I like this. No cloaking at safes either.Originally Posted by Grath
I like this. No cloaking at safes either.
I fucking regret doing this. But LXQ Springs to mind. We had 5 fleets in system each guarding Rapecaged pos's (AU's apart) where supers where logged off in. each team also had "paratroopers" camping jumpbridge/stargate routes to catch RF fleets.
My point is, you'll never ever eliminate the fuck-off big fleets/fights like H-W, y-2, and other fights. Even cj6, two other systems came out of RF, did anyone bother to split fleets? During Max 2 and H-W, something like 3-5 other systems and moons where captured. And I'm sure when y-2 fell, it wasn't the only system, or object on a timer list.
Now is dominion sov system a huge pile of crock that needs to be fixed? Are the static timers fucking abysmal and makes one yearn for POS warfare? As a US TZ player who's repped and reffed half of geminate twice, Dear aped raped christ, yes it needs to be fixed.
But you're living in an equally absurd utopia that permits young small alliances to solo claim space in 0.0, as the same one where you think a multi-objective sov system is going to make 2000+ lag battles a thing of the past.
[Arrador] possesses a considerable understanding of ship configurations, strengths and weakness. He gives clear and purposeful instructions, is good at taking advantage of the fleet-composition he's dealt, and never loses sight of the main goal: fun. This, paired with an excellent tolerance for strong drink gives him an almost Churchillian capability to win, despite being completely pissed on booze most of the fleet operation.
System wide cloak jammer would be hi-larious.
Get your filthy monkey-paws off my cloaking devices, you heathen baboons.
[05:28:32] Damienwhat Solette > friend said, if only they didn't have those 2 falcons there, i said they have 3, and he said that just says they don't want to do anything fair, just want to be dicks about it like not normal dicks but big black huge cocks
Many games have mechanics that penalize or discourage blobing, in different ways. Perpetuum's mechanics are such that a few ships exploding does enough AoE damage to blow up a single ship, thus a few ships being shot down in a blob risks the entire fleet (I think this idea should be extended to titans). Dota 2 has strong crowd control AoE spells that scale with either the number of enemies hit, or some cases even n^2. In the early days of Eve, torpedos did AoE splash damage (imagine that with citadel torps now). For incursions, there's no specific spacetime location that everyone can gather up at and diminishing rewards for larger numbers at a site.
The risk-reward is such that more is always better right now, because there's low risk to bringing more people (smartbombs and bombers) while rewards don't change with more or fewer. There's many ways you can fix this, so no, it's not impossible to fix at all.
Maybe you're on to something...
[05:28:32] Damienwhat Solette > friend said, if only they didn't have those 2 falcons there, i said they have 3, and he said that just says they don't want to do anything fair, just want to be dicks about it like not normal dicks but big black huge cocks
I think there was some suggestion like pinoy's on RivNews about a year ago - something to the effect of 'Caps should go nova when they die and do 9321934321530234032 damage to everything within 100km, that'll keep them from blobbing.'
I'm being a little hyperbolic, but just a little. It's a horrible idea for a variety of reasons, least of all that it only costs a cyno and one unfit carrier to flatten everything on grid.
You want to work on the incentives to blobbing, not some cheap-ass "stacking penalty". Make sov more fluid and dynamic.
I always feel like this game is one step away from being truly ground-breaking and incredible. If they can spend the time, effort, and money to make massed sov conflict truly dynamic, this game will fucking explode in appeal, and they'll never want for rotten shark meat and tortuously woolly sweaters ever again.
My solution for this one has been up for years, but the simple answer is you make it easy to conquer territory and hard to hold it. In real life you can walk into anywhere and say "this is mine", and so it is. If someone wants you out they have to come actively defend it, if not its yours. Countries sizes (historically) where therefore primarily limited by the ability of the country to rapidly move forces from one area to another. Now of course reinforce timers exist so that we don't have a huge "unfairness" in time zones and the resulting station ping pong, so you can keep those but just make it bloody easy to reinforce a system.must have misread your intent Grath, sorry. What then do you suggest? I agree with the sentiment that "Coalitons are eve" but how do we make sov mechanics better?
My system would look like this:
A) Reinforcement is not based on damage etc, but an amount of player time. For example say reinforcing a station takes "2 hours" of player time. Time is reduced with number of ships, but by the inverse natural log. E.g. 2*2/ln(n) where n is the number of ships on grid.*
i) If a hostile ship enters grid the capture pauses until its removed
ii) If all ships from your alliance ever leave grid the capture timer is reset
iii) Cloaked ships don't count
iv) Yes I said alliance, your coalition needs to leave grid for you to actually capture shit. No alliance should have trouble putting a 30 man gang on somewhere for the 8 minutes it would take to capture shit.
B) Reinforce timers are about as long as they are now
C) Capturing is based on the same mechanic as reinforcing.
What this translates to:
Winning is holding the field, like it is in real life.
Shits easy to capture like it should be. If you can't summon someone in a crow to buzz around at the edge of the grid and dodge that 30 man gang while you compose yourselves its probably not really in your control now is it?
Its actually easier on small alliances, because small gang tactics are now mildly effective and not stupidly time consuming. Why do most regions of NPC 0.0 (take syndicate for example) have such large communities of small alliances? Because its "holding" the space is easy as hell. You essentially hold it if you live there.
* For those of you who don't have the time here is a table of capture times, or you can graph 2/ln(x) here. It essentially implements diminishing returns:
1 - Infinity (not doable)
2 - 2.9
3 - 1.8
4 - 1.4
5 - 1.2
6 - 1.1
7 - 1.02
100 - 26 Minutes
200 - 22 Minutes
1000 - 17 Minutes
2000 - 15 Minutes
It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.
stretch grid with cans
warp rifters in until the enemy gives up
and something that automatically blew up falcons as soon as they entered system
You can balance it by scaling damage and explosion volume by ehp, and reduce it by making it dependent on sig (like bombs). Thus a Titan exploding, for example, would only be a significant damage threat for other supercaps on grid, not the fleet of ruptures you used to kill the titan. Only titans exploding would do such damage, so you would need to self-destruct/suicide a titan to exploit it.
Finally a use for the Leviathan :V
When I came to null for the first time that's what I thought cynojammers did, because most sci-fi have the whateverjammers prevent escape, not entrance.
Every rifter counts friend
stretch grid with cans
warp rifters in until the enemy gives up
Place ten Munnins with sensors boosters. Etc. etc.
The entire point of something like this is that the simplicity actually lends more complexity to the available tactics. Though alterantively you could just make it 250km from station and not grid.
It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.
Hah, that reminds me of boat telling how he lost his first carrier since it drifted out of the pos and he thought since the system was cyno jammed he could jump out so he just sat there and died. But I remember thinking how cool it would be if there was a module (or maybe some sort of script on a tech2 cruiser or BC) that would stop ships from cynoing out. Also cyno hacking would be awesome you could 'hack' a cyno and piggyback your own caps/supers out behind theirs and onto them.
There's nothing worse than having a good idea for a post not being good enough to pull it off :negative:
Warp disruptor, warp scrambler, Bubbles, Infinite point these all stop people from jumping out to a cyno
What your describing is not alot different from how systems in FW are taken. Except of course players have to control plexes rather than station grids.
Having to capture plexes in a system to take it is not such a bad idea as plexes restrict the ship sizes that can enter meaning a super cap blob alone can no longer steam roller a smaller alliance.
As for stations I would like to see the ability to anchor guns and other defensive measures on them to make things a little more interesting.
Why are you trolling too, Grath?
You can't seriously believe alliances cram 2000 people in the system because they have to, or because they need to. There was absolutely no need to cram 2000 people in C-J, by either side. Yet it happened.
Tell me, why?
I don't think anyone wants to eliminate the huge fuck-off big fleets, what we want to do is eliminate the need for all fuck-off big fleets, all the time, for every fucking timer, with a bajillion fucking supers, causing big fuckoff blueballs more often than not, until the last fucking timer.
While it would be nice if young small alliances were able to claim space in 0.0, I don't think a system should be made with this in mind. I also don't think the "occupy multiple systems in a constellation to take over said constellation" is necessarily the right thing to go for either. Personally I think a sov system should mean that some systems have different strategic value based on what it contains, f.ex through the number of planets it has, it has to have some sort of TZ protection, and both defender and aggressor has to have the possibility to flub the timers or out-guess eachother. And there sure as fuck shouldn't be some sort of "flub just one attack and hey look, all the progress the attacker made is now null and void", which is what makes the huge fuckoff fleet more or less mandatory for each fucking system, and I assume also makes it a lot more likely that the defenders will just fuck off after losing a few systems, or the attacker fuck off after being rebuffed on the final timer a few weeks at a time, simply because either the defender or the attacker is made to feel like all they do is grind timers only to lose at the final timer, or no matter what they bring, they can't defend.
The only thing the current system really has, is the TZ protection, there's no real "fuck up the timers because we're awful" (well, beyond what SoT managed to do right at the start of the fountain invasion by IT), because it's pre-determined. That shit has to go. It can be argued that there are differences in systems' worth through various anchorable things like ihub, tcu and station, but that's the extent of it. Why can't f.ex something like the POCOs (or some other, new, planet-anchorable thing with enough ehp to make, say, a full fleet take a reasonable time to grind it down) be responsible for sov in a system? And to flub timers, or out-guess eachother, why not make those planet-anchorable things have, say, stront bays so the skill of the defenders actually matters.
Whatever the system is, it needs to actively encourage the two (or three) sides actively fighting eachother as much as possible, and give small morale boosts to all sides, again to encourage all sides to keep fighting as much as possible. It also needs to have, as I have been harping on and on and on, some sort of tug of war, so if one side has a good week, it makes progress, but if they have a bad week the other side makes progress, but unless you get camped into a station for a month or just don't show up to defend at all, you should under no circumstances automatically lose all progress or all your space.
In short, it should be much, much more fluid than it is now. Today's system sucks so much ass it isn't even funny.
Everyone's favourite FC lost a Thanatos in NOL (if I remember correctly), ages ago, because the system was jammed and he though he couldn't jump out.
Mind you, pretty much every new capital pilot at that time had same assumptions
It was suggested quite few times that cynojammer should work that way (prevent in/out jumps)., but I don't think it was ever 'pushed' to CCP.
Have supercapital weapons only work inside anomalies, and everyone will be happy
Jammers working both ways does make a certain amount of sense, I have to admit.
That's not system wide. An anchorable, probe-able (don't make it a pos mode those are gaygaygay), structure that prevents cynoing out would be awesome.
[IMG]https://www.pandemic-legion.com/forums/image.php?u=1218&type=sigpic&dateline=1226360240[/IMG]
I think everyone just wants to know when Guild Wars II & Diablo III will be released.
Daroh > I've bought a telescope, watching you guys fly in eve from my place )))
This is a fucking dumb question that has been answered a million times, and you're a faggot for asking it again as if its some amazing point to make.
Safety in numbers. Nothing beats numbers in EVE. People don't want to lose ships, they want to win. The more dudes you have with you the less likely it is that it's YOU that will die, and the more likely it is that you will win and have some killmails to look at.
[IMG]https://www.pandemic-legion.com/forums/image.php?u=1218&type=sigpic&dateline=1226360240[/IMG]
This. Having rules and whatnot to "fix" blobbing will just make it feel too artificial, especially after some nerds sit down and come up with some kind of optimal ship composition/fleet number that happens to hit the sweet spot between whatever anti-blob mechanic is in place and still being a blob. Coming up with reasons to split the blob up is far preferable, that way you can still put every last chucklefuck in your coalition into one system if you really want to, but a good opponent will outmaneuver you and win despite being outnumbered.
Of course as Grath said, we're not game designers(well, most of us anyway I assume, fuck if I know what you people do for a living) so trying to come up with an actual working model for this will probably just make us all look stupid. More so that is.
Yeah well, I much rather have a monocle, thank you sir.
I'm waiting for EVE achievements (not the fucking useless things you can claim when a skillgroup has been trained) something tangible I could put on Grath's nose when he puts his balls on my face claiming USA is #1.
Daroh > I've bought a telescope, watching you guys fly in eve from my place )))
I agree with everything in this post. I'm going to point out that while I put forth a few suggestions on how I think the system should be, the main thing that I'm pushing (and have been pushing for well over a year, now) is that it must be much more fluid than it is now, and it must be something that incentivizes, rather than forces, people into splitting up. If you don't want to split up, that's fine, but unless your enemies are dumb, chances are they'll just do what happened to BOB at least once, where they defended a CSAA to the detriment of the rest of their space.
Speaking of, are CSAAs still valuable enough to defend that whole alliances would be willing to let parts of their space burn, just so they could defend their unborn supercarrier or titan?
Imagine me staring at you with a disappointed frown, sir.
You stupid fuck, you were in C-J too.
So which of the reasons you listed made you attend C-J fuckfest?
"Everyone else was there because of the reasons I listed, while I was there because I am an hono(u)rable player"
Are you going to take one specific huge clusterfuck, and attribute the reasons behind that to the myriad of other clusterfucks which have happened to grind through all the timers required to take a system?
Actually, you should answer "Fuck you, I was there for those exact reasons!", and then I'll feel even more stupid.
Don't do that, please
The sole reason for so many blue balls is the cyno and the ability for every man and his dog to be able to travel half way across the galaxy to gate crash somone elses fight.
In the good old days everyone had to use the gates to get around and interdiction played a big part.
Now days people have become so lazy they just sit on a titan waiting for somthing to drop on its pathetic.
Why not make everyone use gates including caps,that should put and end to many of the big super cap blob fests.
Or atleast a ship that admits a cyno jammer meaning unless this ship is destroyed no one else can crash the party.
NOT THE "I AM DISAPOINT" FROWN, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Daroh > I've bought a telescope, watching you guys fly in eve from my place )))
Pray I do not escalate further.NOT THE "I AM DISAPOINT" FROWN, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Are you going to ignore huge numbers of cases where sov was taken without a need for 2000 people to be in the system? I am not arguing whether sov mechanics is good or bad. It's retarded.
But always blaming everything on CCP's "game design" is silly, when it's always human nature that works around any design they could come up with.
I like the idea of being able to build static defensive structures for Sov systems; things that would actually matter to defending the system, like station and gate guns, or static defensive structures that deploy assignable fighters (for example. not usable in pve). You'd have to put limits in, of course, such as maximum numbers. I would add low EHP and extremely short or no Reinforce timers.
Similar to the current tactic of "defanging" a POS, this would add smaller scale strategic objectives that would also create points of conflict outside the one timer fuckoff blob types of fights. It might help smaller alliances against the larger if they could manage to hold space long enough to build up a defense.
I'd also like to see some much smaller constellations added to the map that are not in easy jump range (one of the things that has protected IRC), and far away from everything else.
Nothing will help them if 1500 people go after them v0v
The current problems with sov seem to boil down to 'how do twenty guys in rifters hold a system against a hundred guys in aeons?' The simple answer is that they don't.
If you have a bigger blob, then the smaller blob loses. But at the same time, I don't think it's ridiculous for the smaller blob to take a small piece of the map; shouldn't the bigger blob be occupied in defending the bigger constellation(s)?
This is all hypothetical, of course. Entities with supercap fleets are definitely capable of fielding more than one big blob simultaneously.
I mean, it's not a secret what Mittani wants, so the only way to not get attacked by 1500 people is to rent from us or be blue to us v0v
He expressed the plan in one of the interviews some time ago:
So, sooner people get used to this, less it will hurt. Blob is not going anywhere.“Our goal is to control all of Eve,” The Mittani said in an interview over an Internet voice chat program. “It’s totally impossible to claim all of Eve physically. But it’s possible to control the people. It’s possible to control the alliances, be it by economic means or fighting means or political means. That was the goal and that is the goal.”
I actually wasn't there, thanks for playing.
And yeah that is the reason why people bring everyone that wants to come, because they want to win. If this is some kind of revelation for you then I am really sorry for everyone that has to interact with you on a daily basis, because god damn it must be tedious having to explain every tiny piece of minutiae you come across.
[IMG]https://www.pandemic-legion.com/forums/image.php?u=1218&type=sigpic&dateline=1226360240[/IMG]
I mean holy shit safety in numbers is a new concept to you ahahahahaha
[IMG]https://www.pandemic-legion.com/forums/image.php?u=1218&type=sigpic&dateline=1226360240[/IMG]
ARE YOU USTZ AND WANT TO COME ON SHIT ON KUGUPray I do not escalate further.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
You as in PL.
It is tedious that I have to explain every tiny piece of minutiae you come across.
Also, don't be a dumb fuck and generalize things by using some SunTzu-like logic, because you are wrong.
Most of all, people want to play.
There is no way a small power can stand up to a larger power in both eve or real life, I have no problem with that, but what eve lacks is the logistic nightmare people face in real life when the empire becomes too big.
For me its too easy to own vast areas of space, jump bridges jump freighters titan bridges ect ect ect have all made owning and defending great tracts of otherwise unocupied space possible.
Quite simply the best protection the small guy could have against the big guys would be that the big guys do not want their space in the first place because owning it would be depremental to their already overstreched empire. Its the same with poses would one or two groups be able to have such a strangle hold over tech poses if they had to be refuled by haulers using gates instead of jump bridges and jump freighters?
Space travel is too easy and keeping hold of large amounts of it are far to easy, make owning more space than you need deprimental.
I'm saving some long trains for when GW2 is released. You'll also be spared from my posting for a while too.
maybe when shit gets reinforced, the tcu becomes a fight every few hours for a few days to "hold it" top scorer proves there influence/presence and wins?
Or
Maybe a tcu holders should have the ability to specify 3 systems that it is connected to (can't think of a cool name :P)upon reinforcement those 3 tcu become a "Multi king of the hill"(sov level could make more hills?) and its a race to hold them wether it be presence or kill bitches whoever gets the most wins? the initial system? could even make it so that on reinforcement those systems could activate a cynojammer or some other effects like an incursion would to give the defender home turf advantage?
i dunno i just long for a sov system where use of the space and presence is worth more than my super fleet/blob can dick you.
How many of those cases were between coalitions capable of fielding 1000+ each?
No, the problem with sov isn't "how do twenty guys in rifters hold a system against a hundred guys in aeons", that's looking at it from the wrong perspective. The current problem with the system is that we're looking at a few big timers, the most important of which is the very last station timer. Defend the system and rep up everything on that last timer, and you've set back a week or whatever worth of progress. This is demotivating to go through more than once as an attacker, and it's demotivating to be unable to defend a few systems in a row using this sovsystem. So both sides bring ze blob, at least for the final timer, instead of having tons of smaller fights over peripheral systems, with some wins, some losses, and no huge fucking setback because you lost ONE fight.
That's the problem with the current sov system. If fixing this means smaller entities are able to carve out a small backwater system or two for themselves, wouldn't you call that a win? Not something to design the whole system around, certainly, but it'd be a nice side-effect if it happened.
Two words: asymetrical warfare. It's what EvE is missing or at least seriously lacking at. There's almost no way to conduct a guerrilla warfare against a blob and absolutely no way to conduct a guerrilla warfare against a supercapital blob - two main weapons employed by EvE (player-run) "Empires".
As someone already mentioned, you can't do anything (e.g. set up a PoS) in a system controlled by someone without the owner noticing. EvE "partisans" can't set up their "hideout" (e.g. said PoS), they can have no safe havens in a hostile territory. Everything is under full and total control of the owner. I believe indtroducing a mechanism that would allow for at least some kind of hit & run tactis is something that would allow both "small guys" to take their part in history, as would diversify the "black ops" war between the Power Blocks.
Heh, too bad I have no idea how to implement it.
Years ago when all traffic too and from empire had to pass through gates you could have a large effect on a much bigger alliance by means of a well set up gate camp or two.Two words: asymetrical warfare. It's what EvE is missing or at least seriously lacking at. There's almost no way to conduct a guerrilla warfare against a blob and absolutely no way to conduct a guerrilla warfare against a supercapital blob - two main weapons employed by EvE (player-run) "Empires".
As someone already mentioned, you can't do anything (e.g. set up a PoS) in a system controlled by someone without the owner noticing. EvE "partisans" can't set up their "hideout" (e.g. said PoS), they can have no safe havens in a hostile territory. Everything is under full and total control of the owner. I believe indtroducing a mechanism that would allow for at least some kind of hit & run tactis is something that would allow both "small guys" to take their part in history, as would diversify the "black ops" war between the Power Blocks.
Heh, too bad I have no idea how to implement it.
Hostile fleet movements could be slowed and interdicted also because unlike now they dont all sit on titans safe inside a pos while a single cloaky ship goes out in search of a drop target.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks