Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 06:09:00 -
[181]
Originally by: Solbright
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?
Here.
Quote:
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?
Actually, I learned English a long time before I started playing MMOGs.
Quote:
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.
I've disagreed with the allegations you've made regarding the intentions of Agony officers in this thread, and with assertions that you've made to justify those allegations (such as the idea that 'blob' only has one meaning).
I agree that using the definition of 'blob' that Agony pilots have been using leads to confusion, and my response has been to try to address that confusion.
Quote:
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.
Which agenda is that?
------ 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 06:14:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Solbright
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.
You make some excellent points in the thread that you linked to there. I agree that the only real problem with blobs is the fact that the game gets crashed (or lagged into uselessness) by large blobs. I agree that attempting to nerf blobs (once we agree on a definition of 'blob') is bad for the game. So does Rells.
What Rells has been trying to say (and I support him in this wholeheartedly) is that the attempts by the developers to nerf blobs are bad for the game.
------ 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 - 2007.05.05 06:55:00 -
[183]
Cool, can't say I've been paying much attention to what the Devs have said about blobs. I've mostly just focused on my agenda. We just happened to cross paths.
Best of luck.
|
Ecatherina W
Gallente Core Domination Big Bang Quantum
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 07:14:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Ash Vincetti
Unfortunately, we don't have "The Force" to guide our rockets into conveniently placed exhaust ports.
Ash???? You don't have The Force??? When, oh, when, my young paduwan, did you lose the way?
;-) Kath
***** Ecatherina W ***** Empress of the Multiverse
DGAF Newbie Guide about everything Eve: http://jhez.dk/eve/dgaf/
|
Dez Erichs
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.05 11:56:00 -
[185]
Originally by: James Duar
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.
Yes you're exactly right, for two reasons.
One, CAOD is a mess right now, and posting there is a waste of time.
Two, anyone who is fed up with blob warfare and fleet combat is free to sign up for our Basic class and see how Agony does things. Play Eve, have fun, fly smart, and don't grind for a T2 BS and be a slave to some alliance that only thinks of you as another number,
(That's a shameless plug if there ever was one.)
p.s. Check out the link in my sig *wink, wink* --- PvP Training: www.agony-unleashed.com "Veni, Vidi, Caedi" |
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.06 03:12:00 -
[186]
Originally by: Solbright Cool, can't say I've been paying much attention to what the Devs have said about blobs. I've mostly just focused on my agenda. We just happened to cross paths.
Best of luck.
This dev blog is the one where they talk about new Area of Effect weapons, which is what we were complaining about.
------ 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. |
Earthan
Gallente The Absolutely Amazing Fire Eaters
|
Posted - 2007.05.06 18:07:00 -
[187]
I think actually area of effect weapons can help.Specially if balanced like the missile balance long time ago so that frigs/cruisers take much less dmg.I personally was thinking more about a system where dmg from more then x ships of a class gets penalties but i guess this also can help.
Rells your ideas are interesting but really imho with Eve lag any tactic in afight of 50 -50 and more becomes questionable as you dont know whats happening.So the blob firing at one target is the simplest and most effective tactic.Thats the key word with the amount of lag for a good tactic:simple.
I dont know you, maybe you are a genious but from my long term eve pvp experience above acertain number of ships and with decent commanders on both sides, sniper blob is unbeatable .
The Amazing Fire Eaters webpage
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 00:02:00 -
[188]
wait so you mean the titan actually made blobs bigger and we need splash damage weapons on smaller ships ?
omg ! ____ __ ________ _sig below_ the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 04:07:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Earthan I think actually area of effect weapons can help.Specially if balanced like the missile balance long time ago so that frigs/cruisers take much less dmg.I personally was thinking more about a system where dmg from more then x ships of a class gets penalties but i guess this also can help.
Why do you think it will help? (I'm willing to reconsider my strong support for Rells on this issue, but I've seen a lot of good arguments against AoE weapons from a lot of people, so I'm reluctant to just take your word for it.)
------ 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. |
Earthan
Gallente The Absolutely Amazing Fire Eaters
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 15:23:00 -
[190]
Well i think it will help to reduce blobs cause you will be dsicouraged to mass your ships in one point as all ships will get damaged.
But htne when i think more about it maybe it would just force fleets to spit in 6 divions wich still would call one target on ts to shoot at...
Not sure...
|
|
Earthan
Gallente The Absolutely Amazing Fire Eaters
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 15:33:00 -
[191]
I still propose my solution wich everybody seemed to hate at its first show on fourms:) :
Intoroduce penalties of shooting more then for example x ships of each class shooting at same target of y class. lets say x for bs for shooting at y=bs class is 5 lets say cruisers is 2 time more when shooting at bs.So its 10 cruisers shooting at bs without penlty.
So for example if 5 bs shoot at a full dmg they do full dmg if sixth join it does less dmg if seeventh even less etc.
It would force, even if big blobs meet, to have divisions of 10-12 ships wich would target one enemy target, because fring with 40 persons on one target would be very wasteful as the 10th and further bs would do hardly any dmg.
In long term imho it woudl discourage blobs as it would be nearly same to fight 12 us 12 suqadron as would be 100 us 100.And propably even a squad of 12 against 100 would kill some enemy ships before going down.
Its complicated yes and seem artifical but its my only idea and i believe it could work. Ofc it could also prove to calculation hvy for servers...
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Guardians of the Dawn Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 15:48:00 -
[192]
Some say Blobs are not bad. maybe.. and I don't think anyone thinks blobs are bad.. the issue is.. Blobs being the only viable tactic is bad.
You should not NEED to blob! That means blobing should have some drawback so other tactics be as valid as it.
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough |
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 15:50:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Earthan I still propose my solution wich everybody seemed to hate at its first show on fourms:) :
Intoroduce penalties of shooting more then for example x ships of each class shooting at same target of y class. lets say x for bs for shooting at y=bs class is 5 lets say cruisers is 2 time more when shooting at bs.So its 10 cruisers shooting at bs without penlty.
So for example if 5 bs shoot at a full dmg they do full dmg if sixth join it does less dmg if seeventh even less etc.
It would force, even if big blobs meet, to have divisions of 10-12 ships wich would target one enemy target, because fring with 40 persons on one target would be very wasteful as the 10th and further bs would do hardly any dmg.
In long term imho it woudl discourage blobs as it would be nearly same to fight 12 us 12 suqadron as would be 100 us 100.And propably even a squad of 12 against 100 would kill some enemy ships before going down.
Its complicated yes and seem artifical but its my only idea and i believe it could work. Ofc it could also prove to calculation hvy for servers...
1. Takes too much server power to calculate, now you'd have to keep track of exactly who is shooting at who, how many of them there are and which number of attacker it is. May not seem like much calculations, unless you tie it in with point 2. below...
2. How do you determine who is firing at who exactly? If I and 5 buddies shoot at mr X in the first second, and then 8 seconds later 6 other guys fire at mr X, do they get a penalty? You'd have to decide on timers (how long do I have to stop shooting at mr X to exclude me from the calculations of being one of the shooters at him?) and keep track of them.
3. I can envision some exploits by doing ineffective friendly fire to protect some ships. For example, what happens if I try to shoot one of my own frigs at 200km range with Quake L ammo. I won't ever hit him (optimal + falloff is like 70km) but I would take one of the 'slots' to shoot at the frig. Depending on how you do it, there can/will be abuse. signature removed - please contact us to find out why (include the URL of your sig) - Jacques([email protected]) |
Earthan
Gallente The Absolutely Amazing Fire Eaters
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 19:43:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
1. Takes too much server power to calculate, now you'd have to keep track of exactly who is shooting at who, how many of them there are and which number of attacker it is. May not seem like much calculations, unless you tie it in with point 2. below...
2. How do you determine who is firing at who exactly? If I and 5 buddies shoot at mr X in the first second, and then 8 seconds later 6 other guys fire at mr X, do they get a penalty? You'd have to decide on timers (how long do I have to stop shooting at mr X to exclude me from the calculations of being one of the shooters at him?) and keep track of them.
3. I can envision some exploits by doing ineffective friendly fire to protect some ships. For example, what happens if I try to shoot one of my own frigs at 200km range with Quake L ammo. I won't ever hit him (optimal + falloff is like 70km) but I would take one of the 'slots' to shoot at the frig. Depending on how you do it, there can/will be abuse.
Well overall i say good points and im not saying its exactly the solution but maybe something along those lines.
As for the algorithm, me personally , i would try with the simplest approach:
1-Decide on a small time measure in wich would be all calculation made, lets say 2 seconds.
2- The first 2 seconds start when you get first shot on you.
2-All shots on you within these 2 seconds are added until the limit is reached and penalties start to apply.It means who shot first on you got no penalties who later starts to receive them.
3- 2 seconds go by, we jump again to point 2, first to shoot within next 2 seconds no penlties etc.
Let me repeat it sounds to me myself complcated and messy, so i gueess it would bring alot of problems in implementation.But thats the only idea or somethign similar imho that would definitely solve blob problem i see.
And what exciits me in this idea is the prospect of a big battle where mutltiple independent divisions must fight each other.Each divions got a leader with on commander of the whole fleet, wich coordinates everything.Doesnt it sound cool, abit more complicated and exciting then what we got now?:) To me it does
|
Ischia
|
Posted - 2007.05.08 03:43:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Earthan I still propose my solution ... Intoroduce penalties of shooting more then for example x ships of each class shooting at same target of y class...
Not fond of this system, but a refined version sould be great, imo (see below). Remember tho, that this will not address what seems to be the other main problem with blobs: that they are a large collection of ships causing huge lag.
The lag-for-lots-of-ships problem needs to be addressed before we expect huge fleets to adopt any reasonable tactics.
1. Takes too much server power to calculate...
Not really, see below.
Quote:
2. How do you determine who is firing at who exactly...
Not needed.
Quote:
3. I can envision some exploits by doing ineffective friendly fire to protect some ships.
Not possible, without doing serious damage to those ships. See below.
Let me stress that this is not a solution for blobbing defined as too many ships in one grid or server, but it will partially address focussing an entire fleets fire on one ship (when the fleet is large and the ship is small).
The basic idea is to calculate how saturated (with energy, shrapnel etc) the space around a given target is; and allow for these existing explosions/shrapnel/heat/emp/dark matter/whatever to affect subsequent incoming attacks in the same 'tick', however long a 'tick' is. The signature of the target and the signature of the explosion/weapon are used as part of the calculation.
The only weapons that this is seriuosly hard to believe being affected are kinetic projectiles. The only rationale I can come up with here is if pieces of armour are peeling off a ship, then some shells will hit this peeled armour, and not the good armour still on the ship. Hmm...maybe the armour is even designed that way, like an onion...
Anyway, as I said above this does not really address the "too many ships in one area" problem, which leads to huge lag, which means refined tactics become all but impossible (or so I believe). But it does reduce the insta-pod effect of concentrated fire.
See prior posts on enegy-flux/damage-reduction:
- Original thoughts, - some more refined thoughts, and - a fragment that addresses weapon types.
|
Earthan
Gallente The Absolutely Amazing Fire Eaters
|
Posted - 2007.05.08 04:48:00 -
[196]
Nice, its very similar to what i propose:)
However i think in your system the small ships could get pretty nerfed if its the number of guns that is counted to firing.+You could still do more dmg by mixing gun types.
Anyway nice somebody have similar ideas, i think would be nice if CCP would read them and ponder for30 mins or something:)
|
Ischia
|
Posted - 2007.05.08 05:01:00 -
[197]
Originally by: Earthan
However i think in your system the small ships could get pretty nerfed if its the number of guns that is counted to firing.
No, it actually makes them a little more effective. What counts is the damage done and the area of the attack. Small ships have much more concentrated fire.
In fact, in my original modelling, I decided it would be necessary to nerf small ships (a little) because the characteristics of their weapons meant they were more effective than battleships (when massed).
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.05.08 05:32:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Ischia
Originally by: Earthan
However i think in your system the small ships could get pretty nerfed if its the number of guns that is counted to firing.
No, it actually makes them a little more effective. What counts is the damage done and the area of the attack. Small ships have much more concentrated fire.
In fact, in my original modelling, I decided it would be necessary to nerf small ships (a little) because the characteristics of their weapons meant they were more effective than battleships (when massed).
oh no - dont nerf small ships ! ____ __ ________ _sig below_ the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore
miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some |
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 03:49:00 -
[199]
Well now we know CCP isnt listneing to anything we say.
|
Baraak Tizhaan
Amarr The Sun Burnt Ear
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 06:48:00 -
[200]
My own solution would probably break the server.
If line of sight weapons didn't pass through intervening objects, blob fleets would have to dispurse. Reasoning? The possibility of friendly fire damage or fire control systems wouldn't fire if a friendly was in the way.
The same could be said for most items used as weapons: NOS, Nuet, Scram, Web, EWAR etc. How do these devices work? They evidently propogate by some beam effect. So what would happen if another ship interposed itself between the agressor and the target? Surely it would be shielded, even if momentarily.
Sadly, I would imagine that this would probably cause even more lag.
It's a shame really, that the lag can't be aportioned so that small fleets suffer less lag than the bigger ones e.g. 10 man fleet suffers no lag against its 200 man fleet enemy, which suffers bad lag. That would certainly stop people using bigger fleets.
|
|
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 16:36:00 -
[201]
Originally by: Baraak Tizhaan My own solution would probably break the server.
If line of sight weapons didn't pass through intervening objects, blob fleets would have to dispurse. Reasoning? The possibility of friendly fire damage or fire control systems wouldn't fire if a friendly was in the way.
The same could be said for most items used as weapons: NOS, Nuet, Scram, Web, EWAR etc. How do these devices work? They evidently propogate by some beam effect. So what would happen if another ship interposed itself between the agressor and the target? Surely it would be shielded, even if momentarily.
Sadly, I would imagine that this would probably cause even more lag.
It's a shame really, that the lag can't be aportioned so that small fleets suffer less lag than the bigger ones e.g. 10 man fleet suffers no lag against its 200 man fleet enemy, which suffers bad lag. That would certainly stop people using bigger fleets.
First of all that would be impossible because of the intensity of calculations of LOS. Second of all it is not necessary as things stand NOW.
Poeple CHOOSE to blob, it is not forced on them. People blob becuase they are lazy, risk averse, uncreative, dont think tactically and become selfish. None of these issues is something CCP can solve and I wish they would stop trying. Making the game easier for the un-tactically minded, un-creative idiots is NOT the right direction.
|
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 02:00:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Rells Well now we know CCP isnt listneing to anything we say.
Boss, you're wrong.
Do you listen to me? I'm completely confident that you do - we've talked over many things and reached constructive understandings about them.
Do you do as I tell you? No. You seem to be under the impression that not only are you allowed to make your own decisions, but you're the CEO. (It's crazy, I know. But there's not a lot I can do about it. )
CCP has listened, to the point where they've actually told us what's going on; instead of continuing with their policy of giving vague hints and poorly-managed releases of snippets of information. This is a step forward.
Was Agony taking out multiple HACs in a single engagement, right on day one? I suspect not. Building a dialogue takes time, just like building an organization.
Are there still problems? Absolutely. CCP has not yet acknowledged that their 'powerball' concept is a distraction from the real issues regarding blobbing. Like most software developers, they're finding it easier to add shiny features than to tackle underlying issues. That's a common problem that I know we both hate, and for good reasons.
But if you don't give them credit for the steps they have taken (increasing the meaningfulness of their communication, and making the AoE weapons something other than instant winbuttons) you diminish your own credibility, and you provide a disincentive for them to take further steps.
It's like teaching a child to walk. You don't criticise them for being unable to take more than one step, you say "That was a good step. Now it's time for another one." ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. |
Kage Getsu
Knowledge Industries Geological Research Ghosts Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 02:09:00 -
[203]
A blob ceases to be a blob if you use Teamspeak and ECM. Got it. _________________________________________________________
|
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 02:11:00 -
[204]
Originally by: Ischia
The basic idea is to calculate how saturated (with energy, shrapnel etc) the space around a given target is; and allow for these existing explosions/shrapnel/heat/emp/dark matter/whatever to affect subsequent incoming attacks in the same 'tick', however long a 'tick' is. The signature of the target and the signature of the explosion/weapon are used as part of the calculation.
I think there is good realism in that proposal, which is something I think I should have said earlier.
Quote:
Anyway, as I said above this does not really address the "too many ships in one area" problem, which leads to huge lag, which means refined tactics become all but impossible (or so I believe). But it does reduce the insta-pod effect of concentrated fire.
Reduce? Yes. I don't actually have a problem with the insta-pod effect. And I say that having been engaged at odds of "OMG I can't count that high" to "1" a couple of days ago. (Being the '1' is something I'm disappointed about, but it was my fault.)
People will always seek out the insta-pod. There are already reasons not to seek it out. But those reasons are things I'd rather not discuss in public, because I don't believe in talking detailed tactics in this forum. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. |
Kristoffer
Amarr Blackguard Brigade Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 03:16:00 -
[205]
Edited by: Kristoffer on 17/05/2007 03:17:49 A blob is still a blob regardless of it is despersed and not sitting within 5kms of the other ships. AOE weapons change nothing, but only nerf people who try to use remote repairers (which, imo, take a hell of a lot of skill to use effectively in a fight) because the range of logistics modules is so short.
|
BluOrange
Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 03:46:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Rells First of all that would be impossible because of the intensity of calculations of LOS. Second of all it is not necessary as things stand NOW.
Poeple CHOOSE to blob, it is not forced on them. People blob becuase they are lazy, risk averse, uncreative, dont think tactically and become selfish. None of these issues is something CCP can solve and I wish they would stop trying. Making the game easier for the un-tactically minded, un-creative idiots is NOT the right direction.
When we use 30 ships to kill 1 or 2 ships, we are blobbing. The moral judgements about it are something I suggest you reconsider. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting. |
Callthetruth
Caldari Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 04:26:00 -
[207]
youre still using a blob, what we need is a) chance to escape bubbles b) nerf the top end ships c) CCP need to move away from combat skills and brinbg forward planetary interaction
|
Ischia
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 05:01:00 -
[208]
Originally by: BluOrange
When we use 30 ships to kill 1 or 2 ships, we are blobbing. The moral judgements about it are something I suggest you reconsider.
lol...I prefer to think of it as 'swarming', not blobbing. Thorn rockets just dont have the range, sadly.
But yes, it does conform to one of the many definitions of 'blobbing'. Or maybe 'lumping', since the blobs that cause serious lag seem to have a lot more than 30 ships.
And the other thing that the agony approach does not share with the insta-podding blobs is that most victims do have a few seconds, at least, before they die.
|
xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 07:00:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Rells Edited by: Rells on 28/04/2007 19:56:07 Consider 2 "blobs" of 20 BS. In one blob they all target one ship. The second "blob" divides their pilots into groups of 5 with independent primary calling. One ship gets hit by 20 guns and pops. 4 ships get hit by 5 guns on the other side and 4 of them die in the time it takes enemy fleet to re-target secondary and get the guns on it. The true blob spends more time targeting than shooting. There are a number of ways to attack a blob and those ways are only limited by your imagination. (continued below)
Alpha strike incoming from FIVE hostiles! --- Razor CEI
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 07:35:00 -
[210]
Could some of the Agony folks comment in here: Linkage
Basicaly the situation we have right now is following:
What you can do well with a few ships you can do bette with more ships.
OR
If brute force does not solve your problem, you are not using enough.
What we need is to change game mechanics in a way that important parts do NOT scalu up with number of ships used.
Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |