Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Manfred Rickenbocker
|
Posted - 2008.03.03 20:08:00 -
[31]
I /sign this idea for the one sole fact that small gangs have NO role in EVE whatsoever because larger gangs will always get the job done better. Even attacking small targets like station services or POS guns are silly. The only POS guns are the ones on deathstar POSes and small gangs cant get there. Outpost systems are typically well-populated so they can typically rally a defense. Issues like sov. mechanics are just exasperating the issue. Finally, concerns about trickling in to a gate camp can be easily solved by the simple use of covop/inty scouts (which any good gang should already be using in the first place).
It can already be seen what CCP thinks the optimal gang size should be. Look at the alliance tournament: limiting ship points and quantity. This point system would mesh well with this suggestion. This also has other advantages, such as limiting the number of simultaneous grid-loads which should also help to reduce lag.
Finally, lets face it, defenders -should- have the advantage vs. attackers when fortifications are involved, otherwise there would be no incentive to put them up. Conversely, as stated before, it gives attackers the incentive to divide then conquer and exploit the weaknesses in the fortifications (a.k.a. undefended POSes/systems, force defenders to choose which are the most valuable). ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Cursive
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.03 20:47:00 -
[32]
Get a bigger alliance. Oh, better yet, go play WoW. It is "fair."
|
Kekzanid
Black Wolves Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2008.03.03 21:45:00 -
[33]
lol, why bother flaming in features and ideas, you goon. You might as well have posted everyone go join red or blue.
|
Manfred Rickenbocker
|
Posted - 2008.03.03 23:13:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Manfred Rickenbocker on 03/03/2008 23:14:59
Originally by: Cursive Get a bigger alliance. Oh, better yet, go play WoW. It is "fair."
No no, I think you misunderstand. As I see it (and why I signed) this is intended to make things UNFAIR. The sole difference is that in order to take advantage of it, commanders have to plan further ahead and have to look at a larger combat theater. Whomever does a better job of scouting, securing supply lines, planning alternative routes, and going "RAWR! Suprise!" with smaller strike forces will win the day. ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Cursive
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 00:22:00 -
[35]
That won't work at all. What will happen is this:
RSF owns the entire South, has thousands of players in key, controlling outpost systems. Alliance X comes along, wanting to try to take it from us and we laffo as they jump through 5-10 at a time into our held systems with hundreds of us sitting on the gate picking them off.
This doesn't stop blobbing at all, it stops offensive blobbing.
Fine, maybe you take the time, manage to get some ZOMG JAWSOME 1337 players into a key, outpost system without the enemy noticing. Then what? How do you take the system? Do you take the cyno-jammer out with 5 guys and then jump all your cap ships in to start the POS warfare fun? 5 people defending a bunch of dreads sounds awesome, too. Or maybe those 5 people can take the towers down themselves?
Sorry, wars are about resources and numbers. Not so much elite small combat groups, although they do have a role.
If you want to be a small and elite fighting force, fine, do so, but don't cry that you cannot be a part of the larger POS warfare.
And it's a dumb idea. And I started a sentence with "and." And I did it again. And again... |
Kekzanid
Black Wolves Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 00:36:00 -
[36]
So you're going to have 100 pilots in each outpost system are you? I have no idea how many you have, say 10, you would need to simultaneously have 1000 players online, 100 in each one of the systems. Because if you put them all into ABC-DE then the enemy fleet would just go and attack CDE-FG because you can't follow them. That's the point of limiting free travel, you turtle up, enemy just says ok and attacks elsewhere.
Or we could carry on with 300 man fleets going across half of eve in an evening boring the crap out of everyone in the 1fps battle that happens afterwards.
If you want to to play a game of who can get the biggest number of members, I've got a great game for you. You'll really love it.
It's called Facebook.
|
Dr 0wnage
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 01:39:00 -
[37]
Shouldn't the defender have the advantage? Do any of you have ANY idea of how military tactics work? It takes a significantly more powerful attacking force to defeat a well entrenched defender.
It just doesn't make any sense to me that one force can roll into a defended area and within a week take out 50 billion worth of investments simply because the attacker outnumbers the defender.
If a force of 100 blockades themselves in a dead end system w/ a cyno inhibitor shouldn't they be able to hold that system to all but the most prolonged siege?
|
Cursive
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 02:31:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Dr 0wnage It just doesn't make any sense to me that one force can roll into a defended area and within a week take out 50 billion worth of investments simply because the attacker outnumbers the defender.
Oh, you mean like... every war ever fought in the history of man-kind?
Yeah, I agree, totally nonsensical.
You guys wouldn't happen to have empire mining alts would you? If you do -- could I get their names? |
Cursive
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 02:33:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Kekzanid It's called Facebook.
I LOVE Facebook! What's your email address, I'll friend you! |
Dr 0wnage
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 03:56:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Dr 0wnage on 04/03/2008 03:57:58
Originally by: Kekzanid Oh, you mean like... every war ever fought in the history of man-kind?
In fact most all the famous battles of history were won by forces who were outnumbered. Go rent the movie 300 (not that they won but still the general idea). Of course it would be a goon trying to shoot down an anti-blob idea...
|
|
Cursive
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 05:31:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Cursive on 04/03/2008 05:32:24
Originally by: Dr 0wnage Edited by: Dr 0wnage on 04/03/2008 03:57:58
Originally by: Kekzanid Oh, you mean like... every war ever fought in the history of man-kind?
In fact most all the famous battles of history were won by forces who were outnumbered. Go rent the movie 300 (not that they won but still the general idea). Of course it would be a goon trying to shoot down an anti-blob idea...
"Fact" is a mighty big word to use there. Didn't you just debunk your own point?
Bravo.
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar The Unseen Company
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 09:19:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Ellaine TashMurkon on 04/03/2008 09:19:41
Originally by: Dr 0wnage Edited by: Dr 0wnage on 04/03/2008 03:57:58
Originally by: Kekzanid Oh, you mean like... every war ever fought in the history of man-kind?
In fact most all the famous battles of history were won by forces who were outnumbered. Go rent the movie 300 (not that they won but still the general idea). Of course it would be a goon trying to shoot down an anti-blob idea...
Those battles are famous because its rare :)
Or even not - in real life, there is much tactics, much about training, equipment, morale. In general, stronger army wins, not nerceserily
And 300 is a movie based on a comic book :D. That comic book is based on an actual battle, yes, but historically the main reason why a small group managed to delay a great army by a few days was terrain tactical advantage and the fact that its alredays very difficult to move great army thru mountains.
This change is in fact creating the same - the terrain advantage. It brings many interesting possibilities for the defender and there are still ways to counter it for the attacker. The main advantage is the fact that its a good reason to split forces and splitted forces are key to more smaller battles with less lag, more tactics and more fun.
Tactical possibilities;
1.When facing a large enemy fleet, a small force may delay it and even take a few ships, they just need to be 1 jump ahead and deplete gates by jumping themselves. If the defending smaller gang makes a mistake or moves clumsily, those left behind are easy prey. The running fleet may become even more efficient with massive use of vampires and neutralisers, but if they're not precise they may harm their own ability to jump. This way a small force can play with a larger blob for long. The large blob may go 10 minutes per jump or may try to send a fast, forward attack force to eliminate the trouble makers. The defender gets more time to organize.
2.Invading force may speed up their movement and drop more ships per second in system if they split their force and jump from 2 or 3 gates to target system at the same time. Naturally, they need to get there first. Defender may choose to concentrate forces on one gate to get OMGPWN effect but then, the invaders will just drop from the other gate.
3.Some gates will have more and some less cap and cap recharge time, some systems have more gates and are connectec in different ways. Choice of battleground, as well as strategic placing of station and cynojammer systems becomes really important.
4.Warping speed rigs or something like that may affect cap efficiency of gate jumping, making more difference between full-combat ships and high mobility ships.
5.Fleet that would like to drop 50 or 100 ships thru a gate in under a minute just needs to use cap transfers, with a handful of carriers or on many battleships and logistics. So invasion blob is still really possible, but needs more logistic support or sacrifice of firepower.
6.Carriers and Moms and their ship and pilot transporting abilities become more important when forcing thru gates can be slow and/or painful. Same for the blackops gate and covert gangs.
7.Invading force can send heavily plated battleships or small ships able to run from camp in the first way to make it easier for the rest of the force to survive system entry.
8.Lagfests with 800 ships in a system will likely change long constelation sieges, with invading side fighting for system by system, dozens of smaller battles and positional warfare with sides on 2 sides of a gate waiting for good oportunity to invade.
9.Combination of weak gates, cyno jammer and defender covering all timezones seems nearly unbreakable fortress, but in fact it can be invaded like it was, if You use big enough carrier fleet with energy transfers on the other side. If its really really nercesarry, it will be possible to move a huge blob thru a gate in a short time, but only with properly prepared force.
|
Manfred Rickenbocker
|
Posted - 2008.03.05 15:05:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Cursive \ Then what? How do you take the system? Do you take the cyno-jammer out with 5 guys and then jump all your cap ships in to start the POS warfare fun?
It should noted that CCP already stated that perma-running cyno jammers need tweaking. Its true, this idea does not work at all without sov. mechanic changes and tweaks to POS warfare, which has to be the most boring aspect of Eve from all standpoints: running, defending and assaulting.
The greater issue of being able to blob defense is obviously a non-issue for Goonswarm or RA, considering they are the largest coalition running with many tenants as well. As well it shouldn't, since you are able to actually able to populate 0.0 with a decent number of people. The issue at hand becomes smaller (relative of course) alliances who are able to lock down far larger tracts of space than they can feasibly utilize to their greatest potential. In the end, more people in 0.0 = better pew-pew. ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar The Unseen Company
|
Posted - 2008.03.05 16:11:00 -
[44]
But with this change, alliances of any size do not have easier time defending large piece of space. Just the opposite. Their giant blob will not be able to easily move quickly and intercept invading medium blob. And if they'd like to seal every exit, they'd have to be on every entry gate with a medium sized blob at least, thats hudreds of people 23/7, much more effort then simply having scouts and assembling defense fleet when needed. And that would still be splited forces, separated by large distances and long travel times, something that can be assaulted and harmed with a not-so-extreme force. Invader, if he wants space, once inside, can fortify and defend a system against a larger blob of traditional (gate-using) ships, making it easier to take space from big players then today.
|
Conrad Rock
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.03.05 18:00:00 -
[45]
Terrible, it would end up being the same as limiting player numbers in a system. If one gets in first throug a period of hours or even days, the other is still screwed.
With lag and node deaths, there' still a slight chance to get in and do something.
|
Verys
The Black Ops Black Core Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.05 20:30:00 -
[46]
If it had a capacitor wouldnt i be possible to nos/neut them, locking down stargates with curses comes up to mind.
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar The Unseen Company
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 07:55:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Verys If it had a capacitor wouldnt i be possible to nos/neut them, locking down stargates with curses comes up to mind.
Yes, but only from the entry side.
If there is a gate from ABCD-1 to EFGH-2, You can be preventing people jump from ABCD to EFGH only by sitting in ABCD and nossing with a large bunch of NOS ships. This makes Your nossing gang voulnerable to invaders who arrive in ABCD. So NOSers can be killed or can run to EFGH and no longer be able to lock the gate, slowing but not stopping the invaders.
In fact, it could rather lead to tactically intresting encounters rather then inbreakable gate locking tactics.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |