open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked [CSM Debate] Bridges, projection, PVP, and magical fairies
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.18 22:57:00 - [1]
 

Hereís the rules to this discussion, please follow them, if you donít, you will defeat the purpose of this debate.
1.) Please provide all feedback and examples without referencing NC or DRF. Any reference to either group or how they use said mechanic will be ignored.
2.) If you are providing feedback for something you understand in concept but not in practice, thatís ok, just please just note it. For example. If you think titan bridges are unbalanced, but have never used or depended on one, just note that. Input is important but so is source.
3.) Please stick to facts. This is about game mechanics, not metagaming, conspiracy theories or tears because powerblocs are powerblocs and those that arenít.. arenít..
4.) Seriously, lets not get into powerbloc debate, I would like to start that debate, but I want to do so in another thread. Just try and hold back.. kthx

Why Rules?
Look I totally understand that people have problems with large powerbloc groups like NC and DRF. But if your problem is with the mechanics you should be able to hold a valid debate while excluding 1 or 2 users of said mechanic. Meaning is your problem with the mechanic or is it really with the powerbloc.

Bridges: letís talk about how titan and jump bridges are, ways to bring them into balance.

Should we talk about just nerfing? In case you think they should stay just letís look at how many ships can use them at one time, fuel requirements, or mechanics in which they are used?

Should we talk about getting rid of them all together? Now seriously.. Please donít comment here if you have never relied on bridges without stating so.

Personally im not opposed to a rebalance of bridges, however I do oppose removal.

Force projection: I guess my issue with bridges and force projection is that an alliance or group that can project 200+ pilots will do so regardless of bridges. For those that have moved large groups of people. MOST of the time large fleets like this only use a few KEY bridges (if any at all) which almost always requires fuelers ready due to the number of ships. I really think if you remove bridges large alliances will still project their forces when itís really needed, they will just have to start earlier when moving. For Titan bridges, most (probably all) even partially stable 0.0 alliances have a titan or 20. So itís relatively equally in terms of their use as a portal. But Iím interested in ideas on potentially rebalancing these as well.

Small scale pvp: As a pilot who has frequently been in small scale pvp <30 man fleets in both friendly and in enemy space.. I personally do not see how jump bridges prohibit small scale pvp. My fleet can still go in to enemy space and have many GFs.. You say its cause the defender can blob you fast? They will still blob you without jump bridges it will just be slower.. The point is for pvp fighting, not pvp running. If your 10 man cruiser fleet comes up against a 50 man BS fleet.. Your FC commands to flee, you would do so regardless of how they got to you. Additionally it actually takes away a camping point for PVP to occur, and it takes away strategic assets that are a common instigator for small and largescale pvp.

In closing:
I will really try hard to weed through the trolls and tears to have a valid debate, and im quite open minded to new views and ideas, so no attacks.

PLEASE understand that while I am in NC, I am not opposed to rebalancing bridges, and I do STRONGLY endorse more small scale PVP. (Note that I promote GFs MUCH more than I promote the ability to get good ganks easier.. there is a HUGE difference). Im not trying to endorse abilities for RMT, botting and that other crap.. Its dumb and CCP should rule with a MUCH stronger fist on such fronts.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.18 23:00:00 - [2]
 

And I know you are thinking it so I will just say it and get it out of the way.. For any of you tards that think NC or DRF has it made because we have huge jump bridge networks.. Think about this.. NC has over 400 bridges (im guessing cause im too lazy to count) thatís 400 towers to manage, fuel and protect,, 400 actual bridges to keep fueled, 200 systems where ihubs and sov bills have to be maintained. Itís not about the ISK itís about the work that goes into it. The work in coordinating, setting up, documenting, and managing this type of network is frakin insane. If you think any part of managing this many bridges/POSs is easy or fun or makes for a fun game? BITE MEÖ :)

Oh yea.. Magical fairies are great, but I prefer the Frolicking ones.. Just saying..

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.19 02:19:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Imigo Montoya on 19/03/2011 02:20:57
EVE needs more magical fairies - with bells and sparkly dust to turn missiles into flowers. Thanks for the new campaign platform.

As for bridges, I was in a 40ish pilot gang trying to engage two 35ish and 50ish pilot gangs (on seperate occasions) who were roaming through our turf, and without bridges we would have been mucking around for ages trying to engage them. As it happened we got a couple of good fights fairly quickly. So bridges help to facilitate small and medium gang warfare (and who doesn't love that??!?).

Sure, that extra mobility helps the home team and not the invaders, but if you're paying the sov bill and maintaining all the infrastructure it's fairly reasonable to have some advantage.

One thing with jump bridges vs titan bridges is that they are fixed from one point to another, whereas titans can bridge all over the place (with just one pilot for a cyno). So titan bridges have a whole lot of flexibility and can be used dynamically, where jump bridges are pretty static (meaning the invaders can find out where they are and account for them).

And just to clarify, I've used both jump bridges and titan bridges (and also black ops bridges - lots of fun).

EDIT: Spelling and grammar

Tehg Rhind
Posted - 2011.03.19 02:35:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Tehg Rhind on 19/03/2011 02:36:01

Removal is questionable, balancing is not.

I would struggle to find a single military strategist that would not consider logistics as one of the most important issues for a military, both in their effects on maneuvers and on their economic effects.

Jump bridges allow nearly infinite logistical capabilities of the defending forces. This leads to the ability to turtle. Which leads to strategic sov warfare being boring and, well, not strategic.

Then there's the economic factor. Null sec is already the single most profitable realm in EvE. The ridiculous ease with which materials can be moved in and out of null sec with jump bridges means that the strength is only that much more intense. This means that null sec goods end up having high sec liquidity for even the most minimally organized alliances.

Since EvE is a Total War system, the economics of an alliance are directly tied to the military strength of the alliance. This means that the economic logistical strength is yet another logistical defensive strength.

TLDR? Jump bridges lead to excessive defensive strength.

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.19 05:04:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
Jump bridges allow nearly infinite logistical capabilities of the defending forces. This leads to the ability to turtle. Which leads to strategic sov warfare being boring and, well, not strategic.

No. Jumpbridges do give a slight defensive bonus, but the majority of JB usage is mostly non-military.SOV warfare is made boring mostly by the ludicrously awful SOV system, combined with supercarriers. We can theoretically keep up to 6 separate systems under siege more or less completely safe by stuffing them choc full of supercarriers/titans and rotating them one system pr day.

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
Then there's the economic factor. Null sec is already the single most profitable realm in EvE. The ridiculous ease with which materials can be moved in and out of null sec with jump bridges means that the strength is only that much more intense. This means that null sec goods end up having high sec liquidity for even the most minimally organized alliances.

I think you'll find that most material is moved, not via JBs, but via JFs, and mostly on the way FROM jita, not TO.

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
TLDR? Jump bridges lead to excessive defensive strength.

Again, no.

Serious Internet Politician
www.seriousinternetpolitician.com
Posted - 2011.03.19 05:19:00 - [6]
 

I call your magical fairies and raise you one space kitten.


Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.19 17:25:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Tehg Rhind

Jump bridges allow nearly infinite logistical capabilities of the defending forces. This leads to the ability to turtle. Which leads to strategic sov warfare being boring and, well, not strategic.

Please elaborate... how do jump bridges provide infinite logistics? and how do you mean they provide the ability to turtle.
Additional, please add the length of time you served using/depending on them.


Originally by: Tehg Rhind

Then there's the economic factor. Null sec is already the single most profitable realm in EvE. The ridiculous ease with which materials can be moved in and out of null sec with jump bridges means that the strength is only that much more intense. This means that null sec goods end up having high sec liquidity for even the most minimally organized alliances.


Im afraid i agree with goonie here. Most everyone i know uses a carrier or JF to move the 0.0 spoils. This is usually due to the fact that JBs can not provide any level of save transport through low sec, or protect from gate camps, where jumping a carrier/JF right to a station does. so i don't think this is a valid point in the overall grand picture.

Tehg Rhind
Posted - 2011.03.20 03:00:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Draco Llasa
Originally by: Tehg Rhind

Jump bridges allow nearly infinite logistical capabilities of the defending forces. This leads to the ability to turtle. Which leads to strategic sov warfare being boring and, well, not strategic.

Please elaborate... how do jump bridges provide infinite logistics? and how do you mean they provide the ability to turtle.
Additional, please add the length of time you served using/depending on them.



The language wasn't great on my part, but the point has to do with maneuverability. Jump Bridges give a massive advantage to maneuverability, in terms of speed, safety, and limiting intelligence. This all leads to advantages in force projection and concentration of strength.

Now, that's not inherently a problem, the problem is that the advantage is too strong. Guerrilla warfare against a defending alliance should be about the ability to attack logistical capabilities of a larger force, and the ability to have a higher level of maneuverability. With the prevalance of jump bridges this isn't a possibility. You can't split a defending force at a gate and you can't outrun them.

The fact that a battleship fleet can outrun an interceptor gang is an example of the problem.

As for whether or not I have ever used/relied on them, no, because holding sov for any reason other than selling it is incredibly boring.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.20 04:21:00 - [9]
 

First off thanks.. was hoping to be able to get into a good debate on this.. and im glad you posted cause I think you represent so many that share your views. Let me go through each one and see where we get.

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
The language wasn't great on my part, but the point has to do with maneuverability. Jump Bridges give a massive advantage to maneuverability, in terms of speed, safety, and limiting intelligence. This all leads to advantages in force projection and concentration of strength.

Speed Ė yes it does allow the defenders quick moving
Safety Ė yes it does provide SOME level of safety for ppl that arenít idiots.
limiting intelligence Ė no I disagree with you here.. any FC that does real 0.0 pvp knows the enemies JB network already.. I know that when we are the attackers, we use this info to our advantage all the time. We know their bridges and use them tactically.

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
Now, that's not inherently a problem, the problem is that the advantage is too strong. Guerrilla warfare against a defending alliance should be about the ability to attack logistical capabilities of a larger force, and the ability to have a higher level of maneuverability. With the prevalance of jump bridges this isn't a possibility. You can't split a defending force at a gate and you can't outrun them.
The fact that a battleship fleet can outrun an interceptor gang is an example of the problem.

Ok, I donít mean to be condescending here, but a frigate gang isnt really what we are getting at here.. a group of ceptors will out run BSs regardless of bridges.. you cant even bubble them in.. I will assume that was just another bad example..
As for attacking logistic capabilities as you sayÖ let me explain his one thing as I assume you donít know it or you wouldnít have said that.. Do you realize that a fleet of 40-50 BSs with a few guardians can knock out a jump bridge well under 15 minutes (closer to 10 actually)? That single act alone, if planned right can cripple a network. Have you ever seen a bunch of 0.0 ďpvpersĒ when their bridges are down? Half of them donít know what do to, and the other half are yelling at those noobs to quit whining. Point is, you speak as if these amazing, overpowered, structures of awesomeness are invulnerable. They are far from it. And think about it.. you spent 10-15 minutes doing that and they now have to rally a fleet, defend, and THEN they have to spend hours getting logistics ships together to rep that bridge to bring it back online.. As a point of reference.. It would take roughly 10 triaged carriers about 20 minutes to fix what you did with those BSs.

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
As for whether or not I have ever used/relied on them, no, because holding sov for any reason other than selling it is incredibly boring.

And I totally respect thatís how you like to play, just do bear in mind that having never used, managed, maintained, defended, attacked, or repped, jump bridges, it does kinda leave you at a disadvantage to speak on them.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.20 04:23:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Serious Internet Politician
I call your magical fairies and raise you one space kitten.



do they fly?

Tehg Rhind
Posted - 2011.03.20 05:03:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Draco Llasa
limiting intelligence Ė no I disagree with you here.. any FC that does real 0.0 pvp knows the enemies JB network already.. I know that when we are the attackers, we use this info to our advantage all the time. We know their bridges and use them tactically.


The limited intelligence is that the hostile FC has little idea what's coming because Jump Bridges will allow people to come from any number of systems. Granted, most alliances are too lazy to actually split up their forces before concentrating them and good guerrilla forces will have spies in the alliance home defense fleet channels, but still the point remains that there is little way to scout one of 20 jump bridges that are in range of the system you are in.

Originally by: Draco Llasa
Ok, I donít mean to be condescending here, but a frigate gang isnt really what we are getting at here.. a group of ceptors will out run BSs regardless of bridges.. you cant even bubble them in.. I will assume that was just another bad example..


Not a bad example, maybe I just wasn't clear. Lets say we're in Cloud Ring in P5-KCC in an interceptor gang, with a BS Home Defense Fleet forming up nearby. We can haul ass to W-4 and there is absolutely no chance that we will reach there before the BS fleet.

Of course, on the field we can out run them, the reason I chose the Inty vs BS thing was because of the different warp time. Fast fleets should be able to outrun slow fleets, defensive or not.

Quote:
As for attacking logistic capabilities as you sayÖ let me explain his one thing as I assume you donít know it or you wouldnít have said that.. Do you realize that a fleet of 40-50 BSs with a few guardians can knock out a jump bridge well under 15 minutes


First, I doubt it would cripple the alliance since they could just use one of the other 100 jump bridges they have. Second, in what world could a 50 man BS fleet sit in a hostile alliance system for 15 minutes attacking a strategic objective and not get attacked?

If destroying the jump bridge actually caused a significant disruption then *maybe* I could see your point, but I don't think that it really would. The NC jump bridge network is filled with so many redundancies that only the laziest and most mentally challenged pilots would be affected by removing one of them.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.20 05:15:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Draco Llasa on 20/03/2011 05:20:34
i think we might have hit on a very key misunderstanding.. there are NO redundancies in jump bridges.. there are not 20 possible places in range.. it does work like that.. if you are in system x there are ONLY 2 points you can come sin from.. jump bridges points are hard coded.. if you are at a jump bridge you can only go to the ONE points its link to.. not anywhere in range. If that one points is knocked out.. well its down, you can NOT jump.. you now have to resort to gate travel travel as you cant have as many jump bridges in a system as you want.. it's limited.

The other point is you can sit in an enemy system for 15 minutes and this shows me you have never tried. i have on MANY times sat in hostile space and refed POS,stations, and jump bridges.. hell we do it sometiems JUST to get a fight. It can and IS done. It comes down to strategy.. knowing your enemies down times, and if they are off on another op somewhere else. the reality is many alliances wont bother to defend a station or a POS on initial attack.. they will let it get ref'ed and then defend on the timer.

maggelan
Posted - 2011.03.20 05:32:00 - [13]
 

Bridges: Are they unbalanced or even overpowerd? In my opinion they are not! Yet they are not in the current enviorment that eve has to offer.

Titan's (Bridges): Are they unbelanced or even overpowerd? Yes they are and have been for quit some time now. Back in the day when they where added to the game as lag killer and means for logistics as well as projection of force they where fine. Because it took one hell of allot of effort for an entire alliance even an entire bloc to get one build! But in eve today this is different very stable 0.0 regions to build in without any thread to the CSAA's at all eased logistics and much higher avaliblity of titan bpcs at reasonable prices as well as much higher income for alliances due to dominion changes as well as moon goo changes. It takes hardly any effort to build titans now a day. There are just to many of them today so a nerf is in order either removing bridge from the titan entirely or limiting it to certain ship classes.

Force projection: I can not agree that large blocs will get the same number of ppl to boring blob fights which last for weeks or even month if the more casual players suddenly have to fly 50+ jumps instad of 6-8.. taking them hours instad of minutes to get there just to be back home after a few minutes. Also having to use gates for such long distances will increse the chance of getting into an enemy roam while on your way to destination. As well as it will make it harder pilots who lost there ship to just reship and be back on the battlefield in a matter of minutes. So without JB's fights would take allot more concideration and planning ahead of time moving replacement ships to nearby station system placing medical clones there etc.. which again requires logistics..
Also the carebears are to lazzy for that so you will see reduced numbers on battlefields in the longrun.

Your rules: Well when talking about bridges your rules don't work quit well. Because the question is not whatever they work as intend which they do but rather do they work in the current enviorment which they don't and the reason for that is that blocs have build an bridge empire covering half of 0.0 space.. In my opinion there is no real fix for bridges making the ihub upgrade more expansiv issnt going to fix the problem because one of these blocs has infinite income from tech moons the other an infinite renter empire.. nerfing its range won't do much either. But removing the ability of bridges to connect different regions might not be such a bad thing bridges would still be usefull but ppl would be forced to atleast use the regional gates for once.

Tehg Rhind
Posted - 2011.03.20 07:01:00 - [14]
 

It doesn't have to be within system to be redundant. Even having a jump bridge next door is redundant. Being able to keep your fleets, or your solo pilots, off of gates 24/7 represents a massive strategic advantage. And are you really arguing that yall wouldn't whip out an NC blob home defense fleet if you had a 50 BS fleet reported in intel?

I mean...are you really arguing that?

Of course you would. For me the problem simply comes down to the inability of small groups to disrupt large alliances. Their large fleets can use jump bridges to outmaneuver even the most maneuverable fleets and the individual pilots can use them to avoid any risk of using stargates.

Frolicking Fairy
Posted - 2011.03.20 07:30:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Frolicking Fairy on 20/03/2011 07:30:22
Originally by: Draco Llasa

Oh yea.. Magical fairies are great, but I prefer the Frolicking ones.. Just saying..



thanks draco :P

I do agree that titan bridges do need to be nerfed some, the best thing i can figure is to require soem special becon be used for the titan portal to lock onto. I am thinking of a carrier class mod that would have around a 30 second warm up where everyone in system woudl be able to see what you lighted and after teh 30 second warm up its up for 4.5 minutes when people can bridge to you. Like the cyno you can not move jump out cloak etc but it also has the aspect of the triage where your local rep is buffed and you can not get remote repped, if you move or drift into a pos's forcefield it is imposible to jump to teh carrier anymore. My rational is that your not going to be able to nerf them enough to stop them from being used but just make them so that there is a bit more warning that a fleet is coming and so that any cyno frig cant bring in a 200 person fleet.

for jump bridges i like the idea of making jumps between regions harder eiher by not allowing them between regions or requiring special region bridges that use mroe fuel so its harder logistically.

I'm not sure if this was jsut for 0.0 but I do think that black ops jump bridges need a bit of a buff not in range or ships that can go through but allow them in empire so covert cynos can occur there which woudl lead to a nice change in empire war so that it can have a 0.0 feel of fleets movign around more freely than just down pipes.

short version
require cyno carriers for titan bridges
increadsed fuel consumption and cost for regional jump bridges
allow covert cynos in highsec

my spelling sucks (and i dont care)

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 07:53:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
It doesn't have to be within system to be redundant. Even having a jump bridge next door is redundant. Being able to keep your fleets, or your solo pilots, off of gates 24/7 represents a massive strategic advantage. And are you really arguing that yall wouldn't whip out an NC blob home defense fleet if you had a 50 BS fleet reported in intel?

I mean...are you really arguing that?

Of course you would. For me the problem simply comes down to the inability of small groups to disrupt large alliances. Their large fleets can use jump bridges to outmaneuver even the most maneuverable fleets and the individual pilots can use them to avoid any risk of using stargates.


Not arguing what would happen, but what is observed - it's not at all uncommon for a 50 man BS gang to move through an area unchallenged. This can be for a variety of reasons like not enough pilots online, pilots being cut off from their PvP ships, pilots being elsewhere doing something already (out roaming, moving goods, whatever), but for whatever reason, I can verify that this does happen.


Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.03.20 08:06:00 - [17]
 

Knowing the POS password to a blue jump bridge and being able to use it is pretty ****ing over powered don't you think?

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.03.20 08:15:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Imigo Montoya
Originally by: Tehg Rhind
It doesn't have to be within system to be redundant. Even having a jump bridge next door is redundant. Being able to keep your fleets, or your solo pilots, off of gates 24/7 represents a massive strategic advantage. And are you really arguing that yall wouldn't whip out an NC blob home defense fleet if you had a 50 BS fleet reported in intel?

I mean...are you really arguing that?

Of course you would. For me the problem simply comes down to the inability of small groups to disrupt large alliances. Their large fleets can use jump bridges to outmaneuver even the most maneuverable fleets and the individual pilots can use them to avoid any risk of using stargates.


Not arguing what would happen, but what is observed - it's not at all uncommon for a 50 man BS gang to move through an area unchallenged. This can be for a variety of reasons like not enough pilots online, pilots being cut off from their PvP ships, pilots being elsewhere doing something already (out roaming, moving goods, whatever), but for whatever reason, I can verify that this does happen.


The #1 reason to not engage and just ignore them is there is nothing that 50 man fleet can do that is not incredible easy to avoid/repair when they leave. "Ignore them and they will get bored and move on." Should not be the go to tactic for defenders.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.20 17:26:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Imigo Montoya
The #1 reason to not engage and just ignore them is there is nothing that 50 man fleet can do that is not incredible easy to avoid/repair when they leave. "Ignore them and they will get bored and move on." Should not be the go to tactic for defenders.


Here are a list of things that a can be done with 50 BS man gang or smaller size with various ship types
1.) Incap jump bridges (abotu 10-15 mins)
2.) Knock out station services (time varies but the smaller services can be taken out relatively quickly)
3.) Camp jump bridges
4.) Black ops bridging into carebare havens for ganks
5.) Roam for good fights (this is usually the motivating factor to do a lot of the above items)

I know this can be done, we do it all of them ALL the time when we (Razor) deploy to enemy areas. Do you still want to sit and say that a small alliance cant do anything to a large one?

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.20 17:45:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Frolicking Fairy

short version
require cyno carriers for titan bridges
increadsed fuel consumption and cost for regional jump bridges
allow covert cynos in highsec



i have talked about the capital/carrier type cyno with many people and at a basic level i like it, i have also talked about reversing the bridging mechanic. so the titan is where you bridge too, maybe even require 2 titans (in source and dest) to form the bridge. all valid ideas that i would entertain.

Increased fuel for regional jumpbridges or blocking them all together are decent options too. blocking them would form inheritance choke points that smaller corps/alliances or just small gangs would camp on a regular basis and could surely create some havoc. It would not promote much more pvp tho as in 95% of the cases when these types of camps take place, they scatter like roaches at the first sign of opposing force. so is this promoting small scale pvp? no. It just create ganking opportunities.. which is fine from a sense it increases risk.. but lets not confuse it with promoting proper small pvp. (Unless they actually stay to fight)

Yeep
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 18:22:00 - [21]
 

When you bring a hostile fleet into an alliance's space you choose the time and the place. You have the advantage of potentially weeks of planning, you can bring your best FC, a perfect fleet comp. The defending alliance has what, 30 minutes before your ADD kicks in and you move on to scramble for an FC, pick up whoever is on and assemble them in one place. You, as the aggressor have all the advantages.

I've had this conversation with a number of people and what it eventually comes down to is them pointing at the 20 people docked up in a station and crying that they won't undock and fight them. Ignoring the fact that undocking from a station leaves your fleet blind, all in one spot and potentially staggered, half of those people are probably afk, the other half are likely ratting or industrial alts.

You don't get good fights from industrial alts, you get ganks. If thats what you want then fine, but stop getting all ****y that people won't fit their haulers with guns and undock into your fleet. Assuming you've not had an existential crisis at this point it should be fairly obvious that jump bridges allow the defenders to form a fleet to engage you before you spot a shiny thing in the distance and leave.

Unless of course by "good fights" you mean "fights I win" in which case you're never going to be happy with any reasonable solution.

Vmir Gallahasen
Gallente
United Mining And Distribution
Posted - 2011.03.20 21:20:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Yeep
You, as the aggressor have all the advantages.

Well, except the defender has jump bridges. PvP ships and capitals already in place. Stations to dock up in. Intel channels to keep an eye on aggressors.

The agressors on the other hand, have the advantage of surprise and that's it. And the really ****ed thing is, even if an aggressor does make it into your space without being blobbed, and even if it manages to keep all of your forces docked, there's still nothing they can do short of a massive invasion that will result in any significant damage to the sov holder even though they didn't bother to defend their space

Anything of significance these days happens in systems where taking 15 minutes to fire your guns is considered to be reasonable lag, and half of everyone in that system is staring at a black screen.

Aggressors having all the advantages, I lol at you sir

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 21:42:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Originally by: Yeep
You, as the aggressor have all the advantages.

Well, except the defender has jump bridges. PvP ships and capitals already in place. Stations to dock up in. Intel channels to keep an eye on aggressors.

The agressors on the other hand, have the advantage of surprise and that's it. And the really ****ed thing is, even if an aggressor does make it into your space without being blobbed, and even if it manages to keep all of your forces docked, there's still nothing they can do short of a massive invasion that will result in any significant damage to the sov holder even though they didn't bother to defend their space

Anything of significance these days happens in systems where taking 15 minutes to fire your guns is considered to be reasonable lag, and half of everyone in that system is staring at a black screen.

Aggressors having all the advantages, I lol at you sir


Firstly I'd like to point out that Draco misquoted me in post #19, when it was Marconus Orion who made that statement.

I will also add to the aggressor/defender discussion. Having time to plan and gather forces ready for when you want to strike (or even just roam around) does give a significant advantage. It may not be the only advantage available, and the defenders have some advantages too (a point I disagree with Yeep on), but to say that the only advantage the aggressors have is surprise shows you either didn't read Yeep's post, or you have very limited experience of alliance level combat PvP.

Also, to comment on the "anything of significance" thing - those "things of significance" might be the only things which attract CAOD chest beating or EVE News 24 reporting, but they certainly aren't the only significant things happening. Often the truly significant actions go entirely unnoticed.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.20 21:49:00 - [24]
 

this is frigging crazy..
ok lets do it this way..

1.) How many times have you come into 0.0 sov held space with <50 people And of those times how many resulted in your being blobbed to death before you could do anything, causing your whole fleet to die in a fire

2.) I already listed 5 things above that you can do as the aggressor to cause damage.. Since those are obviously not what you want.. what do you want?

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 22:00:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Lord Zim on 20/03/2011 22:06:47
Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
And the really ****ed thing is, even if an aggressor does make it into your space without being blobbed, and even if it manages to keep all of your forces docked, there's still nothing they can do short of a massive invasion that will result in any significant damage to the sov holder even though they didn't bother to defend their space

How few, pray tell, should the aggressors have to be before they should be able to cause "significant damage" because they're ignoring you like the little gnat you are?

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Anything of significance these days happens in systems where taking 15 minutes to fire your guns is considered to be reasonable lag, and half of everyone in that system is staring at a black screen.

And what's the reason for that then?

Oh right, it's the Dominion SOV system's fault, but let's blame something completely different. That'll teach them for ignoring you!

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.20 22:09:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Lord Zim
Oh right, it's the Dominion SOV system's fault, but let's blame something completely different. That'll teach them to ignore you!

RIGHT.. so because the dominion lag hurt Fleet warefare.. its obviously due to jump bridges... i totally see the logic there get rid of jump bridges and we we put 1500 ppl in a system it will now work?

and 15 min lag is not acceptable.. frankly most pilots will consider module lag of up to a minute manageable but more than that is considered unreasonable..

Yeep
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 22:17:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Well, except the defender has jump bridges.


They do at the moment. But I think improved mobility in space you own is a reasonable advantage to expect.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
PvP ships ... already in place.


Your roaming gang isn't in PvP ships?

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Stations to dock up in.


But we just established being able to dock up when hostiles enter local is unacceptable. People should be forced to fight any hostile gang that shows up in their space and bangs their chest. But they shouldn't have enough time to actually threaten the gang, that would be unfair on the poor small gang PvPers.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Intel channels to keep an eye on aggressors.


Intel channels aren't something CCP provides to space holders. Talking to other people isn't exclusive to 0.0 alliances.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

The agressors on the other hand, have the advantage of surprise and that's it.



Its nice to selectively ignore the parts of my post you don't like. I'll give you a minute to go back and try again.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

And the really ****ed thing is, even if an aggressor does make it into your space without being blobbed, and even if it manages to keep all of your forces docked, there's still nothing they can do short of a massive invasion that will result in any significant damage to the sov holder even though they didn't bother to defend their space



So how many man hours would you consider the minimum to put in to do 'significant damage' to a spaceholding alliance? In fact I think you'll find the sov holder will defend their space if you actually threaten it, however you probably won't like what happens when they get to choose the terms.

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 22:30:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Lord Zim on 20/03/2011 22:32:01
Originally by: Draco Llasa
RIGHT.. so because the dominion lag hurt Fleet warefare.. its obviously due to jump bridges... i totally see the logic there get rid of jump bridges and we we put 1500 ppl in a system it will now work?

All trolling aside, they have fixed the majority of the session change bugs, the problem's mostly just the massive amounts of HP and the hilarious amounts of timers now.

Tehg Rhind
Posted - 2011.03.20 23:10:00 - [29]
 

I dunno. I mean, I really don't think it's game breaking or anything, but I still feel Jump Bridges have too much power. People defending the point argue that they aren't really that powerful, which seems a bit ironic because if they weren't that big of a deal then why would people be arguing to keep them that strongly? I still think that the reason people are defending them so vehemently is that they offer massive advantages to the defending alliance. If they didn't, then why would you even start this thread?

The only part that really bothers me, really the only part, is that so few people in alliances have to use gates. With the security that jump bridges allow for moving and the low risk PvE due to Sanctums and whatnot that already exists it's no surprise that small gang warfare is as dead as it is. We need to have pilots using gates and earning isk in belts, this leads to gfgfs and a less lazy mentality in alliances. Jump bridges aren't the whole/only problem, there are other issues (like Sanctums) but the end result is easily defended and highly lucrative space which pushes people to NAP train everyone they can.

I have no problem with blobs btw, small hostile gangs SHOULD get blobbed in alliance space. My problem is that its either blobs, the rare idiot using a gate, or nothing. Rarely will people have a 5 man roaming group, and no PvE systems are ever actively defended because the defensive setup in null sec doesn't require it, null sec defends it self by its very nature.

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 23:49:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
We need to have pilots using gates and earning isk in belts, this leads to gfgfs and a less lazy mentality in alliances.


Having people moving their PvE ships by gates (still happens a lot btw) and earning ISK in belts doesn't lead to ~good fights~, it leads to ganks, and ganks are never good fights.

Going out looking for a similar sized group to fight with while avoiding the bigger gangs is what leads to good fights. Sometimes you run into smaller groups and solo players and you can either gank them or they get away (neither of which is a particularly good fight), but either way ganking PvE ships isn't nearly as satisfying as an evenly matched fight.

Admittedly, those evenly matched fights are a whole lot harder to find (amidst dodging the bigger gangs), but they definitely are out there for anybody who wants to look.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only