Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maximor
Fifth Exiled Legion Ground Zeero
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 12:47:00 -
[31]
POS's used to be speed bumps for any well equipped fleet. A "deathstar" was just a larger speed bump. From an RP standing, POS's were capable of using the largest and most powerful(non siege) weaponry in the game. Yet most POS's were nothing more than a several hour long grind. The balance was in the attacker's favor. POS weaponry was randomly targeted and didn't stay on target for very long.
In comes the patch. We have to move defensive batteries outside the shields. The lock times get severely nerfed. In return, we get the ability to target POS weaponry and the hp's of POS batteries get buffed significantly. However, unless someone is there to control the weaponry, the POS still randomly targets people except that now, POS weaponry has to establish its own lock which in some cases, could take several minutes. Not only that, but logsitics modules and ships received a significant buff to include triage mode for carriers. To top it off, the batteries can be disabled without actually destroying the CT, allowing the attackers to regroup and come back later. POS's are STILL just a speedbump, they just take a bit longer to drive over, depending on the number of modules at the POS. The advantage is STILL with the attackers. The only exception to this is in a zero sec capital system.
Then we get another patch. POS battery lock times are increased,(Not accross the board, small weapon arrays were not changed.) In some cases, the increase ammounted to only 25%. And people begin to cry nerf? POS's are still speedbumps. The difference is that they can be properly defended now. The advantage is not on either side.
There are some game mechanics that provide an advantage to defenders such as capital sovreignty and cyno jammers. But there are also things that benefit the attackers, such as the "fix" for POS shields that prevents a carrier from launching fighter and then ducking back inside the shields. Or the mechanic that prevents friendly units from targeting each other or anything outside the shields while inside.
BTW, for the record, POS battery lock times are STILL longer than they originally were, even after the buff in the last patch.
If you hold a unix shell up to your ear, can you still hear the c: ? |
Jags
Minmatar M. Corp M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 13:04:00 -
[32]
FFS stop the smack, the OP makes a valid and well presented post. Personally I dont agree with him but he is entitled to his view without smack.
FWIW I think RZR faced one of the best setup POS Ive ever seen and also having it well manned helps in taking down the BS attacking it.
Cyno jammers are slightly overpowered with a bit too many HPs , maybe cut the HP in half and its fairer, atm we will take advantage of it though
|
General Apocalypse
Amarr The Merchant Marines
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 13:40:00 -
[33]
FC : We lost ! Quick to the forums !
Originally by: CCP Morpheus nerf ccp plz
Originally by: CCP Oveur To the gankmobile!
|
Princess Jodi
Vendetta Underground Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 13:47:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Maximor POS's used to be speed bumps for any well equipped fleet.
Very well said, Maximor! I don't think there is anything wrong with the best setup DeathStar being able to pop a bunch of battleships. The recent changes to POS mechanics are all a win situation for me.
In the past, you only attacked a POS when you knew you had enough dreads to spread out the damage. No Dreads ever died to a POS it seems...and the system was locked down so attacking the Dreads was a very rare occurrance. Witness MC's complete destruction of 100+? POS's without losing a single capital ship.
So... I support the current mechanics of Cyno Jammers. Perhaps there is a hit point balance issue, but I've shot a few Cyno Jammers and they can be killed. Just not killed for free.
P.S. Sorry to disagree with Razor on this one... I'll see if I can get another tanked BS to help you guys tonight. Just so you know I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is.
|
ttrrwafsfamfjkasjf
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 14:41:00 -
[35]
Originally by: General Apocalypse FC : We lost ! Quick to the forums !
Why make fun of GOONSWARM?
|
Tzrailasa
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 15:11:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Central Scrutinizer So, a brief rundown of the points:
- It's not fun. - It requires blobbage, up to node-death levels. - It is far too slow to take a system, if both sides are competent and nearly evenly matched.
On the two first points, this is not just a point for the cyno jammers but for the whole damned POS warfare system...
On the last point, if two sides are evenly matched, the defender should get the advantage. CCP want more stable 0.0 empires, and this is a way of contributing to that.
POS need to be dangerous, even unmanned. Otherwise timezone coverage becomes too powerful. It shouldn't be mandatory to have full timezone coverage just to participate in 0.0 empire politics, since this would penalise a lot of 'national' corp/alliances...
Personally, I think the whole "Move things out of pos shield" was a monumental mistake by CCP since it encourages blobbing to a degree not seen before. Especially the argument of "Making small gangs useful" makes me laugh all the time, since EXACTLY the opposite has happened. Small gangs are now more useless than ever!
My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance. |
Raneru
Viper Squad Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 17:35:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Central Scrutinizer
We crashed the node, then raped 10 of your unsupported capital ships, and I stil want it changed.
It makes so much more sense that way, doesn't it?
exactly why cyno jammers need to be changed. instead of a 100man fleet + caps doin the job, you first need a 300 man fleet to take the cyno jammer down. (dead node).
|
Interval
Grenadiers
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 18:09:00 -
[38]
How about this. When the enemy drops a sov claiming pos in the system the cyno-jammer gets prevented from onlining. Also the enemy can't have the pos claim sov with an active cyno-jammer in system?
|
Trac3rt
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 18:19:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Trac3rt on 31/08/2007 18:19:36
Originally by: Tzrailasa i.e. there should be a counter to blobs that size and above different from bringing your own blob and lag the servers to death....
This is after all about having fun, and nobody I know thinks lagged fights are fun. Current gameplay however, mandates blobs by its very nature....
INTERMEDIATE OBJECTIVES FOR SMALL GANGS!
We don't neccecarily need a counter to blobs, more a point of diminishing returns where the effectiveness a single fleet is significantly less than the effectiveness of multiple smaller fleets.
For example in a 250v250 situation if team A blobs up in System 1, and team B has 4x50 man fleets in systems 1,2,3 and 4. Unless team A also splits their fleet they will lose 3/4 strategic objectives, which would eventually cost them war was they lose everything else while blobbing up a single system. If team A also splits their fleet, then you are looking at a situation where you have multiple 50v50 skirmishes over multiple systems which would be a lot more fun, and a lot easier on the server. There are so many strategies that could be employed by either side to get ahead it would make alliance combat a lot more fun.
This is unfeasable at the moment because there is nothing a 50 person fleet of mixed shiptypes can do with regards to territorial warfare at the moment.
You don't need to change the fleet game mechanic at all, you need to change the territorial warfare mechanic to make multiple smaller groups more effective than a single blob.
Regarding the Cyno Jammer, I see a lot of people complaining about them and a lot of people smacking those who complain, but nobody saying anything good about them. I think they are a great idea, but the amount of effort it takes to offline one is unreasonable. The obvious solutions would be to exampine the amount of raw HP they have and the amount of defense you can equip on a tower with one anchored.
___
|
Joshua Foiritain
Gallente Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 18:25:00 -
[40]
Cyno jammers are fine tbh, defenders need to have the advantage here, being able to randomly drop capitals on your enemy is silly. -----
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
|
MrRx7
Amarr Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 18:32:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Central Scrutinizer Edited by: Central Scrutinizer on 31/08/2007 10:12:05
Originally by: Bakurra Trunkated
trunkated again
Stop posting please, your replies are no better than the smack in this thread, you make us look bad.. so please STFU. |
ttrrwafsfamfjkasjf
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 18:57:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Cyno jammers are fine tbh, defenders need to have the advantage here, being able to randomly drop capitals on your enemy is silly.
You make a good point.
|
Great Artista
Caldari Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 19:20:00 -
[43]
Originally by: ttrrwafsfamfjkasjf
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Cyno jammers are fine tbh, defenders need to have the advantage here, being able to randomly drop capitals on your enemy is silly.
You make a good point.
He does, but blobs are silly too... Something is very wrong here... _______
◕◡◕ Space perverts and forum warriors united. [PERVS]
My opinions rather rarely represent my corp, not to mention my alliance hihihi... |
Tzrailasa
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 19:23:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Trac3rt
Originally by: Tzrailasa i.e. there should be a counter to blobs that size and above different from bringing your own blob and lag the servers to death....
This is after all about having fun, and nobody I know thinks lagged fights are fun. Current gameplay however, mandates blobs by its very nature....
....
You don't need to change the fleet game mechanic at all, you need to change the territorial warfare mechanic to make multiple smaller groups more effective than a single blob.
....
To a certain degree I agree that this would be a good idea if it could be implemented, but the fact is that as long as lag-blobbing the server makes it possible for people to AVOID fights (simply because the server can't handle it and people CAN'T realistically engage), they'll continue doing it....
If large blobs (say 100+) are..... DISCOURAGED.... what you're suggesting have to happen anyway....
My personal favorite would be a Doomsday-like weapon, mounted on a BS, that can either be activated by the pilot, or is automatically activated when the BS dies (to make it usable when load-lagged). If there are less than 100 ships on grid, it does absolutely nothing. If more are present, damage/range goes UP along these lines: 100-150 people: 20-50 km range, 500-3000 damage 150-200 people: 50-100 km range, 3000-30000 damage 200-250 people: 100-150km range, 30000-100000 damage 250+ people: WTFPWN all non-capitals on grid There are tweaks needed, and the numbers are only indicative, but it would effectively discourage people from blobbing....
My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance. |
Laboratus
Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 20:51:00 -
[45]
Cyno jammers should have little hp, but interceptor size, so that frigates do effective dps against them. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
Central Scrutinizer
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 23:34:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Trac3rt
Originally by: Tzrailasa i.e. there should be a counter to blobs that size and above different from bringing your own blob and lag the servers to death....
This is after all about having fun, and nobody I know thinks lagged fights are fun. Current gameplay however, mandates blobs by its very nature....
....
You don't need to change the fleet game mechanic at all, you need to change the territorial warfare mechanic to make multiple smaller groups more effective than a single blob.
....
To a certain degree I agree that this would be a good idea if it could be implemented, but the fact is that as long as lag-blobbing the server makes it possible for people to AVOID fights (simply because the server can't handle it and people CAN'T realistically engage), they'll continue doing it....
The think is, that when you have node-death levels, which are required in any large op, there is no reason to not jump in. The bnode will crash, then the two sides are on roughly equal footing, or at least, equal chance of being on the upper hand.
Node crashing is now a tactical decision, since nothing else works.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.09.01 01:06:00 -
[47]
Cyno jammers should require multiple systems to form a "network" before they come online IMO.
Say you need 3 systems in a constellation with a cyno jammer in each system before they online. Now the attacker has 3 targets.
|
ghosttr
Amarr ARK-CORP FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.01 01:36:00 -
[48]
I think levels of constellation sov should be required, to anchor a jammer you should have to have at least 1 outpost in the constellation. Also jammers should have a little less hp, and pos guns should be ineffective if unmanned. . Do not read this thread!!!
|
lofty29
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.09.01 01:41:00 -
[49]
Just use logistic fit bses. Stick remote rep drones in all their bays and keep them in a tight gorup, and armor resist them all. Win ---
Project Mayhem 2 |
Cyan Nuevo
Dudes In Crazy Killing Ships
|
Posted - 2007.09.01 02:25:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Tzrailasa Personally, I think the whole "Move things out of pos shield" was a monumental mistake by CCP since it encourages blobbing to a degree not seen before. Especially the argument of "Making small gangs useful" makes me laugh all the time, since EXACTLY the opposite has happened. Small gangs are now more useless than ever!
Although I think your post as a whole is true and well thought-out, I disagree here. I haven't been a part of a large alliance since the POS change, but I have seen a few POS sieges both defending and attacking. I have to say that the outside-the-shield changes definitely helped improve the situation for smaller gangs. Before the change there was literally nothing a smaller gang could do against a POS than grind for hours and hope they could win since there was no way they were getting out unscathed unless they actually brought the thing down. If large alliances are blobbing more than ever now, I think it probably has to do with other factors, and is not caused by this change itself.
About the OP, though, I don't think it's too overpowered since if you get the sov for a cyno jammer that should give them quite an advantage. Think about RL, if a force holds a piece of land for a while it's going to get very fortified and an attack will be very costly (D-Day). --- Proud Amarr pilot.
|
|
Ernest Graefenberg
Minmatar Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.01 02:48:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Ernest Graefenberg on 01/09/2007 02:48:57
Originally by: Jags
FWIW I think RZR faced one of the best setup POS Ive ever seen and also having it well manned helps in taking down the BS attacking it.
It was reasonably feasible to take down when the grid it was in was properly sized. At 800+ km from the turrets, while still being hit somewhat, we were at least not in 95%+ accuracy range anymore. That allowed us to at least have a preload. That's what we did the first time around, and that worked out just fine.
Once the grid was tiny on the second day, and the scramblers functioning even though incapacitated, things got stupid. While the scramblers, bugged or no, were not an issue for BS - having to try to warp 100 already-lagged out guys straight into grid and back out is horribly messy.
That aside, balance wise the problem lies in the domination guns. With nearly 600km optimal + falloff with Republic Fleet Emp and twice the hitpoints of a standard turret, they break what's an otherwise easy to counter module. They also come with a 90mm scan res and do 20% more damage than a regular turret, along with taking 24% less powergrid.
I don't really see why we need pimp structures in the first place, let alone more mechanics that encourage collecting faction loot. Anyway, all that is doable until incapacitated modules keep firing and the grid is too small to preload in. Then you might as well call it a day :P
|
Tassolhof
M. Corp M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.09.02 11:37:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Tassolhof on 02/09/2007 11:38:36 At the end of the day, if this was your POS, this post would be different, you'd be loving the POS changes.
At the end of the day you DID take down the cyno jammer in BKG TWICE in 3 days, and what did you do....
YOU jumped your cap fleet back out on both occations!!!!!!!!
If you had left your dreads in system, we would not have been able to keep the cyno jammer on-line.
So before you start moaning about the pos change, why don't you look to the planners of the attacks, and re-think your strategy
|
Fata Mea
M. Corp M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.09.02 14:31:00 -
[53]
Just a little more information...
The first time our Cyno Jammer pos was hit and placed in reinforced, the cyno jammer was disabled, all the guns were disabled, and enemy caps were brought in system. We spent 7 hours w/ carriers remote repping all the damage outside the pos without a single hostile driveby.
You cant expect to control and take a hostile system when you're only locking it down for a few hours every day and then sitting at a pos afk for the rest of it to pad your numbers in local.
The Cyno Jammer and pos defense mechanics are very close to perfect imo. We've both been on offense against yours in S-E and on defense in BKG. It should be a HARD and LONG affair to take a hostile station system, not a weekend warrior thing.
--------------------------- Fata Mea US TZ Director M.CORP / MPIRE |
Delerium Primus
M. Corp M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.09.02 14:33:00 -
[54]
Cyno Jammers
Cyno jammers are good in the sense they facilite locking down all cyno activity (inc Friendlies). Only by offlining this can you get friendly or hostile capitals in system. Fair enough trade me thinks. Now let me put a scenario to you IF CCP were to nerf the module so it stays offline if the tower is in reinforced and that the hostiles and friendlies operate on different timezones.
Day 1 AM - Hostile fleet comes into system and knocks out cyno jammer and jumps their capitals in to then knock other pos's into reinforced. Hostiles then jump capitals out knowing they can always get them back in system.
Day 1 PM - Friendlies primetime - friendlies rep up all they can but get no gain on on defending their systems. They are left defenceless.
Day 2 AM - Hostiles return and kill friendly pos's and take system.
Obviously the above is a sped up version of a system takedown but its totally biased to the attacking force. Systems SHOULD be hard to take down these days to ensure that a blob fleet cant take them overnight. If people want to take systems these days they should camp it 24/7 and ensure friendlies CANNOT repair stations and pos's. I can feel for the razor/mm/tri fleet that lost countless battleships taking out the cyno jammer but if you are going to goto war, you need to ensure that your coffers are full and that you can afford to take systems. It SHOULD be expensive.
CCP has the balance right now I beleive and Im not saying that as we are effectivley holding our systems well but you can see what would happen if it wasn't like this.
Delerium Primus M. PIRE
|
Berrik Radhok
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.02 14:44:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Lord Pelivar cant cap ships warp normally ? if so whats why worry about a cyno jammer? just cyno a couple dreads into system then warp to pos ?
look at how stupid you are
Originally by: Khavi Vetali
Oh don't worry, the goons are just as suicidal with their battleships as they are with their frigates.
|
Jenna Shame
|
Posted - 2007.09.02 14:45:00 -
[56]
The Devs don't want any one power to dominate 0.0.
This is why we had the BoB nerf patch in Rev 2.0.
Now its all about the blob.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |