EVE Search - Fleet combat, ruined solo PVP and the solution

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Fleet combat, ruined solo PVP and the solution

» 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 - 1 post(s)
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:35:00 - [1] Back in the day (way before I was playing), battleships were rare. I'm sure that a fleet of twenty or so BS with support was an awesome sight, but currently it's not unusual to see a fleet with a core of over one hundred battleships. The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. Due to lag and other unavoidable real world limits, it is impossible to deal with the effects of mismatched scale in a reasonable manner when it comes to balancing battleship design and fleet requirements. Unfortunately CCP didn't think so. The tried to 'increase combat time' by reducing the damage of T2 ammo by 20%, reduced range on T2 ammo by 20%, increased the HP of ships, twice, and introduced rigs where the only effective rigs are defensive in nature. This has now moved ship combat to a defensive posture, favoring the defender by giving him increased time to call in friends, make the attacker endure gate gun fire for a much longer time and removing the effectiveness of DPS ship setups to the point that it now takes a minmum of two and usually three comparably sized ships (compared to the target) to ensure a quick and decisive kill. All of these changes has simply reinforced the concept of 'blob' warfare and has severely reduced the viability of solo combat, and even more so has reduced the viability of dissimilar combat using smaller ships to destroy larger ships solo, due to the already very limited DPS of smaller ships (when compared to ships of larger size). THE SOLUTION: Ships of the line. These would be ships placed squarely between Dreadnaughts and Battleships. "Pocket Dreads" if you will, but indeed, they would not be genuine 'pocket dreads' because they are more like battleships than Dreadnaughts. Each race would get 4 high slots, with Amarr and Gallente getting 4x turret hardpoints, Caldari getting 4x missile hardpoints, and Minmatar would get 4x turret and 4x missile hardpoints for maxium flexibility. HP for struc/armor/shield would be approximately 50% of Dreadnaughts. Slot count would be reduced compared to Dreads, and indeed, even battleships, to make each slot more important in the setup. 4 highs / 4 mids / 6 lows for Gallente, 4/3/7 for Amarr, 4/5/5 for Minmatar and 4/6/4 for Caldari. The ships would have their grid/cpu designed appropriatly so they could be fit with a single capital rep/shield booster. New weapon systems would be introduced. Each race would have a long/short range weapon system similar to the current Dreadnaught designs, but sized and balanced for use against ships of the line and smaller support ships. As an EXAMPLE: 1000mm Strike Railgun 200% optimal range (i.e. 100% increase), 400% base damage of 425mm Railgun II, same tracking, cap use and signature resolution. What this does is it gives a 200% increase in DPS over a T2 fit Battleship, because only 4 turrets are fit, and it reduces lag due to individual calculations for each turret. <continued> Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:36:00 - [2] reserved Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:36:00 - [3] reserved Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Anope High4Life Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:41:00 - [4] Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D
Jin Steele Port Royal Independent Kontractors Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:42:00 - [5] The solution is not bigger ships, that was proven with titans. Also, in order for tanks to be equal at all, the armor tankers will need to be able to fit 2 reps, or else shield tanks will be 50% stronger from the start. _________________________________________________________
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:44:00 - [6] Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D are you unaware of the patch going live TODAY! you fail at eve. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:48:00 - [7] Edited by: BluOrange on 24/07/2007 02:48:31 A pocket dread would be an interesting tactical option. But it won't fix blobbing. Blobbing is a strategic problem, tactical variations cannot (and therefore will not) fix blobbing. To fix blobbing, you have to provide a strategic incentive for people to disperse their forces, rather than concentrating them. Recruitment FAQ
Jin Steele Port Royal Independent Kontractors Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:50:00 - [8] Originally by: MotherMoon Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:45:05 Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:44:30 Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D There is a fix for desynch going live... now. please don't insult CCP when you don't know the facts. Have you been on the test server :) _________________________________________________________
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 02:58:00 - [9] Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D Let's stay on topic and just discuss the idea of fleet fights, shall we? Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:01:00 - [10] Originally by: Jin Steele The solution is not bigger ships, that was proven with titans. Also, in order for tanks to be equal at all, the armor tankers will need to be able to fit 2 reps, or else shield tanks will be 50% stronger from the start. Once again, you have no grasp of the mechanics of the situation. Titans have nothing (nothing) to do with the discussed situation. Titans are also not a front line ship, they're a support ship (regardless of how they've been used in the past). Titans got a huge nerf, and what I'm discussing here is a commonplace replacement for the battleship as the core of an assault fleet. The suggested design will fit neatly between the existing battleships and Dreads, and the battleships can go back to being balanced as they once were (indeed, all the smaller ships could), and it would introduce new styles of play to 0.0 fleet warfare. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:04:00 - [11] Originally by: Jin Steele Originally by: MotherMoon Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:45:05 Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:44:30 Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D There is a fix for desynch going live... now. please don't insult CCP when you don't know the facts. Have you been on the test server :) was that at me? then yes I was in the mess. or is this something different... ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:08:00 - [12] Originally by: BluOrange Edited by: BluOrange on 24/07/2007 02:48:31 A pocket dread would be an interesting tactical option. But it won't fix blobbing. Blobbing is a strategic problem, tactical variations cannot (and therefore will not) fix blobbing. To fix blobbing, you have to provide a strategic incentive for people to disperse their forces, rather than concentrating them. Yes, it would fix blobbing because of the abstract way in which the ships could be deployed. Because a single fleet ship won't be instapopped when they warp in, and will require multiple cycles from an enemy fleet to destroy, it gives an FC time to act, and this time to act is what will make the difference. With increased time, you can warp in multiple groups from different directions, you can split your forces so that the enemy fleet can't apply all of their firepower to you at once, while you position your forces to apply all of your collective firepower against them. Warping in a half short ranged and half long ranged fleet is another option. Because the ships won't insta-pop, you have time to load the grid and coordinate attacks. Current attacks are very simple and straight forward because that is how the ship/play balance is. You warp in and it's now a race to see who can lock who first. Once you're over a certian critical number of ships in your fleet, it doesn't matter who has the most firepower as much as who can lock targets the fastest. Additionally, you can further exploit lag by warping in and killing a few ships, then running off. You don't commit your forces at all. With these larger ships that won't be a viable tactic as you can't do enough DPS to a single target to destroy it and then jump out right away. Larger ships will force the commitment of your fleet to an attack, and again, the increased time will give the defender a chance to react to the enemy fleet and form a workable defence or counter attack. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
cal nereus Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:18:00 - [13] Edited by: cal nereus on 24/07/2007 03:18:50 Solo PvP is like spontaneous murder, a duel, or an Australian guy brandishing a really big knife at a couple of punk teenagers with tiny knives. Fleet PvP is like the US Marine Corps fighting an army, or perhaps a coalition of armed fellows with a common cause. Which of the above two do you prefer?
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:19:00 - [14] Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D point is Originally by: CCP Abathur The 2.1 patch primarily focuses on the de-synch and lag issues. Without fixing that, everything else is irrelevant. The last couple of stress tests on SiSi have been very promising in this regard. The 2.2 will be more balancing and content. This particular issue about starbase modules has received a lot of attention and should be vastly improved. yesterday ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:23:00 - [15] so everybody would just start blobbing with pocked dreads.. still like the idea tough:O
M0rkar Amarr Empire Carebears Soul of Fountain	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:28:00 - [16] So, they will just ignore your Pocket Dread and kill all those filthy BS which are goin down faster and deal 50% of the dps
Richard Aiel Caldari MicroFunks	Posted - 2007.07.24 03:56:00 - [17] Originally by: MotherMoon Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:45:05 Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:44:30 Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D There is a fix for desynch going live... now. please don't insult CCP when you don't know the facts. lol i love how yer insulting the guy fer not knowing the "facts" when we dont even know if the fix WORKS YET We have never, nor will we ever, hack, ddos, or otherwise use OUT OF GAME means to gain ANY advantage.- Dianabolic
Hannobaal Gallente Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.07.24 04:02:00 - [18] Originally by: Richard Aiel Originally by: MotherMoon Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:45:05 Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:44:30 Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D There is a fix for desynch going live... now. please don't insult CCP when you don't know the facts. lol i love how yer insulting the guy fer not knowing the "facts" when we dont even know if the fix WORKS YET Even if the fix turns out to not work, it's stupid to say "decided not to fix". ------------------
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.07.24 04:16:00 - [19] Originally by: Richard Aiel Originally by: MotherMoon Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:45:05 Edited by: MotherMoon on 24/07/2007 02:44:30 Originally by: Anope Originally by: murder one The scale of combat has exceeded CCP's ship design. It is impossible to tank a single battleship to withstand an alpha strike of 30+ battleships. <continued> Thats simple, Fights with possibly around 100 battleships and 30+ BS alpha strike on a single target is very hard to come by... because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch, thus making it very hard to utulize that :D There is a fix for desynch going live... now. please don't insult CCP when you don't know the facts. lol i love how yer insulting the guy fer not knowing the "facts" when we dont even know if the fix WORKS YET Ok excuse me but try reading what he posted again. "because CCP in their infinite intelect decided not to fix Desynch" this has nothing to do with if the fix works or not. he is saying that CCP has decided not to fix it. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 04:53:00 - [20] Originally by: M0rkar So, they will just ignore your Pocket Dread and kill all those filthy BS which are goin down faster and deal 50% of the dps No, I don't think that they will, mostly due to the fact that fleets will change and the majority of the fleets won't be fielding battleships as long range line ships like they are now. I think that the fleet combat ships, FCS for short, (what I'm now calling line ships) will be used to fix the enemy in position and keep them engaged while seperate elements of a fleet in battleships warp in at close range on top of the enemy FCS fleet and engage them where their superior speed and agility can help them against the larger ships. Mostly meaning outflying their guns and overcoming their tracking at short range. If battleships sit at the traditional 100-200km range and try and duke it out with an FCS fleet, yes, they'll get ripped to shreds. Hence, they won't be used in that manner any more. FCS will form the core of the battlegroups and the positions of the FCS in space will form the combat areas around which the fights evolve. It will take quite a bit of time to bring one down, even in very big fleet fights, and there will be a lot of opportunity for the smaller ships to keep warping in and out, changing ranges, getting new warp in points etc. The key difference between FCS and Dreads is that they're designed to do exactly what a Dread is not: fight ships. Dreads are good at sieging POSes. That's about it. Against anything else they're relatively very weak, especially when out of siege mode. The whole point of the FCS class is a ship that can fight against other ships, survive more than a battleships 5 seconds in a big fleet fight, and bring some options and decision making time when fleets of 2-300 people engage each other. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Copine Callmeknau Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:19:00 - [21] Edited by: Copine Callmeknau on 24/07/2007 05:22:13 Please god yes. Implement these new ships, and revert all other sub capital HP's back to pre kali values. Please unnerf T2 ammo's in the process, seriously, you nerfed Quake damage/range, what in the hell was the point of that? Hail sucks beyond belief with the falloff nerf. How can we possibly use the ammo when we have to get inside blaster optimal to fire it. Before there were tactics involved with hail, you had to carefully kite the opponent if he was using void. Now it's simply "Use hail, oh crap he's using void... now we're dead" But yeh, CCP's changes to make fleet battles more interesting pretty much stabbed solo PvP in the face in the process. Once upon a time I could use an unorthadox rupture setup to kill HAC's and BC's in combat. This was due to having flown the ship for a solid year, knowing all the in's and out's, everything the ship, guns, and ammunition was capable of. Kali nerfed that out of existence. Made the game into a very 'That ship always kills this ship, this ship always kills that ship', tactics completely left the building. Oops, ranted a little there. Anyway, bring these changes in. Make a distinction between ships prefered for fleets, and ships prefered for solo players. Make the game one that fleet battlers AND solo pilots can enjoy. Not one or the other. ----- Originally by: Patch86 Depressing as hell though. By the end, you feel like someone's eaten your kitten.
prathe Minmatar Omega Enterprises Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:33:00 - [22] Edited by: prathe on 24/07/2007 05:42:30 every attemp to curtail blobbing just makes bigger blobs starbase structure that can be attacked are so hp heavy that you need a fleet of bs's to take them down in a reasonable amount of time and you will need to have haulers bring you a reload of ammo while you sit there and plug away not exactly the hit and run small gang affair it was intended to be t2 siege bs's bombs 20 mil a pop dropped from a paper ship bombs are too pricey they need to be cheaper and fired from within a cloak at range of 50-60k with the only hint being a partial decloak for 10sec+/- that allows you to spot but not lock so some one can chase him down and fully decloak him within a year you will see more capital blobbing than anything in 0.0 pretty soon you bs fleets will be jumping into multi ms/carrier fleets protected by cyno preventer thingies . they will just sit on a gate with large bubles and R4p3 the bs while they lag out trying to load a grid of 50 carriers and 500 drones plus support the only real solution is not pocket dreads but rather t2 siege bs's btw when i refer to siege i dont mean siege mode per se but a toned down version you decide the particulars
phillie blunt Live And Let Die	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:41:00 - [23] Originally by: BluOrange Edited by: BluOrange on 24/07/2007 02:48:31 A pocket dread would be an interesting tactical option. But it won't fix blobbing. Blobbing is a strategic problem, tactical variations cannot (and therefore will not) fix blobbing. To fix blobbing, you have to provide a strategic incentive for people to disperse their forces, rather than concentrating them. hmm you know a lot about blobbing
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:42:00 - [24] Originally by: prathe every attemp to curtail blobbing just makes bigger blobs starbase structure that can be attacked are so hp heavy that you need a fleet of bs's to take them down in a reasonable amount of time and you will need to have haulers bring you a reload of ammo while you sit there and plug away not exactly the hit and run small gang affair it was intended to be bombs 20 mil a pop dropped from a paper ship within a year you will see more capital blobbing than anything in 0.0 pretty soon you bs fleets will be jumping into multi ms/carrier fleets protected by cyno preventer thingies welcome to static warfare The entire concept of Dreads and POSes doesn't apply to my idea. FCS are mobile, easily repositioned, and allows an FC to divide his forces and put them where he needs them to divide his enemies firepower and exploit the opposing fleet's weaknesses. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Trixie Mayhem	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:45:00 - [25] Edited by: Trixie Mayhem on 24/07/2007 05:46:15 Originally by: murder one Originally by: prathe every attemp to curtail blobbing just makes bigger blobs starbase structure that can be attacked are so hp heavy that you need a fleet of bs's to take them down in a reasonable amount of time and you will need to have haulers bring you a reload of ammo while you sit there and plug away not exactly the hit and run small gang affair it was intended to be bombs 20 mil a pop dropped from a paper ship within a year you will see more capital blobbing than anything in 0.0 pretty soon you bs fleets will be jumping into multi ms/carrier fleets protected by cyno preventer thingies welcome to static warfare The entire concept of Dreads and POSes doesn't apply to my idea. FCS are mobile, easily repositioned, and allows an FC to divide his forces and put them where he needs them to divide his enemies firepower and exploit the opposing fleet's weaknesses. when i refer top starbase structures i meant stations not pos's sorry prathe here damn alt doh
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.07.24 05:51:00 - [26] Originally by: phillie blunt Originally by: BluOrange Edited by: BluOrange on 24/07/2007 02:48:31 A pocket dread would be an interesting tactical option. But it won't fix blobbing. Blobbing is a strategic problem, tactical variations cannot (and therefore will not) fix blobbing. To fix blobbing, you have to provide a strategic incentive for people to disperse their forces, rather than concentrating them. hmm you know a lot about blobbing Blobbing and lag are strategic and tactical problems. As an Agony officer, I do my best to understand strategic and tactical problems. As a player, I hate lag, and I'd love to see the true blob problem (lag) getting fixed, instead of having people get distracted by the fake problems of weapon balance, ship balance, area of effect weapons, focussed-fire nerfage and other creative approaches that might well make for a better game, but won't fix the blob problem. Recruitment FAQ

Ivan Kirilenkov Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:21:00 - [27] Removed a lot of off-topic posts. Please keep discussions about the recent server issues (desyncs or other) in their appropriate threads. Keep the discussion in this thread about the issue at hand please. forum rules \| [email protected] \| Our Website

Foxy CEO Altcenaries	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:27:00 - [28] I like the idea of a ship between BS and Dreads that specialize in killing BS so long as they -are slow -are hilariously inept at killing anything smaller than a BS -are no more useful than a BS against a capital ship Originally by: murder one This has now moved ship combat to a defensive posture, favoring the defender by giving him increased time to call in friends, make the attacker endure gate gun fire for a much longer time and removing the effectiveness of DPS ship setups to the point that it now takes a minmum of two and usually three comparably sized ships (compared to the target) to ensure a quick and decisive kill. I have an issue with what seems to be your underlying gripe here, however. I should be able to set up my ship so that any one who wants to kill me "quickly and decisively" needs to bring friends. Perhaps that is too easily achieved now (not fitting intensive enough), but I don't see a problem with being able to avoid a solo instagank by a similarly sized ship. Also, falloff rigs are great for minmatar. They are weapon rigs and allow for a broader range of combat strategies (both offensive and defensive) on AC ships. Other than that, and ewar/electronics rigs and grid/cap rigs, most useful rigs are defensive. (some cap rigs are defensive, some are offensive, depending on the ship and setup. cough Abaddon cough) NBALT Recruitment
Danlex	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:37:00 - [29] Originally by: BluOrange Edited by: BluOrange on 24/07/2007 02:48:31 A pocket dread would be an interesting tactical option. But it won't fix blobbing. Blobbing is a strategic problem, tactical variations cannot (and therefore will not) fix blobbing. To fix blobbing, you have to provide a strategic incentive for people to disperse their forces, rather than concentrating them. /signed OP, it's a nice idea. It doesn't fix the fundamental reason for blobbing. You bring 20, I bring 30, therefor I win. Essentially what you're doing is attempting to use price as a prohibitive reason to bring a heap of these to a fight.
Strategos Banned Society	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:39:00 - [30] Edited by: Strategos on 24/07/2007 06:41:50 Why don't you try flying a Vaga or a Mach or even a Sabre and then say Solo PvP is dead. The Vaga and the Mach are beyond overpowered 1v1 unless the ship you're going against is specifically set up to take you out which you will rarely find hunting unsuspecting ratters. And even then setting up for a 1v1 vs a nano mach is laughable. Btw I think your ideas are absurd. Solopwnmobiles = ftl. ---Sig--- Sig removed, not appropriate for the forum. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
Cpt Branko Guardian Heroes	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:40:00 - [31] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 24/07/2007 06:40:22 Originally by: Foxy CEO I have an issue with what seems to be your underlying gripe here, however. I should be able to set up my ship so that any one who wants to kill me "quickly and decisively" needs to bring friends. Perhaps that is too easily achieved now (not fitting intensive enough), but I don't see a problem with being able to avoid a solo instagank by a similarly sized ship. If someone can't kill you alone, odds are he'll be bringing in friends, too, and then you really don't stand a chance ;) Anyway, I think murder's idea makes a lot of sense. Originally by: Tsanse Kinske The second you start equating time spent playing a game with lost time and money is the second you need to ask yourself "Why am I playing?". Seriously
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:41:00 - [32] Originally by: Trixie Mayhem Edited by: Trixie Mayhem on 24/07/2007 05:46:15 Originally by: murder one Originally by: prathe every attemp to curtail blobbing just makes bigger blobs starbase structure that can be attacked are so hp heavy that you need a fleet of bs's to take them down in a reasonable amount of time and you will need to have haulers bring you a reload of ammo while you sit there and plug away not exactly the hit and run small gang affair it was intended to be bombs 20 mil a pop dropped from a paper ship within a year you will see more capital blobbing than anything in 0.0 pretty soon you bs fleets will be jumping into multi ms/carrier fleets protected by cyno preventer thingies welcome to static warfare The entire concept of Dreads and POSes doesn't apply to my idea. FCS are mobile, easily repositioned, and allows an FC to divide his forces and put them where he needs them to divide his enemies firepower and exploit the opposing fleet's weaknesses. when i refer top starbase structures i meant stations not pos's sorry prathe here damn alt doh Ok, but my point still remains, fighting a POS/Starbase is what Dreads are for. The ship ideas that I'm suggesting are for dynamic and mobile fleet engagements. Totally different job, and in need of a different tool. We need these ships to replace the BS as the core fleet ship, and then rebalance BS to the way they used to be, along with all the other smaller ships. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:46:00 - [33] Originally by: Danlex Originally by: BluOrange Edited by: BluOrange on 24/07/2007 02:48:31 A pocket dread would be an interesting tactical option. But it won't fix blobbing. Blobbing is a strategic problem, tactical variations cannot (and therefore will not) fix blobbing. To fix blobbing, you have to provide a strategic incentive for people to disperse their forces, rather than concentrating them. /signed OP, it's a nice idea. It doesn't fix the fundamental reason for blobbing. You bring 20, I bring 30, therefor I win. Essentially what you're doing is attempting to use price as a prohibitive reason to bring a heap of these to a fight. Both of you miss the concept entirely. "Blobbing" and making it a pure numbers game will always exist. Right now what exists is 100% of the fleet in one big location/blob, bringing focus fire to bear against the enemy fleet. With my concept, a single Fleet Combat Ship could survive focus fire from 25 or more enemy FCS for at least a few minutes, to the point that an FC could warp in other ships from other directions and make a multiple direction attack, or change tactics, or do any number of things, all of which are not possible with the current ship designs. My aim isn't to stop the numeric issue, but the literal physical issue of putting 100% of your fleet in one spot. Allowing FCs more options than just the straight down the throat brute force approach. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Kharadran Sullath Caldari IntoXication Inc PioneerX Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:48:00 - [34] Perhaps not the ultimate solution to blobbing, but I like the idea of a ship specifically designed for fleet combat and I believe that many of the ideas that have been brought up on the forums would together solve the problem of blobbing. I believe that this one has a part in the solution. ------ --Don't get saucy with me Bernaise!--
Merdaneth Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:53:00 - [35] Originally by: murder one This has now moved ship combat to a defensive posture, favoring the defender by giving him increased time to call in friends, make the attacker endure gate gun fire for a much longer time and removing the effectiveness of DPS ship setups to the point that it now takes a minmum of two and usually three comparably sized ships (compared to the target) to ensure a quick and decisive kill. The bolded part is the only problem you mention. What you call a 'quick and decisive kill' can also be called 'a gank'. CCP specifically tried to counter such kills with the last patches, since they thought they weren't much fun to the gankee. The point was to have them at least experience a fight instead of not being presented with any meaningful decision before being destroyed. You are trying to bring back meaningless ganks, thanks but no thanks. I suggest you put more energy into defining and analyzing the problem before you come up with pages of solution. ____ The Illusion of Freedom \| The Truth about Slavery
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:54:00 - [36] Originally by: Foxy CEO I like the idea of a ship between BS and Dreads that specialize in killing BS so long as they -are slow -are hilariously inept at killing anything smaller than a BS -are no more useful than a BS against a capital ship Originally by: murder one This has now moved ship combat to a defensive posture, favoring the defender by giving him increased time to call in friends, make the attacker endure gate gun fire for a much longer time and removing the effectiveness of DPS ship setups to the point that it now takes a minmum of two and usually three comparably sized ships (compared to the target) to ensure a quick and decisive kill. I have an issue with what seems to be your underlying gripe here, however. I should be able to set up my ship so that any one who wants to kill me "quickly and decisively" needs to bring friends. Perhaps that is too easily achieved now (not fitting intensive enough), but I don't see a problem with being able to avoid a solo instagank by a similarly sized ship. Also, falloff rigs are great for minmatar. They are weapon rigs and allow for a broader range of combat strategies (both offensive and defensive) on AC ships. Other than that, and ewar/electronics rigs and grid/cap rigs, most useful rigs are defensive. (some cap rigs are defensive, some are offensive, depending on the ship and setup. cough Abaddon cough) People have always been able to fit enough tank to avoid a solo instagank. Fit three large armor reps on your BS. Fit ALL shield tank in your mids at the expense of any tackling mods, blah blah blah. The peak DPS output has been reduced by a HUGE amount in the last few patches, while the peak tank amount has skyrocketed (dual rep, 3x armor rig tank anyone?). Not only does this make it an endurance fight (cap using ships get the shaft) for like types of ships, but smaller ships have less effective peak DPS to kill larger ships in solo combat. It reduces variety of combat across the board. As for falloff rigs, you have cited the ONLY useful offensive rig in the game. Good for you. I agree with you 100%. Falloff rigs are great. No stacking penalty with other mods, as they don't exist. Minmatar ships have plenty of grid and projectiles don't use much grid when compared to other gun types, allowing falloff rigs to be used quite easily with standard ship fits. All other offensive rigs are complete garbage and everyone knows it. And as for CCC rigs being 'offensive' for the Abaddon, try required to make the ship even undockable without resorting to using autocannons/arty on it. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:57:00 - [37] Originally by: Strategos Edited by: Strategos on 24/07/2007 06:41:50 Why don't you try flying a Vaga or a Mach or even a Sabre and then say Solo PvP is dead. The Vaga and the Mach are beyond overpowered 1v1 unless the ship you're going against is specifically set up to take you out which you will rarely find hunting unsuspecting ratters. And even then setting up for a 1v1 vs a nano mach is laughable. Btw I think your ideas are absurd. Solopwnmobiles = ftl. Speed tanked ships like the Mach, Sabre and Vaga are beyond imbalanced. Since your post doesn't apply to anything I've said, I don't see your point. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.07.24 06:59:00 - [38] Originally by: murder one Lots of stuff So much unnesesary stuff, when the solution should be to remove the stacking penelty on damage mods and tank. Originally by: myself The Amarr templar joke is a joke stupid people can laugh at. Its the joke any dumb person can laugh at.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:02:00 - [39] Originally by: Merdaneth Originally by: murder one This has now moved ship combat to a defensive posture, favoring the defender by giving him increased time to call in friends, make the attacker endure gate gun fire for a much longer time and removing the effectiveness of DPS ship setups to the point that it now takes a minmum of two and usually three comparably sized ships (compared to the target) to ensure a quick and decisive kill. The bolded part is the only problem you mention. What you call a 'quick and decisive kill' can also be called 'a gank'. CCP specifically tried to counter such kills with the last patches, since they thought they weren't much fun to the gankee. The point was to have them at least experience a fight instead of not being presented with any meaningful decision before being destroyed. You are trying to bring back meaningless ganks, thanks but no thanks. I suggest you put more energy into defining and analyzing the problem before you come up with pages of solution. Read my reply to Foxy. The most applicable part: Quote: People have always been able to fit enough tank to avoid a solo instagank. Fit three large armor reps on your BS. Fit ALL shield tank in your mids at the expense of any tackling mods, blah blah blah. It's not at all impossible to completely avoid 'being ganked'. But of course that isn't the point. And in fact, the point of this thread isn't discussing solo PVP (which is a garbage cap endurance competition at the moment), it's discussing replacing BS with other ships, so that the current PVP situation can be remedied while still having some usable (and indeed, new and improved) gameplay for fleet fights. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Strategos Banned Society	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:05:00 - [40] Originally by: murder one Speed tanked ships like the Mach, Sabre and Vaga are beyond imbalanced. Since your post doesn't apply to anything I've said, I don't see your point. Yes it does, but anyway. Nothing will fix blobing other then less people playing. The more people that play EvE the bigger blobs will be, simple fact. No ship is going to change that. Also, anything bigger then a BS requires a blob, and all you're doing is creating a ship that is bigger then a BS. People will ALWAYS blob, stop trying to fix it, you can't. ---Sig--- Sig removed, not appropriate for the forum. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
Strategos Banned Society	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:05:00 - [41] Originally by: murder one Speed tanked ships like the Mach, Sabre and Vaga are beyond imbalanced. Since your post doesn't apply to anything I've said, I don't see your point. Yes it does, but anyway. Nothing will fix blobing other then less people playing. The more people that play EvE the bigger blobs will be, simple fact. No ship is going to change that. Also, anything bigger then a BS requires a blob, and all you're doing is creating a ship that is bigger then a BS. People will ALWAYS blob, stop trying to fix it, you can't. ---Sig--- Sig removed, not appropriate for the forum. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:14:00 - [42] Originally by: Strategos Originally by: murder one Speed tanked ships like the Mach, Sabre and Vaga are beyond imbalanced. Since your post doesn't apply to anything I've said, I don't see your point. Yes it does, but anyway. Nothing will fix blobing other then less people playing. The more people that play EvE the bigger blobs will be, simple fact. No ship is going to change that. Also, anything bigger then a BS requires a blob, and all you're doing is creating a ship that is bigger then a BS. People will ALWAYS blob, stop trying to fix it, you can't. You're confusing 'numerical superiority' with 'blobbing'. The whole concept of 'the blob' is the physical location of the combatants. So if they're all in one place, it's a blob. There is zero variety in fleet fights at the moment. Everyone puts all their ships in one location and hopes for the grid to load faster than the other guys. Buy making ships that are sturdy enough to survive for at least a few minutes under direct fire from an enemy fleet, we can give FCs the option of moving in multiple wings of ships from various directions. It's like a huge Dread fight, but with the Dreads able to attack each other from long range, and not have to have their targets webbed until they're frozen still. Dread fights take a while, give people options, and are generally epic in scale, both in time and firepower, as well as ISK. My ship ideas will move fleet fights into this arena of providing the time and flexibility to give FCs options when they're attacking or defending. So in short, you're still missing the whole concept. Reading comprehension ftw. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:14:00 - [43] Originally by: Strategos Originally by: murder one Speed tanked ships like the Mach, Sabre and Vaga are beyond imbalanced. Since your post doesn't apply to anything I've said, I don't see your point. Yes it does, but anyway. Nothing will fix blobing other then less people playing. The more people that play EvE the bigger blobs will be, simple fact. No ship is going to change that. Also, anything bigger then a BS requires a blob, and all you're doing is creating a ship that is bigger then a BS. People will ALWAYS blob, stop trying to fix it, you can't. You're confusing 'numerical superiority' with 'blobbing'. The whole concept of 'the blob' is the physical location of the combatants. So if they're all in one place, it's a blob. There is zero variety in fleet fights at the moment. Everyone puts all their ships in one location and hopes for the grid to load faster than the other guys. Buy making ships that are sturdy enough to survive for at least a few minutes under direct fire from an enemy fleet, we can give FCs the option of moving in multiple wings of ships from various directions. It's like a huge Dread fight, but with the Dreads able to attack each other from long range, and not have to have their targets webbed until they're frozen still. Dread fights take a while, give people options, and are generally epic in scale, both in time and firepower, as well as ISK. My ship ideas will move fleet fights into this arena of providing the time and flexibility to give FCs options when they're attacking or defending. So in short, you're still missing the whole concept. Reading comprehension ftw. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Strategos Banned Society	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:27:00 - [44] Originally by: murder one Originally by: Strategos Originally by: murder one Speed tanked ships like the Mach, Sabre and Vaga are beyond imbalanced. Since your post doesn't apply to anything I've said, I don't see your point. Yes it does, but anyway. Nothing will fix blobing other then less people playing. The more people that play EvE the bigger blobs will be, simple fact. No ship is going to change that. Also, anything bigger then a BS requires a blob, and all you're doing is creating a ship that is bigger then a BS. People will ALWAYS blob, stop trying to fix it, you can't. You're confusing 'numerical superiority' with 'blobbing'. The whole concept of 'the blob' is the physical location of the combatants. So if they're all in one place, it's a blob. There is zero variety in fleet fights at the moment. Everyone puts all their ships in one location and hopes for the grid to load faster than the other guys. Buy making ships that are sturdy enough to survive for at least a few minutes under direct fire from an enemy fleet, we can give FCs the option of moving in multiple wings of ships from various directions. It's like a huge Dread fight, but with the Dreads able to attack each other from long range, and not have to have their targets webbed until they're frozen still. Dread fights take a while, give people options, and are generally epic in scale, both in time and firepower, as well as ISK. My ship ideas will move fleet fights into this arena of providing the time and flexibility to give FCs options when they're attacking or defending. So in short, you're still missing the whole concept. Reading comprehension ftw. Whatever dude. I'm not going to go into a war of words with you. What you're trying to design will not work and those who actually fly in fleets will see this. Just wait till t2 BS's are released. In MY opinion it's a shotty idea, but to each his own. ---Sig--- Sig removed, not appropriate for the forum. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:28:00 - [45] Originally by: murder one Originally by: Strategos Originally by: murder one Speed tanked ships like the Mach, Sabre and Vaga are beyond imbalanced. Since your post doesn't apply to anything I've said, I don't see your point. Yes it does, but anyway. Nothing will fix blobing other then less people playing. The more people that play EvE the bigger blobs will be, simple fact. No ship is going to change that. Also, anything bigger then a BS requires a blob, and all you're doing is creating a ship that is bigger then a BS. People will ALWAYS blob, stop trying to fix it, you can't. You're confusing 'numerical superiority' with 'blobbing'. The whole concept of 'the blob' is the physical location of the combatants. So if they're all in one place, it's a blob. There is zero variety in fleet fights at the moment. Everyone puts all their ships in one location and hopes for the grid to load faster than the other guys. Buy making ships that are sturdy enough to survive for at least a few minutes under direct fire from an enemy fleet, we can give FCs the option of moving in multiple wings of ships from various directions. It's like a huge Dread fight, but with the Dreads able to attack each other from long range, and not have to have their targets webbed until they're frozen still. Dread fights take a while, give people options, and are generally epic in scale, both in time and firepower, as well as ISK. My ship ideas will move fleet fights into this arena of providing the time and flexibility to give FCs options when they're attacking or defending. So in short, you're still missing the whole concept. Reading comprehension ftw. Umm, no. The issue you describe (all ships in 1 location) is not the big problem people are complaining about when it comes to blobbing. The problem is 400 people in a system, which causes the whole fight to go to hell due to lag and such. Anything else is secondary. I know CCP for some inane reason thinks that the 'powerball' of 50 BS packed tight in a ball is an issue, but I am telling you it is not, and I am damn sure most people fighting big fights agree with me. And the problem with the 'blob' as you describe it, people all bunching up and having a simple shooting match, is also caused much more by the fact there is so much lag than by them all being in the same location. Lag seriously hampers the ability of fleets to do tactical maneuvers, and you don't want to be warping in and out all the time, which means having to load grid and getting shot to pieces while you do it. Fix the lag and 80% of your problem goes away. I recall fights with FATAL/Outbreak back in February in the drone regions, and later to a lesser extent against GUARD, where there were plenty of fleet maneuvers, warping in at various angles, ranges, and all kinds of stuff. As long as there is little lag, tactical maneuvring will be fine. Note I am not saying I am against the pocket dread, though I would go with having T2 BS first. But your reasoning is flawed IMO. ------------------------------------------------ Murphy's Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold, makes the rules.
Ebon Hawke	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:34:00 - [46] Originally by: murder one With my concept, a single Fleet Combat Ship could survive focus fire from 25 or more enemy FCS for at least a few minutes, to the point that an FC could warp in other ships from other directions and make a multiple direction attack, or change tactics, or do any number of things, all of which are not possible with the current ship designs. My aim isn't to stop the numeric issue, but the literal physical issue of putting 100% of your fleet in one spot. Allowing FCs more options than just the straight down the throat brute force approach. That still doesn't stop "physical" blobbing. 25 = 2 mins(let's just assume by "a few minutes" you meant 2) to kill...That just means if I bring 100 it will take 30 seconds to kill. The more people I have in one place, the faster I mop up. Not to mention that taking 25 people in FCS firing at 1 target 2 minutes to kill is completely insane for a sub capital ship. Fly around killing ratters in any home system and no one will be able to stop you short of bringing a fleet, and all that for a mere 500 mil. Originally by: murder one Dread fights take a while, give people options, and are generally epic in scale, both in time and firepower, as well as ISK. My ship ideas will move fleet fights into this arena of providing the time and flexibility to give FCs options when they're attacking or defending. The only reason dread fights take a while is because people aren't able to blob with them yet. Similar to how battleships didn't used to be so common, that is how dreads are at the moment.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:42:00 - [47] Originally by: Strategos Whatever dude. I'm not going to go into a war of words with you. What you're trying to design will not work and those who actually fly in fleets will see this. Just wait till t2 BS's are released. In MY opinion it's a shotty idea, but to each his own. I fly/FC fleets all the time. T2 BS won't change anything. They're not going to add anything that is going to make a difference fleet wise. It's like Command Ships currently. They still get vaporized in one volley, regardless of resists. CCP has screwed up solo PVP in deference to fleet warfare. If ships like the proposed were introduced, BS could be re-balanced back to where they were and we could once again have some reasonable solo and small gang action. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:44:00 - [48] Remove Insurance Payout in 0.0 That fixes blob warfare, and that only. sup /b/
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:47:00 - [49] Originally by: murder one Originally by: Strategos Whatever dude. I'm not going to go into a war of words with you. What you're trying to design will not work and those who actually fly in fleets will see this. Just wait till t2 BS's are released. In MY opinion it's a shotty idea, but to each his own. I fly/FC fleets all the time. T2 BS won't change anything. They're not going to add anything that is going to make a difference fleet wise. It's like Command Ships currently. They still get vaporized in one volley, regardless of resists. CCP has screwed up solo PVP in deference to fleet warfare. If ships like the proposed were introduced, BS could be re-balanced back to where they were and we could once again have some reasonable solo and small gang action. Very few ships get one volleyed if there is no lag and they are aligned to warp out. Certainly not after the T2 ammo nerf. ------------------------------------------------ Murphy's Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold, makes the rules.
Gaia Thorn Infestation.	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:47:00 - [50] Hmm well as i would like to have more ships to train for i dont see this being the solution. Tbh the only way to remove blob warfare is to remove local in 0.0 plain and simple. Cause all the "strategy" to is what number do the enemy have and how many can we muster to take that force out. Once information becomes more fleeting you will see smaller gangs roaming do more damage to alliances then giant blobs ever will. And it will be harder for alliances to protect their space which makes the "empires" abit smaller making room for more people. And thoose that can support their space will have the benefits of the new jump portals/cyno inhibitors/cyno generators and system scanner for exampel. Local should be keept in low sec and high sec since concord/faction still supervise thoose areas.
me bored	Posted - 2007.07.24 07:55:00 - [51] I have a more simple and effective solution. Roll back the hp buffs, the stacking nerf and warp to 0. They were huge cock ups on ccp's part and it's about time they admitted their mistakes and did something about it.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:00:00 - [52] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: murder one Originally by: Strategos Whatever dude. I'm not going to go into a war of words with you. What you're trying to design will not work and those who actually fly in fleets will see this. Just wait till t2 BS's are released. In MY opinion it's a shotty idea, but to each his own. I fly/FC fleets all the time. T2 BS won't change anything. They're not going to add anything that is going to make a difference fleet wise. It's like Command Ships currently. They still get vaporized in one volley, regardless of resists. CCP has screwed up solo PVP in deference to fleet warfare. If ships like the proposed were introduced, BS could be re-balanced back to where they were and we could once again have some reasonable solo and small gang action. Very few ships get one volleyed if there is no lag and they are aligned to warp out. Certainly not after the T2 ammo nerf. That's exactly right. If teh FCS ships were introduced, the BS could be put back to normal, to where they wouldn't be so great for fleet, but would be just fine for solo/small gang, unlike now. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Strategos Banned Society	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:07:00 - [53] Edited by: Strategos on 24/07/2007 08:10:02 Originally by: Sokratesz Remove Insurance Payout in 0.0 That fixes blob warfare, and that only. That would do one of two things; 1. Remove all large ship pvp as everyone would be afraid to lose their expensive ship as they won't get anything back to help recover from the lose and/or 2. Just make blobs bigger as everyone can/will fly t1 disposable frigates ---Sig--- Sig removed, not appropriate for the forum. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
Strategos Banned Society	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:09:00 - [54] Originally by: murder one Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: murder one Originally by: Strategos Whatever dude. I'm not going to go into a war of words with you. What you're trying to design will not work and those who actually fly in fleets will see this. Just wait till t2 BS's are released. In MY opinion it's a shotty idea, but to each his own. I fly/FC fleets all the time. T2 BS won't change anything. They're not going to add anything that is going to make a difference fleet wise. It's like Command Ships currently. They still get vaporized in one volley, regardless of resists. CCP has screwed up solo PVP in deference to fleet warfare. If ships like the proposed were introduced, BS could be re-balanced back to where they were and we could once again have some reasonable solo and small gang action. Very few ships get one volleyed if there is no lag and they are aligned to warp out. Certainly not after the T2 ammo nerf. That's exactly right. If teh FCS ships were introduced, the BS could be put back to normal, to where they wouldn't be so great for fleet, but would be just fine for solo/small gang, unlike now. This is stupid. Battleships were/are never ment to be solo pwn mobiles. They are the primary ship for fleet battles. I don't think you know what you're even talking about. ---Sig--- Sig removed, not appropriate for the forum. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
Lastdon	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:09:00 - [55] The only way to make it so that people want to use other ships other then the BIG GUNS is to make it so a smaller ship can disable lets say a dread. Other wise whats the point of being in a smaller ship? Would you prefer a fleet of BS/BC/frigates over a fleet of capital ships. I doubt it, why because bigger ships means that your fleet can do more damage and take more damage as of now. There really isn't much thought to the combat Lock, Shot, Tank. If your being jammed wait!!!! The only way I see fit to resolve this issue is make it so a smaller ship can disable certain functions of ships such as their gun/ missiles, targeting systems, or take out their propulsion system. This shouldn't thou allow a smaller ship the ability to completely destroy the larger ship but rather just disable it forcing it to leave battle, or have its hull destroyed by another cap ship. This would make people want to fly lets say a frigate. It allows them to have more of a role then just tackling.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:16:00 - [56] Originally by: Lastdon The only way to make it so that people want to use other ships other then the BIG GUNS is to make it so a smaller ship can disable lets say a dread. Other wise whats the point of being in a smaller ship? Would you prefer a fleet of BS/BC/frigates over a fleet of capital ships. I doubt it, why because bigger ships means that your fleet can do more damage and take more damage as of now. There really isn't much thought to the combat Lock, Shot, Tank. If your being jammed wait!!!! The only way I see fit to resolve this issue is make it so a smaller ship can disable certain functions of ships such as their gun/ missiles, targeting systems, or take out their propulsion system. This shouldn't thou allow a smaller ship the ability to completely destroy the larger ship but rather just disable it forcing it to leave battle, or have its hull destroyed by another cap ship. This would make people want to fly lets say a frigate. It allows them to have more of a role then just tackling. Amazingly enough, that's exactly how combat will work if Fleet Combat Ships are introduced. See, there's this crazy module called a Sensor Dampner. It's been around, well, ever since I've been playing the game. It has this crazy ability to, well, remove a ship's ability to uh, target other ships and uh, use it's guns and stuff. Yeah, it's pretty crazy. And what is even more crazy is that it can be used by small ships. Totally far out. And like, if a FCS's weapons and targeting were disabled, then other larger ships could attack it and then kill it, with the smaller ships disabling it. Like, I never would have thought of any of this if it wern't for you. Sooo far out crazy whacky. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:17:00 - [57] While I think yout ships of the line will become the centerpoint of the new models gategankers groups, I like them. They have possibilities even outside of the fleet combat. From your description the seem balanced to do level 5 missions, and they will be both a lesser loss than a multi billions carrier (if some pirate or NPC pot you) and a good middle step from BS to capitals for the mission runenrs that haven't learned to use a capital.
Arvald Caldari House of Tempers	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:26:00 - [58] well heres a stupid idea, make having more than maby 300 ships in a gang a banable offence (for the fc), but hell what do i know its 4am here, ive been up for 42 hours Being attacked by arvald uuu....Huston....we have a problem
Ssoraszh Tzarszh Minmatar Grumpy Old Farts Gruntfuttocks	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:42:00 - [59] Actually you will see a blob of 'pocked dreads' with some EW support and a host of BS to counter ennemy suport. The Blob will grow, as the Blob is human nature, we humans like to herd together for protection. And the biggest herd always wins ofc
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.07.24 08:45:00 - [60] There would be need to make blobbing up have some very negative effects..and im not talking 'possible threats' like doomsday devices and bombs, but something that directly influences anyone as soon as they enter the blob. sup /b/
gpYUAN29	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:07:00 - [61] Man you come up with some awful ideas, murder one. This isn't one of your worst but it's right up there. What's to stop people blobbing with mini-Dreads? Have you considered the balancing aspect? Have you considered what ships these aberrant mental peregrinations of yours will displace? Have you considered the effect a ship like this would have on gatecamps, contrary to CCP's desire to get more folks out into low/nosec? I think not.I'm waiting for you to post a thread on how the Megathron should have its armor increased by 500% just to compensate for your atrocious skill. Stop posting. Seriously, just stop posting. I beg of you. gpY out.
Lastdon	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:17:00 - [62] Amazingly enough, that's exactly how combat will work if Fleet Combat Ships are introduced. See, there's this crazy module called a Sensor Dampner. It's been around, well, ever since I've been playing the game. It has this crazy ability to, well, remove a ship's ability to uh, target other ships and uh, use it's guns and stuff. Yeah, it's pretty crazy. And what is even more crazy is that it can be used by small ships. Totally far out. And like, if a FCS's weapons and targeting were disabled, then other larger ships could attack it and then kill it, with the smaller ships disabling it. Like, I never would have thought of any of this if it wern't for you. Sooo far out crazy whacky. My point was you shouldn't be able to completely disable a large ship by any means of preventing a ship from locking a target no matter what you call it jamming/dampening/ ex..in a small ship. Small ships should only be able to limit a larger ships capabilities by lets say taking out 1 of the 3 guns a ship has and that shouldn't be instant either. It would take time/damage but not as much damage as taking down the over all ship. Last I recall is the OP's point was how to make smaller ships more vital in combat. O ya and last I recall MS/ titan's are immuned to EW.
cal nereus Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:20:00 - [63] As someone already mentioned, blobbing is human nature. Even when you stack things against the blob, the advantage of superior numbers remains. We feel more confident when there are more of us, and we fight against a large enemy more readily when we have the promise of backup. One counter-blob is the idea of dividing the huge blob into a huge number of smaller entities, and these small gangs would wander into different areas doing different things, while still coordinating. Problem here is, they usually end up in the same place eventually anyways, and the blob is back. Either that or they run away. One or the other.
Copine Callmeknau Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:44:00 - [64] Originally by: Strategos Edited by: Strategos on 24/07/2007 06:41:50 Why don't you try flying a Vaga or a Mach or even a Sabre and then say Solo PvP is dead. The Vaga and the Mach are beyond overpowered 1v1 unless the ship you're going against is specifically set up to take you out which you will rarely find hunting unsuspecting ratters. And even then setting up for a 1v1 vs a nano mach is laughable. Btw I think your ideas are absurd. Solopwnmobiles = ftl. So people should only be able to solo if they have vast amounts of ISK? They should pay 30mil for a sabre to kill frigates and t1 cruisers, hundreds of millions for a vaga and fittings to kill BC's and cruisers? And billions in faction BS and fittings to kill other BS? Thank god you aren't a dev. ----- Originally by: Patch86 Depressing as hell though. By the end, you feel like someone's eaten your kitten.
Solbright altaltalt Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:47:00 - [65] Blobs are good
pipvac Sacred Templars DeStInY.	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:52:00 - [66] I love the idea of this 'pocket dread', but only from the perspective of a new toy to play with. You've gone to alot of effort on the detail of the ships, and in isolation they look great. Nice one. However, I fail to see how this ship is going to stop blobbing though. Perhaps you could explain it loud and slow, exactly how this is going to help with current gameplay issues, as so far there is nothing in the thread to justify it in this regard. Lets look at an extract and analysis of Clauswitz in the context of battle strategy... "The best strategy," writes Clausewitz, "is always to be very strong; first in general, and then at the decisive point." (204) Like other succinct principles, however, Clausewitz carefully qualifies this one, for "to reduce the whole secret of the art of war to the formula of numerical superiority at a certain time in a certain place [is] an oversimplification that [will not stand up] for a moment against the realities of life." (135) Indeed: ...superiority of numbers in a given engagement is only one of the factors that determines victory. Superior numbers, far from contributing everything, or even a substantial part, to victory, may actually be contributing very little, depending on the circumstances. (194) "But superiority varies in degrees." (194) Thus, "a significant superiority in numbers...will suffice to assure victory, however adverse the other circumstances." (195) In sum, quantitative superiority "must be regarded as fundamental--to be achieved in every case and to the fullest possible extent... But it would be seriously misunderstanding our argument, to consider numerical superiority as indispensable to victory..." (197) Eve seems to have a considerable number of tactical options already, so its either the lack of imagination on the part of the fleet commanders, or safety in numbers attitude that results in blob warefare. Afterall, if the lag is so bad that half the fleet can't target primary, whats the point. Regrettably your pocket dreads aren't going to change this, nor will they have any real impact on small number pvp other than to add another class of ship to counter (which is always a good thing [;)]
Jane Vladmir Gallente Dreamscape Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 09:53:00 - [67] You've got the problem out thought but your solution is faulty. This would just add diversity to the super effective blob. What you need to invent is a way for 10 ships to easily take on 30 ships, given that the 10 ship group hugely out-skills, out-SP's and out-isks the 30 ship groups. As it is now, a group of 10 faction ships w/ officer modules vs a group of 30 t1 ships will most likely lose in the isk-vs-isk fight. They might win the fight, even though unlikely, but they're bound to lose more isk by participating in the fight. That's why more pilots = more power.
Ogul Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:01:00 - [68] The two main reasons why people blob: 1) EVE is unrealistic in the way that the blob has none of the weaknesses that would apply in real life situations: * The blob is as fast as a single ship and it is not slowed down by its numbers. * There is no terrain where the blob can not move or is slowed down. * Friendly fire is practically impossible. Both of this means that travel times inside a solar system don't differ much between battleship blobs and interceptor gangs - we are talking about seconds here. 2) Bring the larger blob and lag will be on your side. This removes the incentive to bring a smaller gang of fast ships for a classic hit and run attack on the blob. Apart from introducing ridiculous new rules like stacknerfing focused fire or WoW-like restrictions on ship numbers in an engagement, I see no feasible way to reduce blobbing. Introducing new ships or moduless will not fix anything and ships that can withstand focused fire from a battleship for minutes are already in the game, they are called capital ships.
Ogul Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:05:00 - [69] Edited by: Ogul on 24/07/2007 10:14:48 Seems like a python strangled the forums...
shags	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:09:00 - [70] so what happens when everyone has one of these things and then instead of BS sniper fleets we have these pocket dread sniper fleets. poping anything from 250km. all it would do is further increase the gap between 2 fleets in a battle. blobing and focus fire will never go away because its the only logical way to fight in a game like this. place overwhelming firepower on a single target until its destroyed and then move on to the next target. Engage the target at a range farther then they can engage you from. you want to get rid of sniper fleets? here's the solution. introduce a new deployable item. Force field generators. just like a warp disruptor bubble give it a radius of 30-40 km for a large one. make it so that if your outside the bubble you can not target people inside the bubble and if your inside the bubble you can only target people also inside the bubble. also make it so you can only target the generator to destroy it while inside the bubble. Now you force people to run mixed short and long range fleets. defenders set the forcefield up and sit thier fleet inside it. attackers then would have to send short range fighters into the bubble to either destroy the bubble, destroy the defenders, or force them outside the bubble where they become targets for the snipers. Of course none of this fixes the real problem which is that the hardware and client are not able to support the current scale of such battles. your still just going to lag out and die.
Jaketh Ivanes Amarr Riggers Incorporated	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:23:00 - [71] Only way to really kill the blob, is to introduce line of fire. If you shoot at an enemy and a friendly ship is in the line of fire, you hit the friendly ship instead. That way, you can't just target and shoot, you have to move around a bit and can at the same time shield your friends. Introducing a new ship, will not remove blobs. If you removed battleships from the game, the blobs would just be made of cruisers instead. Still a blob.
Solbright altaltalt Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:31:00 - [72] Originally by: shags you want to get rid of sniper fleets? here's the solution. introduce a new deployable item. Force field generators. just like a warp disruptor bubble give it a radius of 30-40 km for a large one. make it so that if your outside the bubble you can not target people inside the bubble and if your inside the bubble you can only target people also inside the bubble. also make it so you can only target the generator to destroy it while inside the bubble. Now you force people to run mixed short and long range fleets. That actually increases blobbing. With this in place you effectively end up with multiple separate fleets in the same grid sector - creating even large stutters and even more lag. That said, Blobs are good Remember that a blob is all ships in the one grid sector. It don't matter where they are spaced in that sector.
Radamathadus	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:32:00 - [73] In regards to solo and small gang pvp the blobbing effect was massively impacted upon by warp to zero largely in conjunction with the hp boost. Solo players attacking solo targets would find themselves being blobbed as back up is called in fom upto 6-7 systems away and arrived in time to win the fight. Removing warp to zero would be unwanted by much of the player base and the community have adapted well so its removal is pretty much a none starter. The hp boost does prolong fights and as such acheived its goal. My suggestion for improving the solo / small gang experience would also be highly unpopular but somewhat effective. I think that decreasing warp speed by upto a factor of 10 (a starting suggestion rather than a definive figure) across the board would bring several benifits. Firstly bringing in friends to a fight from more than a few jumps away would be far less effective. So solo and small gangs could function again. A return to the eve post closure of the superhighways would occur. Hubs other than Jita would spring up as travelling 12 - 18 would become a real chore. Regional markets would become stronger again. Carriers would become logistics king and jump clones a nessesity and start to forfill the roles they were designed to play. The downside is of course the time sink factor in as much as travel in eve is boring as hell anyway. The high sec community would be challenged most to adapt but could benifit from gaining more trade hubs and thus more profit. After all we survived lossing Yulai and the superhighways.
shags	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:43:00 - [74] Edited by: shags on 24/07/2007 10:43:34 Originally by: Solbright altaltalt Originally by: shags you want to get rid of sniper fleets? here's the solution. introduce a new deployable item. Force field generators. just like a warp disruptor bubble give it a radius of 30-40 km for a large one. make it so that if your outside the bubble you can not target people inside the bubble and if your inside the bubble you can only target people also inside the bubble. also make it so you can only target the generator to destroy it while inside the bubble. Now you force people to run mixed short and long range fleets. That actually increases blobbing. With this in place you effectively end up with multiple separate fleets in the same grid sector - creating even large stutters and even more lag. That said, Blobs are good Remember that a blob is all ships in the one grid sector. It don't matter where they are spaced in that sector. well your right, none of these posts matter because the only real problem is the lag. get rid of that and you fix a lot of problems. I agree blobs are fun. What i was addressing was more the sniper fleet. sniping is boring and sniper fleet vs sniper fleet is even more boring. the force field bubble would at least change things up a bit. But untill you can actualy have 300 people on the same grid with out lag nothing is going to fix fleet combat.
Cygnus Zhada Amarr UK Corp FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:45:00 - [75] Edited by: Cygnus Zhada on 24/07/2007 10:45:53 It's a nice idea but where it fails is giving them a short range option. As such you create a BS Mark II where you still have the option to blob up and move and attack as one group. Imo that doesn't solve anything. Now if you would make those ships long range ONLY (No short range weapon system, and since you only have 4 slots it's not worth it using BS class weapons) all of a sudden you would create a tactical opportunity/problem which needs to be used and/or solved. If you make em slow, heavily tanked, hard hitting snipers you essentially make them into the actual battlships as used by the marine of old; huge gunships, slow, cumbersome but deadly at range while requiring support and defense against closerange attacks. You would force people to actually use tactics instead of blobbing, and with very low agility they would be useless as a normal fleet ship due to their slow aligning. So using them would be a tactical desicion instead of an obvious blobbing/dps option. similar to the dreads as we have them but indeed pocketsized, used against ships rather than POSes. Forcing more tactics means less blobs. Yes, I use lasers, please stop laughing in the back.
Guilliman R Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:53:00 - [76] Give torps AOE damage? small torps have 2km aoe damage (100% on target 50% on the people/drones around him meds 5km aoe, rest same Heavies 7km Siege/cruise 10km AOE range torps are already limited due to flight time, so there's a negative side. Atleast this would force people to spread out a lot. And with 100+ ships, people will have to go into 'squads' and attack from all sides (if they want to hit everyone at the same time atleast. -Wachtmeister ([email protected]) <3
Strategos Banned Society	Posted - 2007.07.24 10:56:00 - [77] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Originally by: Strategos Edited by: Strategos on 24/07/2007 06:41:50 Why don't you try flying a Vaga or a Mach or even a Sabre and then say Solo PvP is dead. The Vaga and the Mach are beyond overpowered 1v1 unless the ship you're going against is specifically set up to take you out which you will rarely find hunting unsuspecting ratters. And even then setting up for a 1v1 vs a nano mach is laughable. Btw I think your ideas are absurd. Solopwnmobiles = ftl. So people should only be able to solo if they have vast amounts of ISK? They should pay 30mil for a sabre to kill frigates and t1 cruisers, hundreds of millions for a vaga and fittings to kill BC's and cruisers? And billions in faction BS and fittings to kill other BS? Thank god you aren't a dev. That went right over your head. ---Sig--- Sig removed, not appropriate for the forum. Please contact [email protected] for more info (including a copy of your picture!) -Pirlouit
PussPuss	Posted - 2007.07.24 11:26:00 - [78] New ship types, while cool are not the way forwards to defeat blobs... Blobs work simply because an entire fleet can target one ship at the same time. While calling primaries is a good method for winning and you end up with a war of attrition between two fleets it destroys many strategic options. To break down blobs you have to break down the benefits of blobbing. Stacking penalties on multiple ships targetting a single ship, pockets of space (like deadspace) where spatial distortions and electromagnetic interference prevent anything more than one ship being able to target one ship and that ship being able to target back. Nerfing individual pilot and ship attributes does not affect blobbing, you have to nerf group offensive attributes. It would make combat so much more enjoyable, long lasting and strategic.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.07.24 11:28:00 - [79] lets make eve turn based ! :=)
Setana Manoro Gallente Firefly Inc.	Posted - 2007.07.24 11:29:00 - [80] Originally by: murder one Originally by: Strategos Whatever dude. I'm not going to go into a war of words with you. What you're trying to design will not work and those who actually fly in fleets will see this. Just wait till t2 BS's are released. In MY opinion it's a shotty idea, but to each his own. I fly/FC fleets all the time. T2 BS won't change anything. They're not going to add anything that is going to make a difference fleet wise. It's like Command Ships currently. They still get vaporized in one volley, regardless of resists. CCP has screwed up solo PVP in deference to fleet warfare. If ships like the proposed were introduced, BS could be re-balanced back to where they were and we could once again have some reasonable solo and small gang action. Considering how much of an advocate of solo-pvp you are, i find it laughable that you say "I fly/FC fleets all the time." Seriously dude, your posts have started to be a joke ever since you started to whine about boosting the gallente bs's. This is a joke in the same way but you will not listen to others, you post immediately after someone else attacking the words used, but not the ideea. PS: I'd rather see CCP fix EVE now then to add more content. Because if this BS continues, many will leave. Caldari are the plague of EVE, little whiners that must be cleansed from TQ.
cal nereus Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.07.24 11:32:00 - [81] Hmmm, this is an interesting thought: What if the maximum number of ships that can lock onto a given target works in much the same way that a ship can only lock onto a given number of targets? For example, if one guy can only lock onto seven targets at once, perhaps one guy can only be locked by seven (or some other number)?
Cygnus Zhada Amarr UK Corp FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 11:36:00 - [82] Originally by: cal nereus Hmmm, this is an interesting thought: What if the maximum number of ships that can lock onto a given target works in much the same way that a ship can only lock onto a given number of targets? For example, if one guy can only lock onto seven targets at once, perhaps one guy can only be locked by seven (or some other number)? Then everyone in the friendly fleet would target eachother to fill up the targeting slots Yes, I use lasers, please stop laughing in the back.
Leandro Salazar The Blackguard Wolves	Posted - 2007.07.24 11:44:00 - [83] While I agree with the notion of introducing a ship class similar to what is suggested, the reasoning is fairly stupid. The only 'solo pvp' that really suffered from Hp boosts and damage nerfs (which were only 6.66%, not 20% btw, BS high damage ammo went from 60 damage to 56) is ganking a hapless victim or someone else not interested in a fight. And I find nothing wrong with that, other people are NOT just content fo you. Engaging a target your size that is also interested in a solo fight would still give you the fight you would have gotten before, it would just take longer. But of course these people NEVER EVER engage those also interested in 'solo PvP'. I wonder why... There is no 'n' in turret There is no 'r' in faction There is no 'a' in Scorpion There is no 'e' in Caldari There is no makeup in rogue drones
Daimos Bellurdan Black Reign FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.24 11:54:00 - [84] There is only one way to stop blobbing: Change the game design so that players do not have to blob to win or even more extreme: Blobbers lose more ships than non blobbers. How: Smaller gangs have to be able to win against larger gangs. Bombs arent enough. We need more Aoe weapons or weapons that work well against fleets but not against a small number of ships. A 4s invulerabilty mod with 2 min cooldown would help as well against focus firing. It should be like this: small gang with anti blob weapons > blob > small gang with standard fitting > small gang with anti blob weapons More players in gang should not always mean a win. Better setups and better teamplay should give you the best chance for winning except when there is an extreme difference in ship numbers.
Steyr Daghan	Posted - 2007.07.24 12:18:00 - [85] Originally by: me bored I have a more simple and effective solution. Roll back the hp buffs, the stacking nerf and warp to 0. They were huge cock ups on ccp's part and it's about time they admitted their mistakes and did something about it. Oh please, that's bs and not a solution to anything that's being discussed. The only reason anyone resists the wtz is that they wanna sit at gates and pop noobs without having to work for it. The odds are still on the side of the ganker and wtz only had the effect of demanding some kind of effort on part of the so called pirates. You just want your i-win button back. How would that solve blobs, lag or for that matter make 1vs1 better?
Steyr Daghan	Posted - 2007.07.24 12:24:00 - [86] Originally by: Gaia Thorn <snip> Tbh the only way to remove blob warfare is to remove local in 0.0 plain and simple. Cause all the "strategy" to is what number do the enemy have and how many can we muster to take that force out. <snip> This sounds corny but you are right. This is brilliant. It would also create an actual need to do some serious combat recon. Probe scanners and other things would also, for the first time, find better use than as prey-finders for noob-gankers.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Guardians of the Dawn Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.07.24 12:35:00 - [87] Remove local, and then side A that has 10 ships don know that B has 15. So A won wait 20 minutes more to get to 15 ships, neither would B then ask for more ships to 20 etc. etc. etc.. Would make fights start much sooner and with much smaller numbers. Without local we reintroduce the concept of stealth. Any military annalist will tell you there are only 3 ways of achieving supremacy, superior force (blob), unreachability (speed usually, but peopel proved to not liek it in here) and stealth (cannot be achieved with LOCAl). You cannot escape form that, if EVE do not allow unreachability niether stealth, blob will remain as the only option. If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Sandra Jones	Posted - 2007.07.24 12:47:00 - [88] somehow i got the feeling that introducing your new shiptype just creates the need for larger blobs with even more firepower...
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 21:38:00 - [89] Originally by: Cygnus Zhada Edited by: Cygnus Zhada on 24/07/2007 10:45:53 It's a nice idea but where it fails is giving them a short range option. As such you create a BS Mark II where you still have the option to blob up and move and attack as one group. Imo that doesn't solve anything. Now if you would make those ships long range ONLY (No short range weapon system, and since you only have 4 slots it's not worth it using BS class weapons) all of a sudden you would create a tactical opportunity/problem which needs to be used and/or solved. If you make em slow, heavily tanked, hard hitting snipers you essentially make them into the actual battlships as used by the marine of old; huge gunships, slow, cumbersome but deadly at range while requiring support and defense against closerange attacks. You would force people to actually use tactics instead of blobbing, and with very low agility they would be useless as a normal fleet ship due to their slow aligning. So using them would be a tactical desicion instead of an obvious blobbing/dps option. similar to the dreads as we have them but indeed pocketsized, used against ships rather than POSes. Forcing more tactics means less blobs. You're completely right. If these ships simply had one weapon type (long range fleet guns), they'd be relatively useless up close (the Caldari and Gallente ships would be more useful than the Minmatar and Amarr for ultra short range, but generally speaking, they'll be even). You wouldn't see them in gate camps too much if they only had long range weapons, and since they'd be slow to align/warp, it would be very clumsy to use them in any sort of combat outside of fleet engagements without support. I agree that short range weapons should be omitted. Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
Terradoct Gallente shock-WAVE corp. Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2007.07.24 21:58:00 - [90] All that need's in removing blobing is reduecing all guns and missile range by vast margins. Like make that short range is not futher than 2km, long range is 10km, and extrime is 15km. Long range guns\missiles requer that there target must be marked by target painter. In order to use extrim range guns you must stop you ship. Adjust all modulse range accordenly.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.07.24 22:18:00 - [91] Originally by: Terradoct All that need's in removing blobing is reduecing all guns and missile range by vast margins. Like make that short range is not futher than 2km, long range is 10km, and extrime is 15km. Long range guns\missiles requer that there target must be marked by target painter. In order to use extrim range guns you must stop you ship. Adjust all modulse range accordenly. And people think I'm insane... Originally by: Goumindong it is at the point where it is impossible to determine whether or not you are trolling or if you area really out of your freaking mind.
cuteboylookingatyou	Posted - 2007.08.19 21:40:00 - [92] I like this idea
Dec V Minmatar Winds of Dawn	Posted - 2007.08.19 23:25:00 - [93] Im not to sure about this. I like the idea, I think there is a bit of a niche for them in the game, but with more and more players having 1 billion isk plus, what happens when these ships, which they will do, replace battleships in fleet battles? Then we will have the exact same problems as we had before. Also, recons will be absolutely useless against them, you dont need them webbing, huge cap so curses arent a problem (esp after nos nerf) huge locking range and ecm strenght so falcon and arazu are useless too. Recons are what is keeping battleships down at the moment, thats the reason more people are flying hacs/command ships. I just don't see how this actually stops blobbing though, at all. The big rich alliances will all use them, and they will be even more powerful than before. Fleets will be full of them, it doesn't decrease the numbers of players fighting, it just gives them a new toy. I think ccp have proved that a ship class isn't going remove blobbing, whether they have learnt from their mistakes is another thing. They made their bed with pos's, cap ships and soveriegnity, and since then all they have done is added to them 3 things, which is turning fighting in eve into blob fests. Obviously they aren't gonna remove pos's from the game (even though they should ). The only other way forward I see is a tactical move. If ccp implement tactics where it is wise not to bring more people, maybe formation flying or...Somebody in another thread ages ago put it perfectly, the only way to beat a blob is to bring a bigger blob, so he said ambushes or shock attacks should be implemented. Think about it, a fleet jumps into a system, the fc knows something is wrong and then BAM the traps set and they're !!!NOT OUTNUMBERED!!! but !!!OUT MANOUVERED!!! The ambushers are in a tactically superior situation, they dont need the extra men, because they have tactically outmanouvered their opponents. There is a lot of ways ccp can implement this, im too tired to think of any but I think this would solve blobs and add a great new level of fighting, make fleet battles not just necassary but FUN pvp. Just my ideas, they aren't perfect and im sure this lovely community will point flaws but...meh
Illyria Ambri RennTech	Posted - 2007.08.19 23:44:00 - [94] Your concept is singularly flawed against caldari.. Everyone knows missles in PvP equals loose... yet you are forcing Caldari to be limited to missles only. We are a Rail gun and missle race.. not just missles. ------------ This is not War... This is pest control - Dalek Sek Here come the Drums!! - The Master
ttrrwafsfamfjkasjf	Posted - 2007.08.31 11:22:00 - [95] Originally by: Illyria Ambri Your concept is singularly flawed against caldari.. Everyone knows missles in PvP equals loose... yet you are forcing Caldari to be limited to missles only. We are a Rail gun and missle race.. not just missles. I use hybrids on my raven.
ViperVenom Labteck Corporation LTD. Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2007.10.08 19:17:00 - [96] Edited by: ViperVenom on 08/10/2007 19:22:29 Edited by: ViperVenom on 08/10/2007 19:19:29 Iv been in quite a few fleet ops. and let me say Lag/Desync is a very very bad problem. When you pew pew pew a pos(in a carrier is way worse/Dread not too bad) then the screen freezes. then 10-15 min pass and TS still works it sucks.!im not going to name locations...Catch Prov...o my bad. Iv had a few Cap ships blown up due to desync/lag/drone spammage. When i seen local grown by 95+ and im clicking jump too and nothing happens then screen froze. You tell me what is there to make me want to enjoy that feeling of screen un freeze in a pod in a Outpost some where else. Im not sure what CCP can do to fix it.i mean 350 in local is nuts. Then the Drones spammage/webbing gate to induce lag...its crazy. I kinda want to head back to empire and carebear cuz fleet combat sucks so bad now. To defend a POS you have to be ready to say o wow look it froze let me wait and see if im dead o im not dead let me o look im out of ammo let me reload..wait wait wait froze screen..not kewl Lag/Desync is very very bad! my bad off topic solo pvp is alive but only in hisec with war decs. last solo kill i got was a pod getting away..lol. The game is all about small gang warfare or huge OMG 200v150 pwnage/lagfest. And just for the record i think 300 man plus gangs are Silly! --www.yarrburger.com-- Also www.Pwnageinc.org-- If u whine about it,then it shall be nerf batted. Lets just stop pod killing while we at it!. --J/P--
Cotton Tail Domination. League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.10.08 20:20:00 - [97] The ships sound fun, but as others have said, the problem isn't the ships, the problem is that EVE has reached a level in subscribers where a multi alliance fight can attract more players than a system can handle, while having no true reason to stop people from blobbing. If a new ship becomes very powerful, it will just become the new preferred weapon of war, people will realise that the best way to kill their enemy is to bring more of the good weapons than their opponents, and the whole cycle starts all over again. Having ships which take ages to kill won't encourage tactics as much as it would encourage blobbing, while making combat exceptionally drawn out. There are two real ways to stop the situation as it now is, 1) CCP magically manage to fix the servers and game code to allow it to accomodate the current demands of the player base (Which everyone whines about them doing but it's obvious CCP don't know how to do it, and can you blame them?). 2) Come up with a game mechanic which penalises a side for bringing numbers in excess of what the server can realistically handle, either through simple mathematical penalties or forcing large groups to be more organised than 'FC says you 'xyz' dies'. The perfect solution would be 1), but that just doesn't seem managable at the moment, I really have a hard time understanding how people think CCP is deliberately sabotaging their own game by not waving a wand and making the 800 man lag gremlins go away. Everyone involved in such situations knows the problem, yet they continue to do it anyway. Thus all CCP can do is try and nudge people towards option 2, and that's some seriously delicate balancing, and most importantly CCP need to decide what size of fleet they consider to be excessive and plan around that. The way I'd do that is to introduce a some kind of sensory confusion when large groups of players are on the same grid and get close to eachother. If too many ships are packed in close proximity, their ability to target their opponents becomes slower, as their sensors try to select their target amongst all the noise around them (or whatever random roleplay reason you want). The smaller your fleet, the less 'noise' your fleet produces, the shorter time your guys have to lock and engage, giving you the first strike advantage & the ability to cycle through targets faster. In addition to this, make the radius of the noise bubble increase with the number of ships on the grid, so if one side wants to blob, they have to spread themselves out a lot more than if they had brought smaller numbers. This would still allow large groups of players on the same side to work together however, all you'd need to do was organise your fleet so that it was spread out enough to negate the 'noise', which would of course mean that you'd have to make sure everyone knows where to go and have jump in points pre selected. The downside of that is the advantage a defender would have, having time to set up and spread out, giving them the maximum advantage over people assaulting. However the large size of the fleet would make moving from the spot very difficult to organise effectively, bringing in a much needed sense of logistics to mass blob warfare. And then you get the possibility that this could just cause people to wait even longer as they set up to fight, effectively making grand scale fleet fighting even longer. That I have no solution to, although the way lag is currently, I think a few minutes waiting time between firing is better than not being able to see/fire at the enemy at all. It's not a perfect idea, but this situation doesn't have a perfect remedy. Thats my best shot at it at least.
Garonis Caldari Templars of Space Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.08 20:44:00 - [98] Edited by: Garonis on 08/10/2007 20:45:01 I am 100% behind having new toys but to stop the blobs, IMHO you have to #1. Get rid of local, at least in 0.0 #2 limit the actual size of the gang/fleet. #3. Someone suggested making warp much slower, I think thats a great idea to limit the "white cell response" you would get from having an element of your fleet engaged. This would also have the smaller, faster ship become more than just tacklers, as they become the true screen such ships historically are good for. #4. My last suggestion is kind of way out in left field. A pact between all organizations to limit max participation in battle. I don't see that happening. Edit: I really like the idea of having LOS fire as well This is my sig ^^
General StarScream THE DECEPTIC0NS	Posted - 2007.10.08 20:53:00 - [99] agree eve sounds more fun the way it was. even tho small gang pvp and 1vs1 is not to hard to find, but you offen get ganked, by big gangs, wich is kinda funny when they smack you around for killing you with there hole uber fleet with dampers and jamming ship. its quite fun to lose ships, win or die, its fun to fight. but lag lag lag lag that sinks.
Cailais Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.08 21:05:00 - [100] Originally by: BluOrange Edited by: BluOrange on 24/07/2007 02:48:31 A pocket dread would be an interesting tactical option. But it won't fix blobbing. Blobbing is a strategic problem, tactical variations cannot (and therefore will not) fix blobbing. To fix blobbing, you have to provide a strategic incentive for people to disperse their forces, rather than concentrating them. Spot on Blu. C. - sig designer - eve mail
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2007.10.08 21:06:00 - [101] While I like the idea of a "Pocket Dread", the hope that this will somehow contribute to reduced blobbing is silly. As others have said, the "PD" will simply become the weapon of choice for fleet warfare, accelerating the "blobbiness" of warfare. At least one other person has suggested the removal of WTZ. This is ALSO a fool's bet. If you will remember, one of the early causes of massive lag was all the Instas that people made. Adding WTZ eliminated the need for instas, and reduced lagginess. Removing it would re-introduce that lag back into the game, making blob warfare even MORE of a problem. Ultimately, the best fix for the blobs is going to be upgraded server and engine capacity, and an engine that can be scaled up and up and up across multiple pieces of hardware or virtual machines. Hopefully this is something that Trinity will bring. Until then, we are just going to have to realize that the giant blobs will be a problem, and re-adjust our tactics to quick hit and run tactics with the upcoming covert cynos and the existing bombers.
Nicocat Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.08 22:24:00 - [102] Horray for necroing threads that show how m1 can't understand the root problem behind blobs. Namely, have more = use more = win more, period. ---------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!
Cailais Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.08 22:26:00 - [103] Originally by: Bish Ounen While I like the idea of a "Pocket Dread", the hope that this will somehow contribute to reduced blobbing is silly. As others have said, the "PD" will simply become the weapon of choice for fleet warfare, accelerating the "blobbiness" of warfare. At least one other person has suggested the removal of WTZ. This is ALSO a fool's bet. If you will remember, one of the early causes of massive lag was all the Instas that people made. Adding WTZ eliminated the need for instas, and reduced lagginess. Removing it would re-introduce that lag back into the game, making blob warfare even MORE of a problem. Ultimately, the best fix for the blobs is going to be upgraded server and engine capacity, and an engine that can be scaled up and up and up across multiple pieces of hardware or virtual machines. Hopefully this is something that Trinity will bring. Until then, we are just going to have to realize that the giant blobs will be a problem, and re-adjust our tactics to quick hit and run tactics with the upcoming covert cynos and the existing bombers. I don't understand this hope for a miracle server / code that will banish all lag. Add 20% server capacity, countered by 20% population growth. If fleet battles run smoothly with 500 ships, players will bring 1000. Its just a stupid dream tbh. C. - sig designer - eve mail
Vitrael Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.10.08 22:33:00 - [104] Fix blobs with bigger ships?
Gemmell DEATHFUNK Chaos Incarnate.	Posted - 2007.10.08 23:03:00 - [105] a simple but efective solution for blob warfare. EMP bombs range 300km, blast radius 70km(with indipendant skill at level 5, say aprox 15km with level 1) outcome - all ships within this area efectively shut down for a set ammount of time. completely. drawback - extremely high skill traning requierments and very costly, wouldent want them usefull for anything else. thoughts?
Plutonian Plutonian Shore	Posted - 2007.10.09 00:20:00 - [106] Getting more people to strengthen your side is the simplest, quickest, and most basic tactical move a commander can make. They bring 20 soldiers... we bring 50... so they scrounge up 100... and so on. How can any game change nullify countless years of human evolution? There is a way to stop this endless escalation... but you won't like it. If an upper-limit is placed on groups, which immediately cause the numbers-gathering tactic to fail horribly, it will finally be abandoned. We have that... it's called crippling lag.
I SoStoned	Posted - 2007.10.09 00:39:00 - [107] Originally by: murder one The ships would have their grid/cpu designed appropriatly so they could be fit with a single capital rep/shield booster. Give them either of two capabilities: Fit BS weapons, but give them a sizable damage bonus (equiv of a BS fitting 8 without damage bonuses, as most inties enjoy now). Or allow them to fit capital/siege weapons, but without the ability to enter siege mode, with only a tracking or ROF bonus. Or make them beefy logistics ships, again lacking the triage mode carriers enjoy, but solid tanks for their abysmal speed.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.