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

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.20 23:58:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
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?

I rarely use bridges because currently I log in to a staging system, join the fleet, shoot ****, go back, log off. I don't do ratting (because it's boring as ****), I don't do mining (because it's boring as ****), so I don't travel. The main reason I argue for keeping JBs is because it makes life more convenient and less like stabbing yourself in the ****ing face with knives.

Of course, it is used from time to time to get ahead of a roaming gang, but at least in deklein people either roll up the region (which is basically just one long corridor) or down the region, and they have to go through at least a few "heavily" populated areas (by 0.0 standards). At which point they either get ignored, or they get outblobbed.

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
--stuff about JBs, security, having to use gates and small gang warfare being dead--

Why do you need to have people using gates? The only argument I've ever seen have been "because it means we get more PVP action", and there's something else which I think is the root cause for this. I'm outlining this in my answer below.

Originally by: Tehg Rhind
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.

0.0 does "defend" itself by its very nature insofar as the dominion sov system basically require a very large fleet up to 6 times in a row. I keep saying that any alliance can basically easily defend up to 6 systems by defending one system at a time and breaking the SOV grind chain one system at a time (provided they're all properly setup with stations etc). That means that when joe random elite PVPer comes around with his small bunch of elite PVP friends, people are either going to be travelling blind (i.e. they're dumb), caught unawares/afk (i.e. they're dumb), or they're going to form up a large enough group and **** the everliving **** out of these elite PVPers (who of course will ***** about blobbing).

This has ****-all to do with JBs and everything to do with the fact that we have developed intel channels because we basically need it. We haven't got concord to make sure that you roaming ***gots need to make a choice between a security/isk hit and a killmail, so we have to provide our own security. That is, after all, what 0.0 is all about.

If you absolutely want to see a change in the number of people in a system, then you wouldn't be vyving for making life ****tier in 0.0, you would be trying to make life in 0.0 for the common dweller easier and more fun, because then they would be logged in more and they'd do more stuff. Of course, the flipside of this if you do things right (i.e. if f.ex the whole of goonswarm could've lived in a single constellation and not feel stifled) is that roaming gangs would have it even harder to get a "good fight", because they'd pop into systems with maybe 100 or more goons in it, which means that you'd get even more outblobbed if everyone except those who weren't paying attention didn't dock up.

As for the whining over not having 5 man roaming gangs, face it, eve has more people in it. Cope.

Tetragammatron Prime
Posted - 2011.03.21 00:06:00 - [32]
 

Making jump bridges only able to be used by the alliance that owns them would be a good compromise imo.

Vmir Gallahasen
Gallente
United Mining And Distribution
Posted - 2011.03.21 01:08:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Imigo Montoya
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.

I'll bite. What does a smallish mobile roaming gang have as an advantage other than surprise? I've already covered the fact that anything of significance happens in laggy, node-crashing blobs

Originally by: Imigo Montoya
Often the truly significant actions go entirely unnoticed.

Truly significant actions of a gang in hostile space such as ... what, exactly? How many alliances have fallen because some roaming gang shot their station services up every day because the alliance would never defend it? Do you think that causes any realistic longterm damage to an alliance?

Originally by: Draco Llasa
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?

None of those things cause lasting damage. Even if they never, ever defend their space and always wait till you're gone to come up and repair what you've broken, you cost them nothing.

Originally by: Lord Zim
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!]And what's the reason for that then?

I didn't blame anything, some fool thought the attacker has all the advantages. All I did was point out how stupid it is to think that when faced with how entrenched alliances are now

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

For YOU I can understand that. Why do your allies share the same benefits? If they want the improved mobility they should be forced to get their own space, not form naps and reap the advantages of holding space without actually holding any of that space

Originally by: Yeep
Your roaming gang isn't in PvP ships?

Alright, I'll go slow this time. My roaming gang members each have one ship to fly. The defenders each have several ships in their hangar (hopefully), which they can choose from to form an optimal defense fleet. This is a defender's advantage. Does that make sense now?

Originally by: Yeep
But we just established being able to dock up when hostiles enter local is unacceptable.

No, they can dock up and not fight if they want. But it should cost them something. If letting a roaming gang shoot uninterrupted at some target in your system for 2 hours caused no anomalies to spawn in that system for a day/few days/week, it's far more likely they'll cobble something together to try and defend their space rather than wait for the hostiles to leave and then go right back to doing whatever it is they were doing. If they choose not to fight, fine but now the pve value of that system is temporarily reduced. If they blob us, they defended their space and therefore continue to reap its benefits. You see?

Originally by: Yeep
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.

This is exactly why taking away an aggressor's power of choosing where and when to strike and putting in reinforcement timers the defender controls instead was such a bad idea and led to our current predicament. Obviously a small gang can't compete with this, so there have to be alternative goals the small gang can pursue which are meaningful or else small gangs dies off *gasp*. Turning off the services while I camp a station hoping to fight the locals only to have them repaired 30 minutes after leaving is a pointless waste of time

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.21 01:59:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
I'll bite. What does a smallish mobile roaming gang have as an advantage other than surprise? I've already covered the fact that anything of significance happens in laggy, node-crashing blobs

You have nothing other than surprise to lean on. You're invading (albeit temporarily) someone else's territory. You've setup no staging POS, you've made no preparations other than you've got a hopefully quick and nimble gang of high DPS ships, and you have (hopefully) a plan of where to go and how quickly to get there, and an exit strategy. Apart from that, you've got ****-all.

Additionally, it's not all "laggy, node-crashing blobs". Almost the entirety of the goon vs IT fountain war involved less than 750 in local, and I almost didn't even have to turn automatic gun cycling off.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Truly significant actions of a gang in hostile space such as ... what, exactly? How many alliances have fallen because some roaming gang shot their station services up every day because the alliance would never defend it? Do you think that causes any realistic longterm damage to an alliance?

Do that for a week or a month straight and see what happens. I dare you.

(Hint: Either the people holding that station didn't deserve to live in 0.0 in the first place and will actually failcascade, or you will get face****d because they will get sufficiently annoyed with you to actually start fighting back.)

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
For YOU I can understand that. Why do your allies share the same benefits? If they want the improved mobility they should be forced to get their own space, not form naps and reap the advantages of holding space without actually holding any of that space

Technically this is more or less a reflection of how it works in real life. Friendly railroads etc were easily usable by allies. vOv

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
The defenders each have several ships in their hangar (hopefully), which they can choose from to form an optimal defense fleet. This is a defender's advantage. Does that make sense now?

Where do you think my PVP ships are? In the middle of our main systems, or at the fringe where there might be a use for them if someone should try to do something other than just be a tiny, but annoying, gnat?

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
If letting a roaming gang shoot uninterrupted at some target in your system for 2 hours

As I said earlier, try to do that. You might get away with it the first time, but try doing that more than once. See what happens then.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Turning off the services while I camp a station hoping to fight the locals only to have them repaired 30 minutes after leaving is a pointless waste of time

Obviously what you need to do is to keep doing it, and not move on after less than 15 minutes. What most "roaming gangs" do, however, is run through a region almost as fast as they can, and the only time they spend in each system is enough to check the majority of belts and/or anomalies. **** giving them any heed other than getting safe and waiting for them to leave.

Oh, and additionally, you are affecting the locals by being in/near their system: most of them safe/dock up before you get to where they're at, so they're not getting ore and not shooting any rats. What more do you want given the average roaming gang's effort input?

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.21 02:16:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Originally by: Imigo Montoya
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.

I'll bite. What does a smallish mobile roaming gang have as an advantage other than surprise? I've already covered the fact that anything of significance happens in laggy, node-crashing blobs


Originally by: Yeep
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.


^ These things are further advantages to the invaders, as previously mentioned by Yeep (as previously referred to by myself). I've been on both sides of this coin and I know which is more fun/exciting/easier.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

Originally by: Imigo Montoya
Often the truly significant actions go entirely unnoticed.

Truly significant actions of a gang in hostile space such as ... what, exactly? How many alliances have fallen because some roaming gang shot their station services up every day because the alliance would never defend it? Do you think that causes any realistic longterm damage to an alliance?


Take a look at the recent fall of IT Alliance. The camp in 6VDT was the final straw that showed that they weren't going to defend. The weeks leading up to that included regular harassment roams to weaken their (and their allies') resolve.

Atlas and -A- lost their space (-A- have gained theirs back now) because they didn't put up a fight to protect their (and their allies') space. The large capital blobs at the end were what finished it, but the fight was over well before that because of the lack of response to the regular small gangs.

My point is well made by the fact that you hadn't noticed these things leading up to the CAOD/EVENews24 worthy events.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

Originally by: Yeep
But we just established being able to dock up when hostiles enter local is unacceptable.

No, they can dock up and not fight if they want. But it should cost them something. If letting a roaming gang shoot uninterrupted at some target in your system for 2 hours caused no anomalies to spawn in that system for a day/few days/week, it's far more likely they'll cobble something together to try and defend their space rather than wait for the hostiles to leave and then go right back to doing whatever it is they were doing. If they choose not to fight, fine but now the pve value of that system is temporarily reduced. If they blob us, they defended their space and therefore continue to reap its benefits. You see?


On this point we can agree - if the locals all pack up into the castle or lock themselves in the cellar and let the barbarians do as they will while the villagers/women/children stay safe, the barbarians should have the ability to raid supplies, burn crops etc etc.... the analogy is simple enough, you get the idea.

The issue is that a pitchfork fleet vs an organised roaming fleet will very often go badly for the advantages that have been mentioned above. Having the ability to destroy local resources would only mean that the big alliances can go burn down the small alliance's infrastructure without having to organise for the sov warfare grind. This would simply make it even harder for a small alliance to occupy sov space.

Something worth thinking about if it could be balanced right though.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.21 02:42:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

Originally by: Draco Llasa
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?

None of those things cause lasting damage. Even if they never, ever defend their space and always wait till you're gone to come up and repair what you've broken, you cost them nothing.


AS the others have said if you do this for a few nights you WILL start getting fights
But i don't think that's really what you want.

I don't think you want to be able to roll up into Pure Blind with 30 BSs and get a fight with 30 BSs. In fact, im better if your scout spotted a 25man abaddon fleet you'd prolly run.

What im getting from this that you want is for a small corp with 20 ships to be able to roll in and surprisingly devastate the foundation of an alliance. c/d?

Ophelia Ursus
Posted - 2011.03.21 05:37:00 - [37]
 

"hey guys, let's have a discussion under terms that exclude perspectives i don't like! also, we'll be discussing game mechanics, but my feelings will be very hurt if you illustrate your points by making reference to the way they're used by their primary beneficiaries."

Oh, and you define a 30 man tardblob as a 'small gang.' That would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic.

Yeep
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.21 13:10:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Originally by: Draco Llasa
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?

None of those things cause lasting damage. Even if they never, ever defend their space and always wait till you're gone to come up and repair what you've broken, you cost them nothing.



You might value your time as worthless but I can assure you most people do not.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen
Originally by: Yeep
They do at the moment. But I think improved mobility in space you own is a reasonable advantage to expect.

For YOU I can understand that. Why do your allies share the same benefits? If they want the improved mobility they should be forced to get their own space, not form naps and reap the advantages of holding space without actually holding any of that space



When I invite my friend around to help me with something I don't force him to **** in the street because its unfair to all the other people on the street who don't have easy access to access to a bathroom. I let him use mine because he's my friend.


Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

Alright, I'll go slow this time. My roaming gang members each have one ship to fly. The defenders each have several ships in their hangar (hopefully), which they can choose from to form an optimal defense fleet. This is a defender's advantage. Does that make sense now?



This is pretty rich coming from someone who appears to have selective reading disorder but why aren't you bringing an optimal attack fleet in the first place? You've potentially had weeks to prepare. The defenders (assuming they all have pvp ships in one station that you happen not to be camping the undock or the route to) have in my experience maximum 30 minutes before the attackers move on.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

No, they can dock up and not fight if they want. But it should cost them something. If letting a roaming gang shoot uninterrupted at some target in your system for 2 hours caused no anomalies to spawn in that system for a day/few days/week, it's far more likely they'll cobble something together to try and defend their space rather than wait for the hostiles to leave and then go right back to doing whatever it is they were doing. If they choose not to fight, fine but now the pve value of that system is temporarily reduced. If they blob us, they defended their space and therefore continue to reap its benefits. You see?



Reinforcement timers exist for a reason. There was some guy in the euro goon channel yesterday arguing that alliances should have to maintain 23 hour camps on their chokepoints 365 days a year in order to defend their space. Thankfully everyone else agreed he'd probably been dropped on his head repeatedly as a child but EvE is a global game with people in different timezones. Any permenant damage has to come with a reinforcement timer unless you want the servers to be split into US/Europe/Asia.


Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

This is exactly why taking away an aggressor's power of choosing where and when to strike and putting in reinforcement timers the defender controls instead was such a bad idea and led to our current predicament. Obviously a small gang can't compete with this, so there have to be alternative goals the small gang can pursue which are meaningful or else small gangs dies off *gasp*. Turning off the services while I camp a station hoping to fight the locals only to have them repaired 30 minutes after leaving is a pointless waste of time


So now your time has value? I'm not sure what you mean by 'putting in reinforcement timers'. They've always been 'in' for the reasons I outlined above. Once again you're banging your chest and demanding a 5000 person alliance does what you say when you say it because you want them to and its not fair and mommy the nasty people have more friends than me.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.03.21 13:13:00 - [39]
 

Projection:
- Delay on cyno/jump or mass allowance on cynos (think Babylon 5 with a bazillion hyperspace holes opening up).
- Tweaking of ranges and fuel involved.

Bridges (convenience -> vulnerability):
- Move away from armed POS (or declaw towers) and allow anyone to use them .. even hostiles (highway of space).
- Have bridges and jammers be mutually exclusive (perhaps combined with mooring of supers at stations).

Small scale pew:
- Revamp sovereignty to ditch EHP based system in favour of smaller objectives (constellation wide), a mash-up of FW and Incursions if you will.
* Defensive measure could be partial control over the sizes required for the various objectives.

The only EHP involved should be that on ships dammit!

Borza Slavak
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2011.03.21 17:14:00 - [40]
 

As it seems this so-called CSM debate isn't only for candidates...

I think it'd be neat to Jump Bridges them from moons to a specific fairly rare planet type such as Ice, Oceanic or Storm. It would make them a bit easier to interdict if that's your thing but the main advantage is it would make some systems much more valuable than others logistically. Many systems couldn't have a JB and of those that can most would only have one Jump Bridge while those with two, three or four would become important transit hubs.
Empire entrances with a planet of the appropriate types become more valuable than those without - for example in Providence KBP has an Ice, Y-MP does not, while with Oceanic JBs the reverse is true.
This change could introduce some more friction to nullsec politics - not enough to break up BFFs but adding tension between neighbours who are only blue for convenience.

Also CCP could probably then tie :DUST: into it somehow or other. Oh and for the apparently essential first hand experience I used and came up against JB networks for a handful of months in Catch and Provi, and did refuelling of them from time-to-time when U'K was in Catch.

Pearl Necklace Badasaz
Posted - 2011.03.21 22:24:00 - [41]
 

ITT: 2 people chat.


News @ 10.


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