| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
   |
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:20:00 -
[1]
Previously: War Analysis Part 2: What Is It Good For
Review and Response
The two previous installments have built my argument that the primary players in the War (BoB/MC, RSF) are able to withstand pressures that will ***** most (if not all) other alliances in the game -- practical concerns, morale and motivational concerns, and leadership concerns.
The last installment in particular argued that despite claims to the contrary, BoB and GS are philosophically ideal opponents; that they are opponents with identities and resulting attitudes that fall in direct conflict, but that result in equal willingness to engage in and take advantage of all possible edges; and that those edges include the "metagame," which enhances the enjoyment both derive from Eve, particularly since both entities are formed around cultural ties that, by definition, are unconcerned with the opinions of the larger Eve community.
Several responses to the previous installment argued that this was not the case, and I feel the need to clarify a bit. My claims are not meant to apply to every member of the entities involved -- as with nearly every generalization one can make, they simply do not apply every single individual. Examples given include the crashing morale of GS members pre-titan nerf and the argument that the acceptance of former LV pilots (Shinra members merged into RKK and the wholesale addition of Finfleet) have diluted BoB's "elite" identity.
Should the War reach a point where it is obvious that one side will lose, it goes without saying that they will find a number of pilots leaving prematurely -- which will likely accelerate their loss. However, I am arguing that neither will experience a complete collapse, leaving the winner to "clean up" POSes and stations without a fight.
While I know it is popular for RSF and allies to argue against BoB's claims that they're "looking for a challenge," I do believe statements made by Molle in an Eve Tribune interview at the start of this war: that even if it becomes clear that BoB will lose the War, there will be a core contingent that will fight to the end. I believe that the same holds true for GS; when they had lost 9-9 in Tenerifis, their situation looked quite dire and participation dropped sharply in the face of multiple pre-nerf Titans. That BoB failed to take more territory in that time period, and that the RSF rebounded so quickly, says quite a bit about the resilience and dedication of RSF's leadership and core member base. I firmly believe that had the War continued in that direction -- or if it should shift in that direction again -- that we would not have seen a true collapse of GS (and certainly not of RA, who have already experienced fighting when whittled to a single station).
That said, I can appreciate those that disagree and have enjoyed reading the comment and debate my claims have spawned thus far. It may be quite some time before we see whether I'm correct or not, but the conversation is enjoyable to see. And, I expect, shining some light on potential pitfalls that other developing alliances will likely keep in mind as well.
CCP Sucks
While I will definitely be criticizing several of CCP's game mechanics in this discussion, I will also be praising others -- and, most importantly, CCP's creation of a game that allows the in-depth analysis of threads like these is reason alone to praise them. It has become clear to even their biggest detractors (I'm not including outright trolls and those who evaluate game changes with only self-interest in mind) that CCP as a whole is interested in balancing the game as best they can, rather than playing favorites.
|
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:20:00 -
[2]
There are always going to be debatable changes, or outright failures; the best that any of us can do is to keep in mind that CCP is willing to listen to player input, if it is well-argued, supported, and presented.
With the sucking up out of the way...
A final disclaimer is necessary. As I've been careful to state previously, I am by no means an expert on politics of this War; my conclusions are largely drawn from larger trends, public statements by the involved parties, with only a meager amount of personal experience. This also applies to game mechanics. I am not someone who knows everything about the mechanics of Eve, or even about particular areas. I am sure that I will get details incorrect and perhaps even draw some poor conclusions -- and I welcome those of you who are better informed than I to correct me in response.
Now, how have the last two expansions affected this War particularly, what affects will they continue to have, and what can we expect from Revelations III?
The Introduction of Fleets
Revelations I introduced Fleets, in an effort to improve on (and, it appears, eventually replace) the gang system. The primary results of the Fleet system have been:
- More extensive use of Gang Bonuses due to the Fleet's hierarchical design
- Ease of communications via the Broadcast interface and split Fleet/Squad chat channels
- Increased size number of players able to utilize these in-game methods within a single fleet (256 max) and the ability to more rapidly form fleets (delegation of invites to Squad Commanders)
As often is the case with organizational system improvements, they have benefited those who are already the most organized. Those who are able to ensure characters are available to deliver gang bonuses will naturally benefit from the Fleet system's emphasis on bonuses more than those who cannot. Those who are able to take full advantage of the Broadcast system for targeting (particularly to set targets while shooting POS modules), for remote repairing, for capacitor transfer, and for setting destinations are able to more efficiently manage minor fleet actions without filling voice or chat communications channels. Those who are able to organize their fleet quickly and correctly are able to handle invite requests more quickly and thus head into action more quickly.
Invention
The introduction of invention has resulted in incredibly economic shifts, the scope of which certainly are beyond my understanding. However, invention has largely reduced the cost of T2 ships and modules, making it more affordable for both sides to consistently replace high-end losses. It has also opened up opportunities for income for those who did not own T2 BPOs, either through producing invented goods or by selling the items needed for invention, like datacores.
While some would argue that this represents a benefit for the RSF due to stereotypes involving BoB's wealth and T2 BPO holdings, this is not strictly the case (at least not as much as it would seem).
Firstly, there were certainly RSF pilots in possession of T2 BPOs that were negatively impacted by invention.
Secondly, while BoB may have produced and distributed T2 ships and modules at mineral cost for their pilots (or for free in communist corporations), this always represents an opportunity cost; those ships and modules could also have been sold at market price, and just because they were sold internally for less does not reduce their value. So while an individual or corporate T2 production now results in lower profits, internally produced T2 goods also represent smaller losses when destroyed compared to those lost pre-invention.
Supercapital Nerf
This is remains a widely debate change introduced in Revelations II, particularly as it relates to Titans, which many saw as one of the game's few anti-blobbing tools. However, a nerf to supercapitals was absolutely necessary.
|
Vasili Z
Beasts of Burden
YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:20:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Vasili Z on 13/10/2007 00:23:09
lol
<insert random wall of text>
-------
Everything I say represents my corporation and their views.
|
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:21:00 -
[4]
Bein Glorious' Titan Thread to End All Titan Threads is an excellent review of the game-breaking issues created by pre-nerf Titans. While many disagreed with his suggested changes -- and they were not the same as those eventually implemented by CCP -- his discussion did an excellent job explaining the issues surrounding Titans at the time.
Despite the fact that many trolls enjoy claiming that Titans were nerfed solely because of Goonswarm outcry, the truth is leaders and members from the GBC who were familiar with pre-nerf Titan warfare readily admitted that they were overpowered. The parties may have disagreed (and may still disagree) on what precise changes would make supercapitals balanced, but most (not all, of course) agreed that they were not balanced as-was.
The second thing to note is that while this nerf hit the GBC hard at the time, any reversal or subsequent supercapital buff would be unlikely to result in a shift of the same magnitude. As time has gone by, RSF and allies have steadily gained supercapitals. In particular, RA and AAA have each gone public with a Titan since Revelations II. Meanwhile the GBC has lost two, including the only one publicly unveiled since Revelations II.
Personally, I believe that the supercapital nerf was absolutely necessary -- and furthermore, that supercapitals remain cost-effective. The logistical and strategic value of supercapitals remains worth the investment, and while supercapitals have died at an increasing rate since the nerf, all of them have died either due to error in pilot judgment, use in incredibly hostile situations, or highly skilled and organized strikes; or, in other words, situations where they should die.
That said, I do hope CCP will buff supercapitals slightly -- as long as they carefully consider the ramifications their changes would cause. Particularly, supercapital pilots have complained about the worthlessness of their clone vat abilities; others have suggested changes that would make Titans more akin to small, redeployable stations for front-line attacks. I hope that if CCP does buff supercapitals, it is in this direction, rather than as single, offensive weapons.
POSes and Constellation Sov
The changes in Revelations II that introduced Constellation Sov and changed the state of POS warfare are perhaps the changes that have the most relevance to the War, both currently and as it moves forward. This includes Cyno Generators and Jump Towers; mentioned in earlier discussions of practical concerns, I won't rehash their benefits once again.
CCP's buff to all individual ships in Revelations I, adding hitpoints and capacitor, reflected a goal of extending combat, and the changes in POSes and addition of Constellation Sov in Revelations II applies that concept to territorial warfare. While exposing structures outside tower force fields theoretically offers advantages to the attacker (the ability to incapacitate POS gunnery and ewar before attacking the POS itself), their massive HP combined with the addition of Cyno System Jammers makes doing so an incredibly lengthy process that actually favors the defender.
These changes, combined with the supercapital nerf, are a double-edged (or perhaps even triple-edged) sword. They have returned sup-capital fleets, particularly battleships, to prominent positions in territorial warfare, as they are the only ships able to initiate an attack on a Cyno Jammed system. On the other hand, the massive HP of modules and the new ability for players to control starbase modules means even massive fleets require quite a long time to properly seige a POS. This allows the defender time to buff existing POS defenses and organize a defensive gang.
|
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:22:00 -
[5]
This either results in two massive fleets, or, if the defending alliance cannot raise an adequate defense fleet, an undefended POS which takes an incredibly long time to put into reinforced.
Station Services
The inclusion of station services appears to be an effort to counteract the addition of numerous defender advantages introduced through Constellation Sov and POS changes, giving attackers targets that lack anchored defenses.
However, much like POS modules, station services have a massive amount of HP that cannot be realistically killed by a small-gang in a hit and run maneuver. Furthermore, they are easily repaired by defenders unless the attacker has a system locked down for long periods of time -- I believe that RISE stations in RIT may be the first to have had station services that remained down for longer than a day or two.
Quite simply, they require a similarly large force and time expenditure on the part of the attacker to be anything more than a mild irritant for the defender.
Existing Mechanics: POSes as Sov Determinants and Stront Timing
The mechanics of system sov and stront timing have been discussed at length for a long time, and most should be familiar with them.
It is, however, worthwhile to note something about each:
Using POSes as Sov Determinants in systems can only result in two forms of contested battle -- POS spam in high moon count systems with empty moons, and massive fleet engagements in low moon count systems or high moon count systems that are fully covered.
Stront timing, while a necessary advantage for a defender, inevitably results in defender and attacker massing fleets at appointed times.
Why CCP Sucks
Ultimately, I believe that many of the changes and CCP's overall vision for 0.0 territorial warfare are good -- they fail solely due to the inability of Eve to handle them.
Yes, I am blaming lag.
While none of us will ever really know what the current territorial warfare mechanics would look like without lag, I believe it would result in a surprisingly balanced and enjoyable game. Currently, both sides of the War frequently will avoid engagement due to expected lag rather than due to strategy or numbers. Both sides have suffered losses that they likely wouldn't have, if lag were a non-factor.
Most importantly, lag staggeringly limits the strategic options of fleet commanders. Hit and run tactics on numerically superior or already entrenched fleets are practically inviable.
This is because the current mechanics, regardless of what CCP says, encourage attackers and defenders alike to form singular, massive fleets attacking a single target. There is no benefit to doing otherwise; in fact, many goals can only be achieved by such fleets.
For any entity currently engaged in POS territorial warfare, there is no incentive to engage in strategies much more complicated than "form up huge fleet, put POS in reinforced, bring huge fleet to kill it when it exits reinforced" for attackers, or "form up huge fleet to defend a reinforced POS" for defenders -- and very little incentive to for opposing fleets to engage one another at these times, as one side will have a clear advantage.
And when they do engage, the game becomes largely unplayable.
This is a cycle that cannot be realistically fixed by better servers or better code; as long as mechanics are such that grouping together in a single place at a particular time is the best way to achieve significant objectives, players will test the abilities of CCP's servers -- whether it's 400 vs 400 or 1000 vs 1000.
Unless CCP attempts drastic revisions or a completely new set of mechanics to determine sovereignty, territorial warfare in Eve will remain a simplistic experience brought down by lag.
|
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:22:00 -
[6]
Such a change would represent a serious balancing challenge for CCP. As stated, in a lagless world I believe the current system would be both enjoyable and relatively balanced. A new system would need to be balanced while also forcing numbers down to levels that their servers can handle -- either through artificial limits or incentives. Ultimately, any sovereignty mechanic must revolve around Structures of some kind; shooting structures is boring, but there's no other realistic way of sov determination. Shooting structures only becomes fun when they are defended, resulting in traditional PVP; that PVP is only fun when the system can handle the numbers involved.
I do not have a gift-wrapped solution for CCP's dilemma. However, I suspect that any newly designed system would necessarily be a much wider, more complicated one. It would involve a number and wide-variety of targets. Some would involve diminishing returns -- the more people shooting the target, the less damage each individual does -- to encourage attackers from focusing on any single one. Some would involve attack windows -- multiple targets that must all be destroyed or incapacitated within a certain amount of time as the rest. Some would naturally have a POS-style reinforced mode -- although perhaps one that cannot be precisely timed, that only give a range of time in which the target will exit reinforced. Some would not be necessary to taking sovereignty, but would speed the process in some way -- perhaps paired with the attack windows idea, so that attackers have legitimate targets that are not essential, but are worthwhile, and that discourage a single massive force. Some would naturally be spread across systems.
Naturally, all of this must also balance total numbers (while motivating a massive fleet to split up is good, they should still be able to achieve more than a smaller one), give the defender opportunities to prevent their territory from being taken over before they can respond, and finally, must either be simple enough for players to understand OR be incredibly well documented (something CCP is not well known for).
To make such a change would be a huge risk, and cause a large amount of upheaval; to move away from POSes as the primary sov determining structures would leave a whole lot of POSes lying around, and it would force territorial alliances everywhere to scramble implementing the new structures, if they were not automatic additions (like station services). It would require CCP to dedicate significant resources to monitoring the system early on, to correct imbalances as they appeared.
I suspect that CCP will elect to avoid taking such a risk, instead placing their trust in new hardware and improved code. If that is the case, then the current situation is one we will all be forced to deal with for far after the War is over.
What This Has To Do With The War
First, the War is going to remain a very slow-moving affair, particularly once smaller entities are removed from their territorial holdings.
All systems taken or lost where both sides utilized the full extent of current mechanics have been long, grinding battles spanning weeks. In particular, I'm referring to battles in 9-9, XGH, 66-, and 0OYZ.
As far as I know, no other systems taken or lost thus far have had full moon coverage. Recent GBC gains in Catch, RSF gains in RMF and, potentially, RISE space, and the original GBC capture of Omist were all taken due, first and foremost, by POS spam. There were certainly towers destroyed by both sides; however, "quick wins" have only come due to a defender failing to counterspam, or failing to have adequate coverage to begin with.
However, when both sides spam with equal abandon until moons are filled (9-9, 66-, etc) or when they fight over a system with a low moon-count that can be filled quickly (0OYZ), the fight takes an incredibly long time.
|
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:23:00 -
[7]
This is, yet again, a reason supporting my claims that many smaller alliances will be driven out before either side begins to work on the other's proper territory; the major power blocs have proven to be the only ones who can reliably engage in the POS spam exchange that escalates a particular system to that point.
Once again, remember that I am not using "POS spam" as a derogatory term; it is a strategy both sides have utilized, and POS spam and counter-spam are the only realistic strategies when seriously defending or attacking systems with high moon counts.
Second, existing POS warfare favors the RSF.
This is primarily due to stront timing and the breadth of timezones in which RSF and RSF allies can cover.
This is not to say that the GBC cannot win the War with existing POS warfare; rather, that it will be far more difficult for them to do so. To defend, the GBC must time their towers perfectly for their primetime on a consistent basis. To attack, they must either rely on RSF stront timing errors, prevent RSF from timing at all (either through kiting or by surprise), or manage to bring sufficient force outside of their prime.
Further, it is highly likely that the GBC will score more victories against smaller RSF allies; the consequences of that and the resulting momentum may either give the GBC time to prepare smaller allies and tenants for invasion (increased POS coverage, organized stront timing) or result in the potential RSF mistakes above.
Conclusions
I've cut this one a bit short (failing to cover Revelations III at all; perhaps another entry), and done a bit less revision and fleshing out than I have for other segments. This is partially because to do a really magnificent job would require a whole load of additional research, and because I'm a bit tired at the moment. So I hope the segment as it is will suffice. While I've avoided replying to some questions or comments in past threads (as in some cases, they addressed topics I wanted to hit in later entries), I will gladly expand on my thoughts if questions are asked here, reply to criticisms, and may add additional commentary if I remember any particular areas I forgot to cover.
Tomorrow will be War Analysis Part 4: Coldest of All Cold Monsters. This will examine the social structures of the two major "powerblocs" -- the semi-feudal model of The Alliance and the cooperative nations model of The Coaltion -- as well as deconstruct the pros and cons of each, evaluating how each model may affect the War.
|
JeanPaul Sartre
26th of July Movement
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:24:00 -
[8]
Real first claimed!
--
 Quote:
If a victory is told in detail, one can no longer distinguish it from a defeat.
|
Jogyn
Spartan Industries
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:29:00 -
[9]
Once again a very good post.
I demand moar!
-P3- |
Sgt Jinxed
Obsidian Inc.
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:30:00 -
[10]
Third!
Looking forward to part 4 :)
|
Baline Aegis
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:33:00 -
[11]
Nice reading
|
Moon Kitten
GoonFleet
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:35:00 -
[12]
TL;DR: There is lag in Eve 
I don't know what it's like in BoB and, frankly, the more I work with them directly the less I am starting to care.
-Seleene, [BDCI] <MC> |
Grimpak
Gallente
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:38:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Grimpak on 13/10/2007 00:38:47
there is a part where you went wrong.
"pos spam" as in the ole RA vs LV days is gone.
nowadays, you can only spam 5 pos per system a day or smth.
many claim that this stopped pos spam, but then I wonder, isn't it spamming aswell? putting up the maximum pos that you can?
it's just a question anyways.
good read.
---
planetary interaction idea! |
Natas Dog
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:42:00 -
[14]
Pretty good. A lot of your points and suggestions have been gone over quite a bit in both the POS warfare and Lag department in other discussion areas though. Nice catchy title though, made me laugh. Sending ISK anyway, gave me something to do while shooting up station services tonight.
_______________________________________________________________
He who laughs last... is usually the one the joke was about. |
Natas Dog
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:43:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Grimpak
Edited by: Grimpak on 13/10/2007 00:38:47
there is a part where you went wrong.
"pos spam" as in the ole RA vs LV days is gone.
nowadays, you can only spam 5 pos per system a day or smth.
many claim that this stopped pos spam, but then I wonder, isn't it spamming aswell? putting up the maximum pos that you can?
it's just a question anyways.
good read.
You're right in a sense, but a coalition of 5 alliances can fill 25 moons and swap them over to another entity 5 a day when its convenient
_______________________________________________________________
He who laughs last... is usually the one the joke was about. |
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:46:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Grimpak
Edited by: Grimpak on 13/10/2007 00:38:47
there is a part where you went wrong.
"pos spam" as in the ole RA vs LV days is gone.
nowadays, you can only spam 5 pos per system a day or smth.
many claim that this stopped pos spam, but then I wonder, isn't it spamming aswell? putting up the maximum pos that you can?
it's just a question anyways.
good read.
Actually, that is simply another reason why you'll see those system battles take so long (I meant to make mention of it).
First, there does remain a form of old-style POS spam, in that multiple alliances can erect POSes to achieve full coverage more quickly (or to prevent the hostile alliance from keeping up). This is the situation in F4R right now -- an eleven moon systems, with 4 IAC POSes, 5 ISS POSes, and 2 BoB POSes. Had BoB failed to tower the final two moons, IAC could have counter-spammed ISS's to retain numerical superiority. I believe this tactic was also used in Tenerifis and Omist.
Second, I'm primarily defining POS spam as "putting up friendly POSes to contest sov rather than tearing down hostile ones," which is in no way prevented by the 5 POS per day limit, even assuming that only one alliance from each side was anchoring POSes in a system. It simply drags the POS spam out for longer.
|
Natas Dog
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:52:00 -
[17]
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
I believe this tactic was also used in Tenerifis and Omist by RSF, and perhaps by the GBC (someone more familiar with that can chime in).
Pretty much, we didn't put up much of a fight in Omist, but we turtled up and did our best to hold onto Tenerifis. IIRC, Goonswarm was pretty hit for cash after filling the void LV left so quickly after we invaded, so it wasn't feasible to try and counter spam the insane moon count stations in omist.
_______________________________________________________________
He who laughs last... is usually the one the joke was about. |
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:53:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Natas Dog
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
I believe this tactic was also used in Tenerifis and Omist by RSF, and perhaps by the GBC (someone more familiar with that can chime in).
Pretty much, we didn't put up much of a fight in Omist, but we turtled up and did our best to hold onto Tenerifis. IIRC, Goonswarm was pretty hit for cash after filling the void LV left so quickly after we invaded, so it wasn't feasible to try and counter spam the insane moon count stations in omist.
For clarification, I was referring to RSF retaking those regions, after the POS limit had been introduced.
|
Natas Dog
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 00:58:00 -
[19]
I missed a good chunk of the retaking portion, I had a vacation scheduled right when Rev2 hit and didn't have any time to play. Maybe someone else can chime in.
_______________________________________________________________
He who laughs last... is usually the one the joke was about. |
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 01:28:00 -
[20]
I like the general conclusion that I believe you have reached. EVE simply can't handle the numbers that get thrown at the server when it comes to territorial warfare. It is the ultimate irony that it is the game mechanics that effectively force massive fleet encounters and unbearable lag.
On that count, yeah CCP does suck.
Nice read again, bring on part 4.
|
Iasius
Seven.
Enuma Elish.
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 01:29:00 -
[21]
I cba to read any of it other than that i will say lag really gets on my ****. Irrespective of who you fight for if two huge fleets want to get it on and are clobbered by lag its drive everyone up the wall.
tbfh 'The Need for Speed' initiative seems to be eclipsed by 'The Need for new Subscribers'.
I am particuarly grouchy as this week after a long break i have got back into big fleet warfare and been hit by the lag bat again.
This post was a remix from that album 'Thats What i Call Old News 2005'
.
Full Spectrum Mercenary |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 01:34:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 13/10/2007 01:35:05
Originally by: Nez Perces
I like the general conclusion that I believe you have reached. EVE simply can't handle the numbers that get thrown at the server when it comes to territorial warfare. It is the ultimate irony that it is the game mechanics that effectively force massive fleet encounters and unbearable lag.
Agreed--I've posted about this before, and the general result of any logical thought is that all of CCP's sovereignty mechanics are designed, advertantly or inadvertantly, to force people into gigantic lagfests that the server can't handle.
And the fact of the matter is that lag diminishes the importance of player skill and coordination among a fleet. I still remember an AAA vs FIX fleet battle in 49-U over a month ago where AAA and IAC simultaneously jumped fleets into the system, causing a huge lagfest even though local was well under 300. We completely trashed AAA, killing (if I recall correctly) nearly twenty battleships with near-zero losses. Of course, it turned out it was so easy because they couldn't even see us on their overview. The fact that their dictors orbited us for over ten minutes without ever firing a bubble suggested this. Not surprisingly, later in the day, they did similar to us, with us being completely unable to lock anything. 
And this was, by Coalition-vs-Alliance standards, a tiny battle.
23 Member
EVE Video makers: save bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! (updated) |
Paracidic Infection
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 03:05:00 -
[23]
Quote:
null
lol, get laid.
<insert random wall of text>
That made me laugh, right in the middle.....
But seriously good write up. IMO this war will never see an end, 'cause if it did who would the pvpers have to shoot? It sounds like the 'chinese' server has a complete 0.0 lock down, to me it just doesn't sound like fun, oh wait, I think it is called WoW.... |
BlackHorizon
Caldari
Dark Knights of Deneb
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 03:08:00 -
[24]
Edited by: BlackHorizon on 13/10/2007 03:08:35
Warp To Zero also has had a significnt effect on 0.0 warfare and populations. Thankfully, it won't be around forever.
|
Sekket
Caldari
White-Noise
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 04:12:00 -
[25]
There's a book within you, I think you should write it, and save us all from the wall of text.
|
Scavok
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 04:35:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Scavok on 13/10/2007 04:39:54
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
All systems taken or lost where both sides utilized the full extent of current mechanics have been long, grinding battles spanning weeks. In particular, I'm referring to battles in 9-9, XGH, 66-, and 0OYZ.
As far as I know, no other systems taken or lost thus far have had full moon coverage. Recent GBC gains in Catch, RSF gains in RMF and, potentially, RISE space, and the original GBC capture of Omist were all taken due, first and foremost, by POS spam. There were certainly towers destroyed by both sides; however, "quick wins" have only come due to a defender failing to counterspam, or failing to have adequate coverage to begin with.
D2E was 100% covered with 38 large POS split between Venom and BoB with 1 GS staging POS, and 2-R had all 12 moons covered by RMF. D2E was certainly shaping up to be a similar grind to 66- and 9-9 when BoB pulled all of their towers down. 2-R was a cakewalk sans the fight in ZID.
|
dev1lwoman
Cynos R US
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 08:06:00 -
[27]
3 good write ups, and for once a wall of text worth reading, thanks
|
Tetsujin
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 08:42:00 -
[28]
it really is a pity about the lag...if it wasn't as ugly and huge as it is this would be the best computer game ever made in my opinion.
|
pyklet uk1
Confederation of Red Moon
Red Moon Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 08:56:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Sekket
There's a book within you, I think you should write it, and save us all from the wall of text.
Then don't read it.
Good read yet again, thanks.
|
Mag's
MASS
Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 08:59:00 -
[30]
Yet another good read.
Keep them coming, as it make a refreshing change for CAOD. 
Mag's
|
Musgrat
Discordant Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 09:38:00 -
[31]
Amazingly good read, this one is worth of dev response. *hint hint* Also, you are completely correct when you say that CCP does not truly factor in lag to their game mechanics, and therefore we could only see what they envisioned this game to be if there was in fact no lag. I guess a lot of us are willing to play the game in the hope that one day we can experience that.
|
Joycalyn
UA Industry
Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 09:42:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Tetsujin
it really is a pity about the lag...if it wasn't as ugly and huge as it is this would be the best computer game ever made in my opinion.
It pretty much was back in the days of RA vs .5. and stuff (pre-POS).
All the additions to the game since have only lowered the fun factor and increased the time sink on 0.0 territory warfare. I only hope the technology will catch up and this game will achieve it's true potential of lag free battles involving many thousands of players.
|
|
Jacques Archambault
Forum Moderator
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 10:17:00 -
[33]
Thread cleaned.
Please keep it polite and on-topic thanks.
-Jacques
forum rules | [email protected] | Our Website!
|
|
NereSky
Gallente
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 10:31:00 -
[34]
Good Read 
shame there isnt more posts like this
|
Hellown
Avis de Captura
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 10:48:00 -
[35]
Another good read. more pls.
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar
Aeden
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 12:39:00 -
[36]
(I'll quote a few time from some of your 4 post)
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
Examples given include the crashing morale of GS members pre-titan nerf and the argument that the acceptance of former LV pilots (Shinra members merged into RKK and the wholesale addition of Finfleet) have diluted BoB's "elite" identity.
While I agree that were not the happiest moments of this war, (morale, as a participant, can be pictured as a "so-so"), GS was not experiencing their first defeat. They once lost to Bob, they lost to D¦. TCF lost (and was formed in) a war against D¦+the old north. RA's will is not to be proven. I think RSF, if the Alliance have to win, will not go back so easily.
I'd want to had a few things about LV's pilot. I'm not sure, if Bob is in deep trouble, that they'll stay inside their new host alliance. With M.Pire, they'll have to shoot old friends and some Shinra/Finfleet pilots could think they are not concerned by BoB's defeat (again, if it occurs).
(to be continued)
2isk
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar
Aeden
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 12:43:00 -
[37]
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
Revelations I introduced Fleets, in an effort to improve on (and, it appears, eventually replace) the gang system. The primary results of the Fleet system have been:
(...)
- Increased size number of players able to utilize these in-game methods within a single fleet (256 max) and the ability to more rapidly form fleets (delegation of invites to Squad Commanders)
You're totally wrong here. Organizing a 256 men fleet can take up to one hour before taking off : the interface of the inviting process is particulary horrible to deal with.
Something has really to be done here, like a as big as the market 2d window showing bonuses, drag and drop to take people and put them in the correct wing/squad.
2isk
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar
Aeden
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 12:46:00 -
[38]
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
These changes, combined with the supercapital nerf, are a double-edged (or perhaps even triple-edged) sword. They have returned sup-capital fleets, particularly battleships, to prominent positions in territorial warfare, as they are the only ships able to initiate an attack on a Cyno Jammed system.
I agree, and my biaised point of vue says it's normal. Battleships were always the core of a fleet. Prenerf titans made them obsoletes.
2isk
|
SunglassesInSpace
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 12:48:00 -
[39]
Wow I actaully read all that and it makes sense
|
Phrixus Zephyr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 12:48:00 -
[40]
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
I believe that RISE stations in RIT may be the first to have had station services that remained down for longer than a day or two.
The station services in C4C and L-C in Fade have been down from the day we first attacked till the day we took control of the stations.
Originally by: consider telos
..then we had a fight and he was so dead and
then I like became champion of eve and then
ccp gave me a medal and a t-shirt and asked
me to go out with him on a date to mcD' |
Major Stormer
Caldari
Copperhead Inc.
Molotov Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 12:51:00 -
[41]
I am rather enjoying these. Shame you couldnt post with your main, but well done none the less.
Originally by: SirMolle
Excuse me? BoB slave corp?
k, if thats what you wish, you just got your wish granted. Forever.
|
Wigglytuff
Vale Heavy Industries
Molotov Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 13:44:00 -
[42]
This is a thread worthy of a main.
Good read.
|
Impretinent
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 13:50:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Phrixus Zephyr
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
I believe that RISE stations in RIT may be the first to have had station services that remained down for longer than a day or two.
The station services in C4C and L-C in Fade have been down from the day we first attacked till the day we took control of the stations.
I'm fairly sure services have been kept down pretty much continuously since about the middle of September by PL and our guys. I'm not really sure how any of it really matter either way though.
|
Sanka Cofie
Amarr
Nubs.
D-L
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 14:41:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Sanka Cofie on 13/10/2007 14:43:09
Just wanted to say that these have been some pretty good posts.
I know alot of people who actively look for the next one, and thats the mark of a good serial article, news piece, TV program, or serial anything (except killers. the mark of a good serial killer is an awesomely gruesome calling card that says to the cops "hahaha i'm stylish and stuff").
I'm trying to decide if your more EVE-Herodotus or EVE-Walter Cronkite. Seems to me the former.
Either way I hope you continue on this topic for a while, or find others that draw your attention, they've been interesting,and provide a better read than anything the EVE News (ISD?) people have put out in a while (no offense ISD ppl).
As far as the lag, i've never really understood the mechanics of it. Is it an unsustainable number of players in a single system (a la Jita), constellation, or region that causes the lag? A combination of the above?
If its just a single system then your idea of forcing a group to hit multiple systems to take a single structure in one would seem like a really good fix.
Like in Homer's epic, The Iliad, when Odysseus and a squad of his bravest men had to knock out the Sheild Generator on the forest moon of Endor before the rest of the fleet could attack the Death Star.
-[WillChat4ISK]-
I can be the handsome Amarr space captain.
You can be the helpless Minmatar slave girl. |
WhatIsItGoodFor
Absolutely Nothin
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 18:24:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn
(I'll quote a few time from some of your 4 post)
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
Examples given include the crashing morale of GS members pre-titan nerf and the argument that the acceptance of former LV pilots (Shinra members merged into RKK and the wholesale addition of Finfleet) have diluted BoB's "elite" identity.
While I agree that were not the happiest moments of this war, (morale, as a participant, can be pictured as a "so-so"), GS was not experiencing their first defeat. They once lost to Bob, they lost to D¦. TCF lost (and was formed in) a war against D¦+the old north. RA's will is not to be proven. I think RSF, if the Alliance have to win, will not go back so easily.
I'd want to had a few things about LV's pilot. I'm not sure, if Bob is in deep trouble, that they'll stay inside their new host alliance. With M.Pire, they'll have to shoot old friends and some Shinra/Finfleet pilots could think they are not concerned by BoB's defeat (again, if it occurs).
(to be continued)
That was actually my point -- that while members and participation of the alliances in question certainly did fall when under heavy duress, the alliances themselves did not crumble entirely as others have.
Unless you are saying that every pilot of RSF stayed and endured through the pre-nerf Titan days (or the previously challenges each individual alliance experienced), which I would absolutely disagree with.
|
Duke Grail
DarkStar 1
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 20:15:00 -
[46]
Originally by: BlackHorizon
Edited by: BlackHorizon on 13/10/2007 03:08:35
Warp To Zero also has had a significnt effect on 0.0 warfare and populations. Thankfully, it won't be around forever.
OMG DEV!!!111!!! :P
good think i have a copy of all my old insta's in a gsc somewhere.
|
Alpine 69
Slacker Industries
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 21:39:00 -
[47]
Originally by: dev1lwoman
3 good write ups, and for once a wall of text worth reading, thanks
This.
Sweet love for the ones that mod my sig <3 
From her? You're on. -Rauth |
Ungdall
Minmatar
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 22:02:00 -
[48]
I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of this bit of writing and now need to go back and look over the rest of your essays.
|
dor amwar
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 22:05:00 -
[49]
Edited by: dor amwar on 13/10/2007 22:05:31
Quote:
The second thing to note is that while this nerf hit the GBC hard at the time...
i would not say they were hit. because of BGCs superior 'planning' abilities they had the advantage of having the un-nerfed supers almost exclusively for a long time.
very well written, thank you.
|
Danyael Tyren
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 22:55:00 -
[50]
Excellent write-up, you are clearly a gentleman and a scholar.
|
Cyriel Longinus
XERCORE
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 23:02:00 -
[51]
I recall when the cluster would stress with only 9,000 Players online. In comparison to then, the game has certianly improved.
Answers are not easy to come by when pushing the boundaries of something no one else has done before.
Obviously in the past and present, CCP has been pushing the boundaries and provided us a dam good game. The effort is obvious. The passion is obvious. There is a history of growth and success for CCP and EvE that span YEARS.
Seriously, if you can make the difference step up from behind the alt, volunteer or apply for a job at CCP.
No amount of carefully chosen words in a seemingly objective format will hide a tantrum or amount to the creditability of action.
Score:
CCP = Providing Years of Entertaiment to EvE Fans
WhatIsItGoodFor (alt) = A whole lot of unoriginal wind
|
BAteh
Amarr
The Elear
|
Posted - 2007.10.13 23:38:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Musgrat
a lot of us are willing to play the game in the hope that one day we can experience that.
With an MSSQL database? Abandon all hope.
OP: Excellent post.
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar
Aeden
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 01:50:00 -
[53]
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn
(I'll quote a few time from some of your 4 post)
Originally by: WhatIsItGoodFor
Examples given include the crashing morale of GS members pre-titan nerf and the argument that the acceptance of former LV pilots (Shinra members merged into RKK and the wholesale addition of Finfleet) have diluted BoB's "elite" identity.
While I agree that were not the happiest moments of this war, (morale, as a participant, can be pictured as a "so-so"), GS was not experiencing their first defeat. They once lost to Bob, they lost to D¦. TCF lost (and was formed in) a war against D¦+the old north. RA's will is not to be proven. I think RSF, if the Alliance have to win, will not go back so easily.
I'd want to had a few things about LV's pilot. I'm not sure, if Bob is in deep trouble, that they'll stay inside their new host alliance. With M.Pire, they'll have to shoot old friends and some Shinra/Finfleet pilots could think they are not concerned by BoB's defeat (again, if it occurs).
(to be continued)
That was actually my point -- that while members and participation of the alliances in question certainly did fall when under heavy duress, the alliances themselves did not crumble entirely as others have.
Unless you are saying that every pilot of RSF stayed and endured through the pre-nerf Titan days (or the previously challenges each individual alliance experienced), which I would absolutely disagree with.
That is 95% true for TCF.
"OK I go !! Where could I lead/be leaded in french ??????? OK I stay !!!!!"
2isk
|
Mortania
Minmatar
Carbide Industries
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 04:30:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Cyriel Longinus
I recall when the cluster would stress with only 9,000 Players online. In comparison to then, the game has certianly improved.
Answers are not easy to come by when pushing the boundaries of something no one else has done before.
Obviously in the past and present, CCP has been pushing the boundaries and provided us a dam good game. The effort is obvious. The passion is obvious. There is a history of growth and success for CCP and EvE that span YEARS.
Seriously, if you can make the difference step up from behind the alt, volunteer or apply for a job at CCP.
No amount of carefully chosen words in a seemingly objective format will hide a tantrum or amount to the creditability of action.
Score:
CCP = Providing Years of Entertaiment to EvE Fans
WhatIsItGoodFor (alt) = A whole lot of unoriginal wind
You failed to understand his point. It wouldn't matter if CCP had a server that could handle 5,000 players in a system, the playerbase would just bring 7,000 to the party and it would fail.
CCP needs to stop thinking they can overcome lag through superior firepower, it's a doomed proposition, and why "The Need for Speed" is a failed endeavour before it's over.
They need to start coming up with systems that don't require massive fleets, that actively DISCOURAGE massive fleets. Otherwise lag will always be present.
---
Destroying asteroids one at a time, to make the universe safer. |
Schlieren Altiprlayle
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 06:03:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Mortania
You failed to understand his point. It wouldn't matter if CCP had a server that could handle 5,000 players in a system, the playerbase would just bring 7,000 to the party and it would fail.
The playerbase is not infinite in number. It is possible to provide enough optimized computing power which would enable any number of server -- client interactions.
Quote:
They need to start coming up with systems that don't require massive fleets, that actively DISCOURAGE massive fleets.
EVE's barely-explained, byzantine game mechanics already strain credulity, and while almost anything would be preferable to what now is the case, at the same time it seems hard to understand how CCP approaches--and approached--these mechanics in the past. The balance between the ruleset and how it could be implemented in-game seems to favor concept over performance, which suggests future revisions might only introduce a different set of bottlenecks, perhaps forseeable, yet optimistically ignored, left to the discovery of CCP's disenchanted clients. I suppose it's understandable that they would prefer to stick with the devil they know.
____________________________
stop posting |
Salastil
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 07:31:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Salastil on 14/10/2007 07:34:30
The lag is unavoidable and effects everyone equally, there is no strategy in the game aside from the defender cramming as much ships into the system and letting the automated POS guns and auto-aggressing fighters and drones do the work because they are still trying to target the primary that was called thirty minutes previous.
|
duckmonster
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 07:54:00 -
[57]
I wouldn't personally say CCP sucks. They do seem to be stuck between a rock and a hard place (as metaphore for 'non linear growth in task/message queues' vs 'spiraling arms escalation in 0.0) , and indeed the problems of 700 people shooting each other in lag may well be unsolvable , but I think CCP tackled the problem all wrong.
When it became clear that from the player perspective there where two problems, both incompatible in solution;-
1) Players need to bring lots of people to a fight because the other side is also doing that (Whoever backs down loses), PLUS
2) Players need to bring less people because the lag sucks.
... CCP tried to respond by area effect weapons. However both attempts appear to of failed. The first one, the TITAN, was an unmitigated disaster, because of how massively broken the Asymetry was. Team #1 would get its numbers reduced to almost zero, Team #2 was still free to blob the living hell out of the arena. Too powerful. The second one, Bombers , has the opposite problem. Whilst being far more 'democratic' (A new player could train one up in a few months, in theory.) the bang for buck factor just made it not worth it.
Regardless AOF weapons in almost any MMO are fun killers. One guy gets a bunch of kills, the other guys don't even get to play. Wouldn't it be easier to just allow newbie griefing in empire? Oh yeah. Lag. (No Im not advocating newbie killing, I'm being Rhetorical).
The problem with these , is they treat the symptoms, not the causes. Rather than breaking up the 'blobs' (Abusive term for large group of customers out to have fun) by force, break them up by objective.
If the POS's required to take out a system where easier to kill, but had to be taken out simultaneously, and more methods where in place to avoid the gate cluster**** , then clearly the elements would be in place to start breaking up the 'blobs'.
I'm also going to say this right now. Fighters suck. You have an entity that causes the same amount of lag as a player, and you can stick at LEAST five on a gate per carrier. Whee. Also carrier can be somewhere else. If theres drone rewriting going on, make them *dumber* and less needing of complex interaction. Why do they NEED collision detection? 99% of eve players would happily accept that the fighter goes through instead of around obstacles, if it meant that fighters didn't lag a battlefield into worthlessness.
And please, profile that fleet code. It still is true that dropping fleet in a battle will make the battle playable again. This shouldnt happen. Somewhere in that code, something is doing something else terribly wrong.
Otherwise, I still love EVE and thank CCP for making it for us, and I certainly empathise with CCP that this isnt easy stuff to fix.
-----------
HI IM DUCKMONSTER |
duckmonster
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 08:00:00 -
[58]
Originally by: BAteh
Originally by: Musgrat
a lot of us are willing to play the game in the hope that one day we can experience that.
With an MSSQL database? Abandon all hope.
OP: Excellent post.
And python 
No seriously man. I'm a linux guy, and I'd make different decisions, but folks like to bash on MS-SQL and Python without any real understanding of what the roles of them here are. MS-SQL has problems, but I've no indication I've seen that used in a proper enterprise configuration its any less fast than DB2/ORACLE/MYSQL/Pick-your-favorite. Its just what they chose for whatever reason. Likewise, until I see anyone point out a dynamic language that isn't Scheme, is as easy as Python to learn AND has that microthreading goodness that EVEs concurrency relies on, I'll continue to maintain that CCP's choice of stackless was inspired genius.
-----------
HI IM DUCKMONSTER |
Byzan Zwyth
Dark Centuri Inc.
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 18:54:00 -
[59]
can only imagine how awesome eve would be without lag. Anyone who has been in a large battle knows the crazy stuff you have to deal with.
To be honest when new details of game changes come out all I think about is screw the new ships and all that fancy new trash. I would trade it all for a noticeable improvement in battle lag.
----------------------
Rank: Tech 1 and a 1/2 cannon fodder
Pointless forum slowing bandwidth hogging signature pic inc? |
Maysta PhaCade
The Arrow Project
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 23:12:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Sekket
There's a book within you, I think you should write it, and save us all from the wall of text.
I have to disagree. If you don't like it, don't read it! WTF, moaning about this.
To the OP... good work. Keeps me sane at work, gives me something to read and think about. Keep em coming please.
|
Ernest Graefenberg
Minmatar
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 23:56:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Sekket
There's a book within you, I think you should write it, and save us all from the wall of text.
Your post contained words. Grrrrr, words!
|
OwnedBy Me
|
Posted - 2007.10.18 09:35:00 -
[62]
Maybe u have 10 objectives on different nodes(or the lag is the same), u have to kill 3. When 3 of them is killed you will have the same reinforcement on all 10 of them. Then you have 10 objectives again to defend if you where to slow to react the first time.
Now the defender has to spred his forces so that he is able to cover all 10 in a short time frame and the attacker can pick the onces he so pleases but also has to split his forces by a minimum of 3.
If the defender just sits at one spot you can always go to the next one or even go for 4-5 objects at a time.. He has to split his forces, if he or the attacker doesnt.. Nothing will happen.
Make it so there is more objects based on size/finaces of the alliance, maybe pos¦?. Thus making it harder the bigger they are.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.10.18 09:47:00 -
[63]
You cannot reduce blobs unless you force both sides to defend as well as attack. The reason for the big blobs is that there is always time to react and mount a defence later.
What CCP needs to do is create infrastructure that is both vulnerable, and highly lucrative.
Example, what if:
- CCP moves the sovereignty POS to planets and keeps them with a reinforcement timer.
- CCP nerfs small and medium POS shields and defences and removes the reinforcement timer, but enhances their abilities to make isk. As in, introduce moon harvesters that mine say a million trit or 400k pyerite an hour (but only function in 0.0 to discourage macroers).
Then corporations/alliances have an incentive to actually install a lot of industrial POS in 0.0, but they will need to defend them to keep them alive. An attacking force with could otherwise wreak havoc in a few hours time and the only way to counter it is to keep people at home to defend, which reduces the blob. Any side that continues to blob will risk enemy gangs wrecking their industrial infrastructure due to lack of defenders.
------------------------------------------------
|
Barthezz
Paradox v2.0
|
Posted - 2007.10.18 14:19:00 -
[64]
I've been saying this stuff about lag for a while now. Even asked if we could get a dev update on it.
The servers cant handle whats required and as someone else said, most likely never will. If the servers allow 500 vs 500, then thats what both sides will bring. If the servers allow 1000 vs 1000, then thats what both sides will bring.
Currently it seems that lag is the elephant in the room for CCP. Everyone in CCP knows its there, yet no one talks about it.
---
Dont be a victim of what I do to survive! |
Ticl Er
Sweetrock Mining
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.10.18 16:44:00 -
[65]
Quote:
I've cut this one a bit short
|
papaPadla
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.18 20:27:00 -
[66]
i agree with the title :))
-------------------------------------
|
Tuis Ryche
Caldari
Ryche's Aggressors Asylum
|
Posted - 2007.10.18 22:32:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
You cannot reduce blobs unless you force both sides to defend as well as attack. The reason for the big blobs is that there is always time to react and mount a defence later.
What CCP needs to do is create infrastructure that is both vulnerable, and highly lucrative.
Example, what if:
- CCP moves the sovereignty POS to planets and keeps them with a reinforcement timer.
- CCP nerfs small and medium POS shields and defences and removes the reinforcement timer, but enhances their abilities to make isk. As in, introduce moon harvesters that mine say a million trit or 400k pyerite an hour (but only function in 0.0 to discourage macroers).
Then corporations/alliances have an incentive to actually install a lot of industrial POS in 0.0, but they will need to defend them to keep them alive. An attacking force with could otherwise wreak havoc in a few hours time and the only way to counter it is to keep people at home to defend, which reduces the blob. Any side that continues to blob will risk enemy gangs wrecking their industrial infrastructure due to lack of defenders.
Interesting ideas. Stations that require fewer ships to destroy would allow smaller harassing fleets to strike the supply chains and perhaps force multiple smaller battles. A huge defending fleet would either waste itself on one fleet or divide itself up to answer the multiple threats.
______________________________________________________________
"May God have mercy on my enemies, because I won't."
---Gen . George S. Patton, Jr. |
sartorii
Genco
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.10.19 04:54:00 -
[68]
Edited by: sartorii on 19/10/2007 04:54:58
Originally by: Schlieren Altiprlayle
The playerbase is not infinite in number. It is possible to provide enough optimized computing power which would enable any number of server -- client interactions.
actually it is not, not with current technology and CCPs desire to remain playable to those on 'sub standard' connections.
the US military has major issues with simulations this large (Eve large) even with dedicated networks, common hardware platforms and bandwidth that civilian gaming can only dream about. This requires many many functions and units to be 'approximated' ie move and act as a single BDE sized entity vs the 3000 individuals (or even individual Companies) that actually comprise it..at present you will NEVER see a SimEx that involved even a full Division's (10-20k depending on nation and doctrine) worth of active entities at an individual level (which is what Eve currently does)
love it or hate it, what CCP is doing with Eve right now is really on the (often bleeding during massive fleet fights) edge of what is currently possible.
"disconnect and self destruct one mullet at at time" [sic] |
eLLioTT wave
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.19 05:32:00 -
[69]
I would love to see smaller fleets until technology allows proper lag free fleet combat. CCP please make this so. Change mechanics to favour multiple small fleets rather than one large one.
PS Good luck doing this! |
Lazuran
Gallente
Time And ISK Sink Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.10.19 06:07:00 -
[70]
There is one simple solution to the current frequent blobs:
make the EVE universe bigger!
Think about it for a while. Most of the blobs happen because it's so easy to move 20 jumps to join (esp. with WTZ, jump bridges) and because - let's face it - 0.0 territory has become scarce. With an EVE universe about 5 times bigger, things will become more relaxed, like they were in early 2004 or so, when blobbing was actually a rare and spectacular event. Alliances need to spread out more and people will think twice about joining a blob 50 jumps away.
isn't it funny how some people advocate both GTC<=>ISK trades and EVE being superior due to its cruelty and costly losses, when they use the former to circumvent the latter?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |