| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
NvyoU
   |
Posted - 2008.01.23 19:10:00 -
[61]
Maybe giving certain ship formations and organisations over distances bonuses?
Would that help thin the blob?
|
Burt Gummer
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 19:19:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Burt Gummer on 23/01/2008 19:20:47
On the idea of multiple objectives in different systems...
How about an anchorable structure, perhaps a communications array of some sort, that sits outside a POS's shield. This stucture would link to a POS in a nearby system and could be destroyed by a 20-30 man fleet. A POS could have say 3 of these arrays linked to it, and if they are all destroyed it could lose it's defensive capabilities such as not being able to go into reinforced, or the reduction in CPU of the tower causing some structures to offline.
This could help break up fleets by having them go to multiple objectives at once, because these arrays could be replaced relatively easily, so these structures couldn't just be destroyed by several groups that simply rejoin the main fleet once they are gone.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 19:26:00 -
[63]
 Originally by: Burt Gummer
... and if they are all destroyed it could lose it's defensive capabilities ...
One note on ideas like this. Change the idea of destroy all to having a minimum number that must be functional. If all must be destroyed, then the defending fleet can just blob up at one and wait for the attackers to come to them. But, if say three of these things must be functioning and to "offline" one, another must be under attack, then we force people to spread out to multiple objectives at the same time.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Dramaticus
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 19:26:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Burt Gummer
Edited by: Burt Gummer on 23/01/2008 19:20:47
On the idea of multiple objectives in different systems...
How about an anchorable structure, perhaps a communications array of some sort, that sits outside a POS's shield. This stucture would link to a POS in a nearby system and could be destroyed by a 20-30 man fleet. A POS could have say 3 of these arrays linked to it, and if they are all destroyed it could lose it's defensive capabilities such as not being able to go into reinforced, or the reduction in CPU of the tower causing some structures to offline.
This could help break up fleets by having them go to multiple objectives at once, because these arrays could be replaced relatively easily, so these structures couldn't just be destroyed by several groups that simply rejoin the main fleet once they are gone.
the corollary is that this would probably require more POSes to be put up and thats pretty much the last thing anyone wants
|
Burt Gummer
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 20:50:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
Originally by: Burt Gummer
... and if they are all destroyed it could lose it's defensive capabilities ...
One note on ideas like this. Change the idea of destroy all to having a minimum number that must be functional. If all must be destroyed, then the defending fleet can just blob up at one and wait for the attackers to come to them. But, if say three of these things must be functioning and to "offline" one, another must be under attack, then we force people to spread out to multiple objectives at the same time.
However, if the defensive fleet decides to blob one of these communications arrays, then the main POS would be undefended and could just be destroyed the old fashioned way, so blobbing one objective wouldn't be an entirely good idea, but I could see having a fleet ignore 2 communications arrays just to focus on the one a bit more as being a slight problem. So I think that your correction is fine, the finer points of my idea could certainly be revised a little.
Originally by: Dramaticus
the corollary is that this would probably require more POSes to be put up and thats pretty much the last thing anyone wants
Not necissarily, you could anchor any number of these to one POS so that one POS in a system could help support every POS in adjacent systems if you wanted. Many established alliances already have a network of existing POSes they could use for this purpose. The only problem I see is a new alliance trying to get started in 0.0 with a small number of POSes and none in neighboring systems to help strengthen it's defenses.
|
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 20:55:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Chrysalis D'lilth
One of the main causes people Blob is to engage in POS warfare.
POS warfare requires huge fleets to do effectively.
POS warfare is a major contributor to why people form such huge fleets.
Add to this that a protected system can't summon capitals (while the defenders still can), a large blob is required to overcome defenders otherwise even a small number of capital ships would pose a huge problem.
POS mechanics need changing, otherwise people are going to have to blob, plain and simple.
Right here, this is it... All you need to do is just reduce the HP for POS/Anchorables/Station systems
TO fight the blob allow less people to do more. Cut the stront timers down as well, I know this means less planning but at this point, mega blobs break the game. CCP wanted to have more things for smaller gangs to do. The best way to do that is have TRUELY SMALL GANGS take out station services and put POS's into reinforced. JUST DO IT CCP
|
Westly Synpa
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 21:04:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Matrixcvd
Edited by: Matrixcvd on 23/01/2008 20:56:26
Originally by: Chrysalis D'lilth
One of the main causes people Blob is to engage in POS warfare.
POS warfare requires huge fleets to do effectively.
POS warfare is a major contributor to why people form such huge fleets.
Add to this that a protected system can't summon capitals (while the defenders still can), a large blob is required to overcome defenders otherwise even a small number of capital ships would pose a huge problem.
POS mechanics need changing, otherwise people are going to have to blob, plain and simple.
Right here, this is it... All you need to do is just reduce the HP for POS/Anchorables/Station systems
TO fight the blob allow less people to do more. Cut the stront timers down as well, I know this means less planning but at this point, mega blobs break the game. CCP wanted to have more things for smaller gangs to do. The best way to do that is have TRUELY SMALL GANGS take out station services and put POS's into reinforced. JUST DO IT CCP... the best part is there is no need for weird, buggy solutions, you just change a couple numbers and what the ammo fly
are you stupid or something a full load of stront is only a day and a half.
a small gang should not be able to do any of the things possible here.
|
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 21:52:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Westly Synpa
are you stupid or something a full load of stront is only a day and a half.
a small gang should not be able to do any of the things possible here.[/quote
hillarious logic... CCP introduced station services and move POS hardware outside the shields to encourage small fleets, but the amount of HP involved in doing this only has large numbers of ships, nobody likes shooting stationary objects so it must be done FASTER with MOAR SHIPS!. The original idea is better than having 800 morons flood a system till it crashes. if 10 to 15 guys could do the job of taking out station services/POS in 15 minutes large blobs would be ineffictive and fast nimbler fleets for both aggressors and defenders would be needed. Obviously this would hit some of the largest alliances where they have their only advantage
|
Spoon Thumb
Paladin Imperium
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 03:17:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Spoon Thumb on 24/01/2008 03:18:29
Sorry to be a damp squib, but you're all getting off topic somewhat I feel. People complain they are no longer able to go solo or small gang hunting anymore, (and when they do and a large fleet comes to intercept they cloak up or nano up, blob complains of untouchable targets and small gang complains about getting out blobbed).
That is more the problem I'm trying to solve with my op, rather than POS warfare.
Edit: Thinking from the small gang warfare, that would hopefully slowly propogate up
Khaldari
khanidpublic: RP channel for Kingdom loyalists
Recruiting |
Vabjekf
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 03:37:00 -
[70]
Make it to where if too many warps are engaged in the same area within the same time frame a horrible hyperspace storm kills everyone. Oh wait, sorry, a horrible depleted vacuum storm sucks everyone up, and they die horribly.
This would make it impossible to move large groups of people simultaniously. You could even use hit and run tactics. If 'large fleet' was going from point A to point b, you could have a 'small fleet' of about comparable numbers to the safely-warp-at-the-same-time figure, who can come and harass the first (or last) group of people in 'large fleet' while they are warping to the next gate getting ready to jump. You would have to go in and do your damage in a small time window then get the hell out before the rest of 'large fleet' arrived.
Only warping out would cause this. SO you could, say, move your freshly jumped in fleet to different locations around the system, and then simultaniously converge at a single location, but it would still take time to warp everyone to their locations.
Of course the problem of having to keep track of how many people have used warp within a certain area remains... I guess something would keep track of where someone was when their engines engaged, then draw a sphere around that, and if too many spheres overlap the game triggers a chance for disaster, the more warps, the higher the chance.
This would also have the nice side effect of killing everyone in jita.
|
Herring
Alcatraz Inc.
Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2008.01.24 03:59:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Turin
Under current game mechanics.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIX BLOBBING! IT CANNOT BE DONE!
I have thought about this for a long time. Its just not possible.
You either need something that destroys blobs, yet not small gangs. I dunno how you can do such a thing. Titans are not the answer. Neither are stealth bombers.
As long as people CAN bring more, they WILL bring more. period. The only sure fire way I see to fix blobbing is to lock a constelation to a max ammount of ship numbers. Notice I didnt say system. Constellation. Otherwise you will just have 2-300 people sitting on a gate waiting to jump in as soon as they can.
As someone mentioned above. Until there is a way to make a reason to split up your numbers among multiple objectives, people wont do it.
This.
Although if they added something like a high density torpedo (think big bomb w/launcher, fitted on a black ops bs; finds the rough center of gangs (fof style ai bomb) that are 50+ people or more and detonates [range ~ 100km] and give it a not so good refire rate. More expensive than bombs to build but at least 5x the AE damage. If there's not enough people present it just flies in a random direction and explodes) with an explosion radius of about 75 km.
Oh and it shouldn't have the crappy negative sig radius damage modifiers like bombs do (that make them so ineffective, even against frigs). Either that or give this thing a ginormous explosion velocity. It'd also make the black ops BS a little sexier.
CCP - please stop with the nerfing and boost something already. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |