Originally by: Aleus Stygian

---

Originally by: Derek Sigres

---

Well, the assertion about real life strategy holds little bearing here and it's also more or less incorrect. Economy of effort is important in most conflicts because a commander does not have limitless resoucres at their disposal. Therefore, it's often in the commander's best interest to use the minimum force necessary to accomplish an objective, leaving the remainder of his combat forces available for other duties. However, just as important as economy of effort is the idea of fire superiority. The side that slings more lead with greater accuracy is almost invariably the side that will win any battle, and the best way to achieve this is with sheer, overwhelming numbers.

As an example, when assaulting an entrenched opponent the general logic that's used is if the attacking force has a similarly powerful force it should avoid the dug in opponent. At 3:1 odds, the attacker should split thier effort along two fronts and only at 10:1 odds should the attacker attempt a direct, frontal assault. The reason for the logic is simple: until you achieve a wide enough margin of superiority, a frontal assault becomes unnecessarily deadly for the assaulting force. In spite of the fact that you risk a far greater portion of your forces in a 10:1 odds assault it almost invariably results in fewer casualties, thus furthering the concept of economy of effort.

In Eve, the idea of economy of effort exists, but only in terms of losses. A defending force can almost certainly avoid a battle for many hours while help arrives, whereas in modern warfare it might takes DAYS for a sizable relief force to assemble. It's rare for any major alliance to have the bulk of their combat forces online more than 30 minutes to an hour from being ready for a fight. Because mobility is not an issue, the prime concern is massing enough of a force to combat a threat effectively with minimum casualties. This in itself is a prime reason blobbing happens.

I agree that this isn't how the game OUGHT to be, but you can't exactly unmake the concept now that it's in place without a substantial reimagining of the game's basic mechanics.

---

I keep repeating that 'just because something is doesn't make it right', and that that's the reason why the mods are even trying to 'fix' the game in the first place. Reimagining and revising the mechanics are part of this.

You're very right on the first account, but you haven't taken into account the complexity of maneuvers or the acquisition of targets, the need not to waste firepower and effort, and so on. Plainly, the 'openness' of EVE combat and the lack of environmental circumstances and secondary targets and requisite objectives is what makes the calculation so simple. So overly simple, and risk-free for some people, and discouraging of individual pursuits and excellence and encouraging of cowardice. And while it can be disputed, and might ultimately be a question of opinion, I for one do not find this a good thing.

You're right. We're talking minutes, not days here. But that shouldn't decide the difference in scope between EVE battlefields and real ones. Only the intensity. It ain't the timespan that compresses the effort, since the servers are online all day round...

We can't get footholds or establish perimeters or acquire advantageous positions, or be subjected to resource denial or sneakier assaults... I know it may not be the foremost priority, and that numbers and sheer effort should always count for as much as they should, but damnit. Is this how things should be? People obviously do not desire quite this much blobbing, and you do want to reward people for thinking.

---