered here. Only, we havent really come up with a solution yet.
In terms of definitions, there is very little that can be done to reduce fleet sizes (which is the essence of a blob), but insta-popping ships should be addressed imo (which is the essence of the effect of a blob on players -- other than lag).
Useful FC/GL tools to help organize fleets seem like a good step, tho. As do my other various soap-box items, covered earlier in the thread.
|
Solbright
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 02:54:00 -
[178]
Originally by: BluOrange
Originally by: Solbright Doesn't really matter how organised the combat is. The effect of blobs on the nodes is the same - lots of simultaneous commands load up the node. That is the essence of what blobbing is for Eve.
Yes. That's what I was saying in my post where I attempted to identify and address the confusion regarding the definition of 'blob'.
Where?
Quote: ... I used the word 'blob' for many years before I started playing this game, and I believe that's the case with many other Agony officer.
A named term in other MMOGs? Example?
Quote:
Quote: I'll repeat. Any assertion that a blob is less than this is going to cause confusion. Especially in reference to blobs being an Eve design issue.
I agree with you.
Good, you certainly didn't earlier.
Quote:
Quote: I'll make an assertion now. You have always known what a blob is for Eve. You are just a bunch of trolls hijacking a hot topic for your own agenda.
I personally knew what a blob is for Eve before this conversation started. However, most Agony pilots ...
Most Agony pilots will be happy to go with the agenda.
|
Solbright
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 03:07:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Ischia The dev's apparent solution to blobs is to introduce AOE weapons. This will not fix blobs (unless the AOE is greater than the max range of all existing weapons), and will break all kinds of tactical combat.
Now we get back to the question of what is wrong with blobs. I say nothing. Blobs are good
The Devs can't nerf blobs anyway. Anything that nerf's blobs will destroy the game as a whole.
|
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 06:04:00 -
[180]
Originally by: Solbright Yeah, right! Win a fight, look how cool that was with just cheap ships. Lose a fight, not to worry, it was unbalanced in their favour.
Not sure where the Ego risk is there.
Heh, you're not the one who spent two hours analysing the battle he lost yesterday. But maybe you're right. Maybe Agony has found a way of taking in part in PVP without taking any meaningful risks. Maybe I should gloat about that instead of arguing with you
------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. www.agony-unleashed.com
Some people kill for money. Some people kill for politics. Some people kill for religion. I kill because it's fun. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |