open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked My idea reformed - Idea for pos warfare
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.20 13:07:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: joshmorris on 20/10/2007 13:11:56
My original idea i didn't explain very well and i have been thinking about it to make it better, more realistic and something which will work but just needs people to like the idea to get it going.

The problem.


At the moment the only way to take systems and defend them is to have pos's. These require massive capital blobs to take them out AND massive fleet blobs to defend the capital blobs. Which makes this even worse when stront timing makes it so everybody loggs in at the same time to take/defend the pos.

The result ?

Lagg, no fun and generally the bigger blob wins.

CCPs idea !! Rolling Eyes

From my understanding CCP wants pos warfare to be tactical with quick strikes to disable parts of defenses generally leading to a victory if played well.
Sadly CCPs idea doesn't work. Stealth bombers Bombs were introduced to what i think take out sniper battleship squads. The idea on paper looks amazing, yeah while there blob of 50 snipers is 200k away pwning us we send 4 bombers up unseen drop 4 bombs and pop goes all there untanked bs.
With new black op ships coming in CCP wants unseen squads to get in do damage get out .... but they dont have any targets !!

Station services ?
- Well might work if u have 300 of them u could take them down 1 by 1 each taking 10 mins each .

Pos - Umm yeah quick strike kill a gun get out ( rejoice they have won the war )Rolling Eyes

So basically CCP nows what they want it just isn't working with the current pos system.

My idea - finally ( Read this bit if u have just scrolled the rest )

To have a new building / pos called something like a watch tower.

1.These would work like a pos except with minimal costs.
2.They would go into reinforced BUT for max 10 mins.
3.Max hp on these things would be 30k and there resistances would be the T1 resistances for there race.
4.They would cost in the region of 10 Mill
5.They them selfs would be unable to have large guns (due to power grid / cpu) So 1/2 mediums or 4 smalls.
6.They have the same sovereignty values of a pos.
7.They would have no other functions apart from a few guns and a 5-10k shield radius.
8.They would have the different fuel hangers but they would be very small making them impractical for any time apart from war. ( 10 mins max stront, between 12 - 24 hours of fuel to keep the pos online )


Here are a few FAQ's.

Why use them ?

Your system is on its last pos your about to lose sov, spamming loads of these is saving you.

Well i would just spam them constantly then we would never die ?

No remember the attacker can use them too.

Well wouldn't 50 dreads just constantly go through all the moons and insta pop all ?

No, why would you use 50 dreads when you can use 2 battleships and put the pos into reinforced just as quick, this would lead to your force being spread out, Therefore increasing gorilla warfare which is what CCP wants.

Would this just make pos's pointless ?

No pos's are more of a long term thing now, yes there will still be times where the fleets are massed when a pos does go into reinforced but there will be a much bigger presence of groups of smaller ships bouncing between moons taking a Watch tower out then running to another ect ect instead of just a blob.

So basically if you have a big blob in one place you can't defend your own watch towers and attack, attacking a system would require skill and play hours from dedicated players.

Imagen getting a alliance mail saying;

Bring small ships hacs / recons for hit and run.
Corp 1 - You hold / attack planet 1
Corp 2 - You hold / attack planet 2
ect


Instead of the atm.

Sniper bs !

All hands op fleet get here at 18:00 Enemy pos is coming out.
Other times , 19:00 , 22:00.


This idea really has some potential guys ask any questions to contradict the idea and things which will be used to exploit them or reasons why they wouldn't be used and i will answer all.

Thanks.

Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2007.10.20 14:30:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Cailais on 20/10/2007 14:31:02
Id agree that POS's shouldnt determine Sov. In my view POS's and Outposts should be more akin to 'forts' or 'castles' with Sov being determined by other factors within a system.

My personal preference is that Sov be based on small constructions (smaller than your example) formed upon Asteroids. These might be termed 'colonies' or something even more basic like a 'alliance tag'.

My thinking is that these 'colonies' act rather like crops / hamlets around a POS 'fort' supplying it with sustenance and Sov. Raids upon these outer fields would reduce the availability of fuel to a POS, meaning that POSs effectivley starve to death if these fields are not resown or allowed to recover.

C.


joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.20 15:20:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: joshmorris on 03/05/2008 14:18:05
I never said that pos's shouldn't determain sov i said that these newer buildings provide the same sovereignty attributes as a pos.

Edit - And yeah i mean guerrilla not gorilla i suxxorz.

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.20 16:58:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: joshmorris on 21/10/2007 17:33:12
Guys i really want feedback on this,

Tell me whats wrong with it,
Tell me how it couldn't work,

I really wanna know ! :P

Think ide get more interest if Lazers couldn't damage them and every time a raven shoots them a officer spawn appears ?Laughing

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.21 17:34:00 - [5]
 

Bumpage ... until i get other opinions on this idea i wont be happy =(

Xanos Blackpaw
Amarr
Inadeptus Mechanicus
Posted - 2007.10.22 18:22:00 - [6]
 

well...i guess i could work...

Kuma Kai
1120S Enterprise
Posted - 2007.10.22 19:12:00 - [7]
 

I don't really see how letting an alliance spam an even cheaper pos is really going to solve anything, why should something worth 10 mil give you sovereignty even if its easy to kill, your talking about adding a new level to a pain the ass system of taking sovereignty.

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.22 19:31:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Kuma Kai
I don't really see how letting an alliance spam an even cheaper pos is really going to solve anything, why should something worth 10 mil give you sovereignty even if its easy to kill, your talking about adding a new level to a pain the ass system of taking sovereignty.



Maybe because you are not reading it.

These will reduce the need for constantly forming gigantic fleets to take out pos's when they come out of reinforced.

After a alliance has taken sov by holding the system at all these different strategic points (moons) ( by showing numbers ALL the time, using skill , bait tactics , fighter assigning, hit and run) then they can take the remaining enemy pos's out and put there own pos up for the long term well after they have started there assault on another area.

These new pos are to assault and take sovereignty instead of pos's. Pos's will now be a long term structure, used more for research and development not for assaulting systems in a extremely expensive way which provokes giant fleets to lag everything.

It will be more about corporations / players taking the system skillfully than just an alliance telling a fleet to blob around and put things into reinforced.

Kuma Kai
1120S Enterprise
Posted - 2007.10.22 19:37:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: joshmorris
Originally by: Kuma Kai
I don't really see how letting an alliance spam an even cheaper pos is really going to solve anything, why should something worth 10 mil give you sovereignty even if its easy to kill, your talking about adding a new level to a pain the ass system of taking sovereignty.



Maybe because you are not reading it.

These will reduce the need for constantly forming gigantic fleets to take out pos's when they come out of reinforced.

After a alliance has taken sov by holding the system at all these different strategic points (moons) ( by showing numbers ALL the time, using skill , bait tactics , fighter assigning, hit and run) then they can take the remaining enemy pos's out and put there own pos up for the long term well after they have started there assault on another area.

These new pos are to assault and take sovereignty instead of pos's. Pos's will now be a long term structure, used more for research and development not for assaulting systems in a extremely expensive way which provokes giant fleets to lag everything.

It will be more about corporations / players taking the system skillfully than just an alliance telling a fleet to blob around and put things into reinforced.


i understand that, but whats stopping them from using a large pos instead. Currently the alliances don't give a damn about how much isk they sink into spamming large control towers.
and would these micro twers have the same influence as the larger pos'es? whats the advantage of using one of these posses that u have no chance of defending when all your pvpers are offline with a 10 minute stront timer.
wont these pos's just be cannon fodder???

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.22 20:15:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: joshmorris on 22/10/2007 20:23:02
Originally by: Kuma Kai


i understand that, but whats stopping them from using a large pos instead. Currently the alliances don't give a damn about how much isk they sink into spamming large control towers.
and would these micro twers have the same influence as the larger pos'es? whats the advantage of using one of these posses that u have no chance of defending when all your pvpers are offline with a 10 minute stront timer.
wont these pos's just be cannon fodder???



Nothing is stopping them from using a large pos, but why use a large pos now to attack when you can have 10-20 of this for the same isk. Remember it is not the alliances isk being used to pos spam its the corporations who is told to put a pos there.

Yes they would have the same influences (sovereignty wise).
If all your pvp'ers are offline then you will lose them yes, people who are not dedicated to there alliance and who don't care to keep track of them are going to loose thats the whole idea !!!
Instead of putting up pos's then showing up at 1 time to defend and 1 time to attack its a war ALL the time !

Advantages - In my post i have mentioned please read carefully ask yourself questions then refer to my original post, if the answers arnt there please post and ask.
But ill repeat ..
.Hardly any amassed fleets,
.coordinated TEAM efforts not just 1 person ( the fc ) throwing ships about.
.Being able to hold sovereignty if you are under attack if
you have a few dedicated players ( So a player makes a difference, whereas now u need 200-300 players )
So smaller alliance have a chance.
Any many more.

I put the stront in so a team of dreads couldn't just go through all the moons and insta pop all of them. With the stront timer you either have to do 2 runs through all the moons (which gives ample time for a logistics cruiser to quickly come in and repair to put more stront in before they come back) .... to prevent that you would leave a scout yeah ? so for every 1 u put into reinforced you have to leave people there .... in the end you will have small groups strategically attacking places to gain control.

Just think about it without making a swift reply, think about what goes on now and then think about what will happen if this is implemented. Think what would be the best way to attack a system if you had this tool ,
what would be the best way to defend ?
How would u exploit it ?

I have already thought many things and just came to the conclusion that this works ... I wouldn't be defending it if it wouldn't work and at the moment until somebody points out reason that makes me think "Oh yh, this wont work so well" i will keep on defending this idea =)

I just want to point out as well that alliances like goonswarm do so well because they have players who sit in hostile systems and grief, stopping people from making money disrupting there haulers. But it only works when they are there 23 hours a day

This is like that, you will need a player base in different time zones , you will have to put the hours into taking a system if this is implemented , if you don't show enough you will loose or it will just take a hell of a lot longer.

Hardtail
Ever Flow
Axiom Empire
Posted - 2007.10.22 23:01:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Hardtail on 22/10/2007 23:05:43
Edited by: Hardtail on 22/10/2007 23:02:06
Originally by: joshmorris
Edited by: joshmorris on 20/10/2007 13:11:56




Quote:
Well wouldn't 50 dreads just constantly go through all the moons and insta pop all ?

No, why would you use 50 dreads when you can use 2 battleships and put the pos into reinforced just as quick, this would lead to your force being spread out, Therefore increasing gorilla warfare which is what CCP wants.





!!!!Gorilla Warfare!?






Daibutsu
Minmatar
Free Space Pilots aka Banderlogs
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2007.10.23 00:55:00 - [12]
 

do you not think that the Ra or aaa or even bob will not bring 50 dreads only in order to kill 1 vs 1 pos ???

OzDeaDMeaT
Gallente
StarForged Universal Assembly
Posted - 2007.10.23 01:18:00 - [13]
 

I could see this as turning into POS spam pretty quickly. If this was going to work u would need to have it so there is maybe an hour of stront available. I dont like the idea of putting 10 of these things down in a system, getting sov, going to bed and then waking up to see some arsehat has gone through and whiped my 100 mill investment without me even being able to defend it. It would make it alot more fast passed but by it being more fast pasted i see it turning into blob warefare as each alliance tries to get the enemies baby POS's destroyed while putting up there own. This also buts alot more stress on Alliance Logistics having alot of these ready to deploy in each system incase they come under attack.

I guess the only way to make this really work is for there too be a full 24 hours before the sov of these takes effect rather than ninja POSing before DT. It will allow the enemy to attack them and defend there territory and it would also allow them to put more of there own up. Would they only be located at moons? Or would they be placable at asteroid belts and jump gates? I agree there needs to be something done about POS warefare as it is the primary reason why large groups of ships get together in a particular system. Have a look at my Strategic Points idea for solar system soverignty, its similar and gives small groups of enemies objectives to hamper your solar systems satelites.

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=498900


joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.23 08:57:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: OzDeaDMeaT
If this was going to work u would need to have it so there is maybe an hour of stront available. I dont like the idea of putting 10 of these things down in a system, getting sov, going to bed and then waking up to see some arsehat has gone through and whiped my 100 mill investment without me even being able to defend it. It would make it alot more fast passed but by it being more fast pasted i see it turning into blob warefare as each alliance tries to get the enemies baby POS's destroyed while putting up there own. This also buts alot more stress on Alliance Logistics having alot of these ready to deploy in each system incase they come under attack.

I guess the only way to make this really work is for there too be a full 24 hours before the sov of these takes effect



From your first paragraph, Yeah i know 10 mins is short but i dont wanna give enough time for a blob to move through all the moons and when they get back to the first the stront runs out so they can finish it.
It wont only be your towers , if your corporation has been told to take and hold planet 1s (moons) then its your corps effort to make sure American and European players are on all the time to defend and attack.
At the moment you cant do anything until u have a massive fleet .... most of the time now in battles taking a system im sitting in a pos waiting for a big enough gang to be formed to take on the other gang. With this i could just go about the moons and try take a undefended smaller pos down a bit zoom off come back 10 mins l8r and finish it (IF it hasn't got a gang repping it)
Maybe a new mailing list for every corp / alliance, which tells you every time a smaller pos is attacked so any1 who is on and sees it can go to its rescue.


I agree with you saying that they have to be there for 24 hours to stop ninja. Razz


Oh and kos guy.... yes thats exactly what i meant ... eve would pwn if it looked like that :P

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.23 09:00:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Daibutsu
do you not think that the Ra or aaa or even bob will not bring 50 dreads only in order to kill 1 vs 1 pos ???


Lol did u go fat ? ... but tbh i have not actually counted before but prolly hit near that number.

OzDeaDMeaT
Gallente
StarForged Universal Assembly
Posted - 2007.10.23 23:46:00 - [16]
 

I can see this working if you want some extra points for sov and want to place hold particular moons until u get ur large POS into position. But ive been to some systems that have like 50+ moons and i think those systems could be abused by this addition. Maybe if they had a half life of maybe a week to stop people putting them up perminantly might work. Other than that the idea is really growing on me.

/signed

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.24 18:42:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: joshmorris on 24/10/2007 18:42:51
Originally by: OzDeaDMeaT
I can see this working if you want some extra points for sov and want to place hold particular moons until u get ur large POS into position. But ive been to some systems that have like 50+ moons and i think those systems could be abused by this addition. Maybe if they had a half life of maybe a week to stop people putting them up perminantly might work. Other than that the idea is really growing on me.

/signed


Thanks for your support man,

Yes i totally agree with you, I tried to make the fuel bay so small that it was impractical to have permanently, (Imagen having 20+30 of these and trying to refuel every day when your out assaulting another system) .. basically it isn't gonna work lol but reducing to fuel bay to 18 hours or 12 is a balance factor which would obviously have to be decided if it was implemented ... at the moment i think 18 hours would stop them being used unless assaulting a system. ~

I'm not sure about the half life because i really don't see people keeping them up after they have won.

Imo more moons is better lol , harder to attack , harder to defend. Remember if they get spammed they gotta be looked after, putting 1 at every moon is gonna be very hard to keep alive and refueled.

Anyway thanks for input and if we can get any other input on the "Half life" addition i would be appreciative guys, but for the moment i don't see how it could work or even if it is necessary.

Corvax Tatresi
Posted - 2007.10.27 12:56:00 - [18]
 

since everyone is still in the same system isn't it going to get lagged out anyway.

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.10.28 11:31:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Corvax Tatresi
since everyone is still in the same system isn't it going to get lagged out anyway.


Umm every1 wont be in the system, the days where every1 gets extremely lagged is because every1 masses together to kill a pos coming out of reinforced, this will reduce that chance greatly due to pos's being put up after you have sov and made the enemy retreat.

Read plz ..

Wannabehero
Wayward Ventures
Posted - 2007.11.01 20:48:00 - [20]
 

I commend your thinking on methods to discourage Blob warfare, however I disagree that this idea would resolve the (blob)problems in fleet combat.

Originally by: joshmorris
Edited by: joshmorris on 20/10/2007 13:11:56

To have a new building / pos called something like a watch tower.

1.These would work like a pos except with minimal costs.
2.They would go into reinforced BUT for max 10 mins.
3.Max hp on these things would be 30k and there resistances would be the T1 resistances for there race.
4.They would cost in the region of 10 Mill
5.They them selfs would be unable to have large guns (due to power grid / cpu) So 1/2 mediums or 4 smalls.
6.They have the same sovereignty values of a pos.
7.They would have no other functions apart from a few guns and a 5-10k shield radius.
8.They would have the different fuel hangers but they would be very small making them impractical for any time apart from war. ( 10 mins max stront, between 12 - 24 hours of fuel to keep the pos online )


Firstly I question the merit/fairness of the new watchtower structure.
Basically, it’s like an unpiloted anchored Dreadnought, but gains you sovereignty, costs less than half of a Battlecruiser, has a fleet shield, and has firepower useful against Capitals and Battleships? Also, for defensive purposes, a single Industrial ship inside the shield could refuel the watchtower for longer than just the 10 minute reinforcement timer. With sufficient logistics, defenders get to choose which watchtowers they let go down, dictating where combat will occur, causing forces to mass back together at those places.

Originally by: joshmorris
Edited by: joshmorris on 20/10/2007 13:11:56
Well wouldn't 50 dreads just constantly go through all the moons and insta pop all ?

No, why would you use 50 dreads when you can use 2 battleships and put the pos into reinforced just as quick, this would lead to your force being spread out, Therefore increasing gorilla warfare which is what CCP wants.


I assume you are referring to using 2 battleships to attack each individual watchtower to trigger it entering reinforced mode, correct? The result I foresee from that is yeah, some fleets may try dispersing to strike multiple towers at once to begin the reinforcement timer, particularly if the attacking fleet has a numerical advantage, but the fleet would then reassemble once reinforcement modes began expiring and move from one watchtower to the next en masse.

The reasons why I predict this occurring are
- The defending fleet will attempt to destroy attacking forces sent to destroy watchtowers. They will want to do this quickly so they may deploy those defending ships to protect other watchtowers, meaning they will want to significantly outgun the attackers to ensure swift victory with minimal loss. This may mean sacrificing some watchtowers in order to achieve victory at others by using a consolidated defense. The towers only cost 10mil anyway, right? It’s all about cutting your losses.
- The attacking fleet will want to commit a force large enough to swiftly destroy the watchtower before the defenders have a chance to call in necessary reinforcements. The attacking force will need to possess sufficient firepower to destroy the watchtower and destroy or chase off the defending ships, or else risk losing to many pilots to the defense. That means the fleet will want to significantly outgun the defenders to ensure victory at minimal loss. Diluting the attacking forces to much would mean taking significant losses if the defending fleet is consolidated and swiftly dispatching the smaller attacking gangs. Eventually the attacking fleet would loose too many ships and the offense would stall or be repelled fully. To avoid this, the attacking forces will want to consolidate the offense.

Wannabehero
Wayward Ventures
Posted - 2007.11.01 20:49:00 - [21]
 

The defense will want to outgun the offense, and the offense will want to outgun the defense. Both fleets will attempt to overpower the opposition in any engagement. Both fleets will either retreat when outnumbered or commit more and more forces to a battle until the blobs have reformed. Fleet Commanders will recognize this trend and learn to commit the majority of their forces to any given engagement from the beginning. Blob warfare is not ‘fixed’ in this case, sovereignty just becomes much harder to maintain as these tiny, expendable watchtowers will pretty much be what POS’s are today in terms of sovereignty warfare, but cheaper, easier to destroy, far easier to spam (ninja spam), and harder to keep track of for refueling.

The flaws with fleet combat are not resolved by changing the places where combat occurs. Fleets tend to do battle near strategic places, at strategic times; such as jump gates when trying to lock down a system, or POS’s when reinforcement mode expires. Fleet’s group together into Blobs because it is easiest to deal with an opponent by consolidating your forces. This is especially true if the opposition is doing the same, due to alpha strike capability of massed ships (overwhelming any defenses) and peoples’ flock mentality (strength in numbers). Tactically, smaller strike groups working swiftly could outmaneuver Blobs and do some damage, but lag makes it impossible to effectively maneuver in blob conditions.

I apologize for the length of my response; I just wanted to make sure I got everything down. As far as I can see Blob warfare is a problem in EVE because there is no restriction against it in the mechanics of the game. It is much like the ‘zerg rush’ tactic of most multiplayer games; victory through superior numbers/concentrated firepower. This most simple and blunt of strategies works because of how EVE works.
We as the player community need to put our heads together to help CCP solve this issue if we want to see fleet combat and 0.0 warfare evolve into a form of meaningful conflict rather than just a competition of who has more pilots and money. Joshmorris has presented an idea, gave rational defense to his idea, and invited discussion. We need more of this in the forums. I personally don’t think joshmorris’s idea will achieve the goals he desires it too, but I appreciate the effort of everyone who really tries to come up with a good ideas to fix problems they observe rather than just complain. I have tried myself –LINK-. It may not be the best idea, but it is an idea.
Safe flying everyone, may the blob never cross your path.

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.11.02 15:28:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Wannabehero
I commend your thinking on methods to discourage Blob warfare, however I disagree that this idea would resolve the (blob)problems in fleet combat.

Originally by: joshmorris
Edited by: joshmorris on 20/10/2007 13:11:56

To have a new building / pos called something like a watch tower.

1.These would work like a pos except with minimal costs.
2.They would go into reinforced BUT for max 10 mins.
3.Max hp on these things would be 30k and there resistances would be the T1 resistances for there race.
4.They would cost in the region of 10 Mill
5.They them selfs would be unable to have large guns (due to power grid / cpu) So 1/2 mediums or 4 smalls.
6.They have the same sovereignty values of a pos.
7.They would have no other functions apart from a few guns and a 5-10k shield radius.
8.They would have the different fuel hangers but they would be very small making them impractical for any time apart from war. ( 10 mins max stront, between 12 - 24 hours of fuel to keep the pos online )


Firstly I question the merit/fairness of the new watchtower structure.
Basically, it’s like an unpiloted anchored Dreadnought, but gains you sovereignty, costs less than half of a Battlecruiser, has a fleet shield, and has firepower useful against Capitals and Battleships? Also, for defensive purposes, a single Industrial ship inside the shield could refuel the watchtower for longer than just the 10 minute reinforcement timer. With sufficient logistics, defenders get to choose which watchtowers they let go down, dictating where combat will occur, causing forces to mass back together at those places.



Right well i dont see it being like a unpiloted dread .. maybe a bs, but no anyway...

Yes it gains you sov,
Yes it costs half of a bc,
Yes it has 30k shield with t1 reistances
No, 2 mediums will not even scratch a tanked bs, and im sure hacs / bc could withstand them too. I just put them in as a small defense so they are NOT like a un piloted high hp ship.
The industrial cannot just insta refuel stront the tower has to be repaired so it will be a small effort of a few ships to keep the tower alive w/stront.

Yes with numbers they can choose BUT they can only do this when there forces are spread, a mixture of ships some sniper bs to warp at range pop a few warp off, few hacs to go in engage, ect ect.
There will be quite alot of these towers remember and there will not be 1 fleet. It would be much more effective for say small groups / corps to be holding and attacking 1 planets worth of moons.
Instead of how it is now where when attacking a system you have to wait in a pos Waiting for hours until enough numbers have formed so that u can either attack the enemy fleet or a pos < THAT is where the blob problem comes from.
With my idea implemented when players log on they can go to a random moon and start damaging towers, with 1 or 2 friends then can make quick strikes to go in and take a few out (or put into reinforced) before the defender arrives.

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.11.02 15:51:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: joshmorris on 02/11/2007 15:53:06
Originally by: Wannabehero
The defense will want to outgun the offense, and the offense will want to outgun the defense. Both fleets will attempt to overpower the opposition in any engagement. Both fleets will either retreat when outnumbered or commit more and more forces to a battle until the blobs have reformed. Fleet Commanders will recognize this trend and learn to commit the majority of their forces to any given engagement from the beginning. Blob warfare is not ‘fixed’ in this case, sovereignty just becomes much harder to maintain as these tiny, expendable watchtowers will pretty much be what POS’s are today in terms of sovereignty warfare, but cheaper, easier to destroy, far easier to spam (ninja spam), and harder to keep track of for refueling.

The flaws with fleet combat are not resolved by changing the places where combat occurs. Fleets tend to do battle near strategic places, at strategic times; such as jump gates when trying to lock down a system, or POS’s when reinforcement mode expires. Fleet’s group together into Blobs because it is easiest to deal with an opponent by consolidating your forces. This is especially true if the opposition is doing the same, due to alpha strike capability of massed ships (overwhelming any defenses) and peoples’ flock mentality (strength in numbers). Tactically, smaller strike groups working swiftly could outmaneuver Blobs and do some damage, but lag makes it impossible to effectively maneuver in blob conditions.


Seriously yes that will happen people don't want to loose there ships, nano gangs will be common in attacking a system (hopefully CCP would of made a counter without minny recons) but even now well places snipers could rip these apart .. but anyway,
The blobs would not reform into 1 big blob. There would be many smaller blobs even then the numbers would not be the same in local because the ONLY Reason numbers get to such a high number is because of the only targets to take down are pos's which are only in a few places. It gets even worse when just 1 is coming out of reinforced and hundreds of ships amass to defend / attack 1 Moon. This makes the game unplayable and not fun.
Yes they will be what pos's are today BUT there will be much more and instead of 300 needed to take 1 out you will need 100 people spread out quickly striking places to avoid being ganked (defenders would more than likely have a powerful force of 10 guys in hacs /bc ready at a pos waiting for somewhere to be attacked) .... then again if multiple places are attacked at the same time using team work this could be easily countered.

IF you read the whole thread somebody pointed out about ninja and i agreed, maybe 12-24 hours they need to be there until there sov value kicks in.

Yes but this only happends on such a large scale that lag makes it unplayable because of pos's and the need to amass at that time.
If a roam gang of 10 comes to attack we would get a gang of 10-20 and then bubble and engage BUT normally these gangs consist of cruisers battle cruisers hacs and maybe 1 or 2 well tanked or sniper bs.

The problem IS because of pos's so my idea WILL fix the blob problem large scale.

I dont think you relise that these fleets only amass at this size for assaulting a system and there is no other reason to get fleets this size otherwise.

thanks for your comments man but the only problem i saw with my idea from your writing was the ninja spam which we have already discussed and solved, earlier in the thread.
Therefore you havn't really giving any realistic input on how my idea wouldn't work.
I'm only supporting this idea because i truly think it will work, until somebody gives me reasons that make me think my idea sucks ( if that happens i will not respond anymore ) i will keep saying that it will work, because it actually does and will solve blob warfare on a massive scale, also put the fun back into assaulting a system.

Wannabehero
Wayward Ventures
Posted - 2007.11.05 20:20:00 - [24]
 

I don't have much time to post here and I have already taken up to much space in this thread, so I just want to boil it down into one question.

Given that all those little expendable POS's are perpetually being blown up, won't the blobs still form when trying to take down the large (current) POS's?


joshmorris
Posted - 2007.11.06 22:20:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Wannabehero
I don't have much time to post here and I have already taken up to much space in this thread, so I just want to boil it down into one question.

Given that all those little expendable POS's are perpetually being blown up, won't the blobs still form when trying to take down the large (current) POS's?





Good question.

And also maybe / yes.

I think that if a alliance attacked they would put up 1 large pos (as a sort of staging ground) then they would base all the smaller attacks from that. I dont think the defender would go after this until they have made the enemy give up / think again about attacking.

And from the attackers point of view after they have gained sovereignty and the enemy are no longer there, it would be a matter of starving them and/or taking them out without resistance.

So yeah there will be times where fleets amass to take out a pos but it will be very unlikely and not very often as to what its like at the moment.

Sylvia Lafayette
Posted - 2007.11.07 14:44:00 - [26]
 

/SIGNED

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.11.23 08:11:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Sylvia Lafayette
/SIGNED


thanks any reasons why or do u just like teh idea generally ... i'm after feedback aswell =)

Thanks again.

McFly
Peanut Factory
Posted - 2007.11.26 00:49:00 - [28]
 

I understand that your goal is to move the fighting away from always being the towers. And that these new mini towers are designed to be temporary.

But here's where I see a problem...

Mini Towers, more work, more time, and they'll be popped before you log back in...
Reasoning:
- I'm guessing these things won't fit in a BS cargohold so you still need a cap ship or industrial to deploy them.
- That leads into all the fueling costs and time to anchor and online, which will probably never have guns mounted since it's gonna be popped by the enemy in less than an hour anyway.
- 12 hours until it can start getting sov (i liked this idea but it's also a problem) your mini tower needs more fuel before it's effective, 35 minitowers need to be filled up and there's a gangload of Itty V's running around...

I understand that your idea is well thought out, but I don't think that the EVE community as a whole will accept it, The mini tower needs to be more permanent or no one is going to waste their time with them when they can just put up towers instead that will last a bit longer and take a large force to destroy.

Granted running around popping the mini towers while the larger fleet masses a few systems away to come and kill the Large tower does make sense and gives the support pilots something to do besides desync. It's not fixing the problem.

I'm not bashing your idea I just don't see it becoming more strategically useful than regular towers, when you weight the pro's and cons. I mean it sounds excellent for a defender to keep sov in emergencies, but for the most part it's a giant headache.

Like I said great idea, to pull the blob apart, but it's not the right idea, imho.

The issue with blobs and trying to get the blob from wanting to form in the first place is tough becuase it's anti-strategic and anti-common sense to not blob. The more guns firing the more DPS. The more web's on that vaga the close he is to 1m/s....the more damps on a sniper the harder it is for him to lock a titan at 1km.... the problem is that you have to tell an FC, don't think, pick five pilots and go.

Small gang combat works great, but that other side always brings just a couple more guys than you, so you call in some more, then they do the same, then you're dropping a cyno and next thing you're anchoring a tower and shooting station services, before long your in a hauler moving all your stuff and then you "nice region, we'll take it...."

I'm gonna shut up now but I did enjoy reading your idea, hopefully everything I just said made sense in some way, good luck with the idea though.

M

Shiken Kan
Posted - 2007.11.29 11:16:00 - [29]
 

I don't like that idea much, though it does have it merits. But what it will come down to is that you need international corporations to even think about holding a system. Then you'll get ninjaing a lot and you can't even blame the people for it. If one ally has like 80% american and 20% european players and the other vice versa this will just lead to a change in sovereignity every 12 hours. I'm all for removing the blob and improving medium gang warfare but i don't think that's the way to go.

joshmorris
Posted - 2007.12.02 12:36:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: joshmorris on 02/12/2007 12:47:39
Originally by: McFly
I understand that your goal is to move the fighting away from always being the towers. And that these new mini towers are designed to be temporary.

But here's where I see a problem...

Mini Towers, more work, more time, and they'll be popped before you log back in...
Reasoning:
- I'm guessing these things won't fit in a BS cargohold so you still need a cap ship or industrial to deploy them.
- That leads into all the fueling costs and time to anchor and online, which will probably never have guns mounted since it's gonna be popped by the enemy in less than an hour anyway.
- 12 hours until it can start getting sov (i liked this idea but it's also a problem) your mini tower needs more fuel before it's effective, 35 minitowers need to be filled up and there's a gangload of Itty V's running around...

I understand that your idea is well thought out, but I don't think that the EVE community as a whole will accept it, The mini tower needs to be more permanent or no one is going to waste their time with them when they can just put up towers instead that will last a bit longer and take a large force to destroy.

Granted running around popping the mini towers while the larger fleet masses a few systems away to come and kill the Large tower does make sense and gives the support pilots something to do besides desync. It's not fixing the problem.

I'm not bashing your idea I just don't see it becoming more strategically useful than regular towers, when you weight the pro's and cons. I mean it sounds excellent for a defender to keep sov in emergencies, but for the most part it's a giant headache.

Like I said great idea, to pull the blob apart, but it's not the right idea, imho.

The issue with blobs and trying to get the blob from wanting to form in the first place is tough becuase it's anti-strategic and anti-common sense to not blob. The more guns firing the more DPS. The more web's on that vaga the close he is to 1m/s....the more damps on a sniper the harder it is for him to lock a titan at 1km.... the problem is that you have to tell an FC, don't think, pick five pilots and go.

Small gang combat works great, but that other side always brings just a couple more guys than you, so you call in some more, then they do the same, then you're dropping a cyno and next thing you're anchoring a tower and shooting station services, before long your in a hauler moving all your stuff and then you "nice region, we'll take it...."

I'm gonna shut up now but I did enjoy reading your idea, hopefully everything I just said made sense in some way, good luck with the idea though.

M
.

Hey man thanks for your comments.

I know it might sound like it but i wasnt really trying to solve the blob problem with 1 idea i was just useing it as a argument that it will solve some blob problems.
I made thought of this idea and decided to post because i felt that pos warfare at the moment is boring not tactical and just a really rubbish way to take systems/0.0.

This idea makes it fun, employs team work and needs a strong alliance who are willing to fight to win. At the moment eve players have become lazy. It takes nothing to amass fleets to take a system w/pos's with the current mechanics but with this it will require a really good team of players in different time zones who work together, (both defender and attacker alike).

Well thanks again for your comments, this might not be the idea which makes 0.0 warfare fun again but i still stand by it.
Edit - oh and yah prolly 1-2k each volume, will need indys / escorts for them, (tbh will need alot of logistics which will need lots of smaller ships as escorts ... more scouts more hit and runs alot more small gang warfare to take a system, and i dont think local would go above 300 at MAX)


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