open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Question to CSM candidates: Titan Warfare?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Anonymos CEO
Angry Miners in Stringtangas
Posted - 2008.05.11 10:56:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Anonymos CEO on 11/05/2008 10:56:22
With the ongoing Discussion about titans, brought up by KIAEddz in CAOD (http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=766895)
I wanted to ask all Candidates, what their views are on Titans and Titan Warfare?

For me this is one of some major issues with eve atm.

What would the candidates try to change?
What would you bring up to CCP, if it comes down to a discussion about titans.

Please no flaming and chestbeating here.


With best regards
Anonymos CEO

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.15 01:05:00 - [2]
 


Okay, I’m going to make a serious attempt at answering this question. I can understand why the other CSM candidates steered clear though, since it is a very contentious issue and something of an electoral minefield - but I think the Eve player-base deserve to hear the opinions of the people they are voting for, especially since there is a high likelihood that this matter of “Titan Balance” will come up for formal discussion at the CSM.

First of all experience-wise, I haven’t flown a Titan personally – but I have spoken at length to people who have. I have seen Titan-class ships in operation and seen the effects of single doomsday weapons deployed in small-scale warfare. I’ve also followed with great interest the AAR and assessments of Titan role in larger fights and strategic deployment in territorial warfare thus far. I’m quite aware of the potential damage and impact the doomsday weapon (singular) does on the battlefield, and I’m similarly aware of the potential impact of multiple doomsdays coordinated or staggered on the fleet battle environment.

Now, I’m going to stick by my assessment in the Manifesto that there isn’t anything essentially wrong with the balance of the ship + doomsday weapon in concept. I definitely feel that the AOE weaponry should remain an option for this ship class and I think it would be unfair and unreasonable to remove this functionality at this point given the extreme skill training and expense of preparing characters for this role.

But, there are problems with the Titan class and the foremost of these is its ability to perform almost consequence-free hit and run attacks via doomsday with no ability for the victims to counter the tactic. It’s possible at the moment for a Titan to arrive on grid and almost immediately begin its warp out while triggering the DD weapon and enter escape warp after the weapon goes off. This isn’t reasonable since if the hit and run attack is performed correctly its virtually impossible for any ship capable of surviving the doomsday to reach bubble/focused scram range on the Titan before it can leave.

Secondly, the proliferation of Titan class hulls will ultimately leave us with the situation where a group of Titan’s has the option of coordinating DD firing to instantly destroy all heavy Indictors on grid. If all Titans are aligned and ready they will be able to disengage against an unlimited number of HiC’s in this fashion and can simply escape after causing damage with the AOE.

I’m going to suggest the following changes to deal with these problems:


1. A Titan should be unable to initiate warp for a period of 60secs after DD activation. This to be hard-coded into its stats: this enables a fair chance for enemy indictors to cross the grid and get points if they are quick and the Titan is unsupported by an appropriate defence force.

2. I’d like to see the introduction of Capital ship grade warp scramblers that are able to scramble Super-Capital hulls with a decent range and fitting requirements commensurate with capital modules. These will allow capital ship “tacklers” to gain and hold points on super-capital targets even in multiple Titan simultaneous DD environments where even HiC’s would be instantly destroyed by the combined blast.

-cont


Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.15 01:07:00 - [3]
 


Now these are both technical “nerf’s” to the current usage and capability of Titans so to be fair there needs to be some rebalancing in turn to allow Titans to compete in situations where they are tackled and unable to escape without fighting and destroying their tacklers:

1. I’d like to see the Titan hit points increased and defence advantage enhanced. If we’re forcing these ships to stay around in fleet battles as the focal objectives for all likely hostility its only fair to give them the ability to better survive in this environment.

2. I’d like to see a focused-script for the Doomsday Weapon that allows the Titan pilot to choose between the 60min recharge AOE weapon and a 1min ROF Anti capital weapon with good range and commensurate damage that will allow these ships to present a significant threat to capital ships in theater if they choose to focus on this role.

*This should be a tactical choice as to when to switch between the focused weapon with rapid refire and the AOE doomsday that will have one big bang then a 60 minute cooldown (where even the scripted mode wouldn’t be available). This gives the Titan a real anti-capital role in supported fleets and means an additional sacrifice of capability against larger ships when it chooses to fire the area Doomsday.

In conclusion I’d see these changes having the effect of keeping Titans on the battlefield where they are committed and reducing the effect of consequence-free hit and run raids where they doomsday and leave. I like the Titan class ship, and I think it’s great as an aspiration for advanced pilots and powerful alliances – but it needs to be more “epic” – and “epic” in this context means playing a significant role in fleet battles both from being forced to remain longer, and able to actively fight when not in doomsday deployment mode.

Ultimately I believe the solution to the problem of “capitals online” in Eve is to alter the mechanics to make capital usage more dangerous and brutal and ensure that significant capital engagements end with significant casualties. When we start seeing multiple Titans, supercaps and caps dying in single terrible engagements then we’ll start seeing impact on alliance wallets and stockpiles of capital ships finally diminishing to the cost of endless and continuing war. This returns consequence and dynamic attrition to the business of wielding power and can only be a good thing.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 03:31:00 - [4]
 

large scale AoEs need to be removed from the game completely. Anyone espousing a different opinion is of one of two minds. Either they do not understand what large scale AoEs do to games like this, or they want the game to be a blob-fest pushing out small scale combat all together and in general hate fights that won't crash the node. Its very simple, large scale AoEs force people to blob and in serious amounts. If you like, i can explain in great depth, but its going to take a long time, so for now i am going to leave it at that.

I am appalled but not surprised that Jade actually wants to buff titans.

Tea Spoon
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.05.15 06:03:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Tea Spoon on 15/05/2008 06:04:31
edit - misread that

zoolkhan
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2008.05.15 06:46:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Anonymos CEO
, what their views are on Titans and Titan Warfare?

For me this is one of some major issues with eve atm.



limit it to one per alliance.

or even limit it to a certain amount per entire game by activating blueprints
(fairness by waiting list) only when somewhere another titan dies.

cap it. not more than maybe 5 in the entire game - that would
comply with the backstory.

of course it also leaves the power with those who already have one -
but they are the only ones able to build them too, so there is no major change.

i am aware that this is just a very very rough frame of an idea that needs a lot of discussion
and thinking.


Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution
Posted - 2008.05.15 06:54:00 - [7]
 

(Soon TM)

Sariyah
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.05.15 07:26:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
large scale AoEs need to be removed from the game completely. Anyone espousing a different opinion is of one of two minds. Either they do not understand what large scale AoEs do to games like this, or they want the game to be a blob-fest pushing out small scale combat all together and in general hate fights that won't crash the node. Its very simple, large scale AoEs force people to blob and in serious amounts. If you like, i can explain in great depth, but its going to take a long time, so for now i am going to leave it at that.

I am appalled but not surprised that Jade actually wants to buff titans.

Hehe... a goon wanting to remove titans, what a surprise.
It is an anti-blob weapon... I don't see how removing titans would actually promote small scale combat but it makes sense for Goon to promote ideas like this... Cool

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 07:30:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Sariyah

Hehe... a goon wanting to remove titans, what a surprise.
It is an anti-blob weapon... I don't see how removing titans would actually promote small scale combat but it makes sense for Goon to promote ideas like this... Cool


It is not an anti-blob weapon. It is an anti-fight weapon. They are very similar to tactical and strategic nuclear weapons in that regard. You can't fight small so you either don't fight at all, or you blob to a huge amount.

Also, we now have three titans and we won't be slowing down our production any time soon.

Sariyah
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.05.15 07:40:00 - [10]
 

Small gangs were never supposed to do strategic things.
Titans have now the possibility to reduce gangs (pay attention and align, or die) a bit to make it all more playable... ;)

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 10:07:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 15/05/2008 10:07:08
Originally by: Sariyah
Small gangs were never supposed to do strategic things.
Titans have now the possibility to reduce gangs (pay attention and align, or die) a bit to make it all more playable... ;)


wait. So let me get this straight.

Small gangs aren't supposed to be able to do strategic things.

Titans are designed to make gangs smaller

Everyone flies small gangs or gets killed by titans

No one does anything.

...


Yea, that is a recipe for success!

Oh, and also, its just as easy to DD a small gang as it is to DD a larger one. A lot easier actually since they are less likely to be able to get you held down than a larger one is.

Bartholomeus Crane
Gallente
The Crane Family
Posted - 2008.05.15 10:12:00 - [12]
 

Small gangs are really fun though, and at least can be handled by the server well.

The mass proliferation of capitals and super-capitals in the game is a bad thing. It takes away from the fun and upsets the balance in that the haves can always beat down the have-nots. It's now to the point that you have to have a fleet of capitals and super-capitals to hold space in 0.0 with an alliance.

So, the idea of making capital combat more brutal sounds good to me. Also, I think that when a Titan jumps into battle, that should be a big deal. You lose Epicness when you have 4 Titans jump in.

I don't think Jade's ideas are the answer, but at least he has stated an opinion on it. Flaming is easy, come up with your own ideas if you know it all.

Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Posted - 2008.05.15 10:25:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Anonymos CEO
I wanted to ask all Candidates, what their views are on Titans and Titan Warfare?

For me this is one of some major issues with eve atm.

What would the candidates try to change?
What would you bring up to CCP, if it comes down to a discussion about titans.

My view on titans is that they shouldn't be as commonplace as the are quickly becoming now, but at the same time I am an advocate for keeping the Doomsday; IMO the day the DD is removed is the day that numbers become the final solution to all PvP in Eve, and I hope I don't have to point out what that would do for the game on the lag front.

But they still do need to be nerfed in some other way that discourages people from continuing to build them. The idea I've seen that I like the most at this point is to make supercapitals persistent in space when their pilots log off. If nothing else, it keeps the casual player from farming their way to their own personal ubertoy, and gives explorers something to do for the rest who are prepared to accept the additional risk.

Of course, the risk could be reduced by sharing ownership of a titan with another player, but we see that to a limited degree in the game already anyway.

/Ben

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 10:39:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Bartholomeus Crane
Small gangs are really fun though, and at least can be handled by the server well.


They are, but you do not get more small gangs by implementing a system by where the haves can bring as much as they want and the have nots cannot. And when two haves fight each other their options are "bring really freaking super-omg ridiculous huge" amounts of forces or don't fight at all.

You make more small gang warfare by removing large scale AoEs and giving small gangs goals that they can accomplish.

You can read more of this in my manifesto, ask me a question about it in my thread, or ask me to explain here. I would be happy to do any. But titans in their current iteration do not make small gangs more viable. They make them less so.

Kelsin
Dirt Dog Trading Company
Posted - 2008.05.15 12:25:00 - [15]
 

Goumindong, based on everything I've read (and admittedly never personally experienced) about Titans I do agree that it seems the Doomsday is far too overpowering given that it's necessary to form large fleets to take down cynojammers and POSes. However, I don't see how the existence of the Doomsday is responsible for blobbing as you suggest.

Isn't it the cynojammer and the structure of Sov warfare that is responsible for blobbing?

I would think, as Jade suggests, that if Sov warfare didn't require the forming of large fleets to conquer territory - but instead relied on a decentralized mechanic like capturing Stargates for a cumulative Sov effect - that the relative power of the Doomsday would be severely diminished.

To me what I hear is upsetting to players facing Titans is that this very effective anti-fleet weapon was introduced without also introducing alternatives to fielding a large fleet.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.15 12:38:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Bartholomeus Crane
The mass proliferation of capitals and super-capitals in the game is a bad thing. It takes away from the fun and upsets the balance in that the haves can always beat down the have-nots. It's now to the point that you have to have a fleet of capitals and super-capitals to hold space in 0.0 with an alliance. So, the idea of making capital combat more brutal sounds good to me. Also, I think that when a Titan jumps into battle, that should be a big deal. You lose Epicness when you have 4 Titans jump in.


I think I'm going disagree partially - you don't lose the Epic nature of the fight when 4 Titans jump in. You lose the Epic when they jump-in ... hit warp, and use the 30 second align to trigger doomsdays and inevitable killmail lag to clear their exit from the battlefield and subsequent cloaking at safespots. I would like to see those Titans arriving and announcing their presence with strong anti-capital warfare weaponry, getting tackled and committed, forming the focal point of the battle for both sides and having the option to change script and trigger the AOE doomsday if they need to clear the decks of sub-capital assailants while continuing to slug it out with capital class foes (knowing that triggering the AOE takes their main anti-captial gun out of the fight for an hour).

Making capital fights feel like capital fights is the key here - and my guy instinct is that capitals should not be performing hit and run actions. Deal with this situation and the rest is naturally self-balancing. Eve would have epic capital clashes with many super-cap deaths a side and wars would be decided by these engagements. With the best logistics in the world at the moment it takes a lot to build a Titan, if you are losing these at a rate of 1-2 each couple of weeks you are not going to sustain the war effort indefinitely.

Current malaise with Eve turning into "capitals online" is because in reality - not many capital ships actually die. Hit and run usage of Titan's is bad for this - so, as I said, nothing much wrong with the AOE doomsday - just ensure the ship that deploys it is committed to the fight and needs a support fleet.

Quote:
I don't think Jade's ideas are the answer, but at least he has stated an opinion on it. Flaming is easy, come up with your own ideas if you know it all.


Yep, I'm very interested to see other people's proposals on the Titan issue. My answer to the op was a considered piece written after talking over the issue with a lot of clever people who have been involved with Titan warfare in Eve but it still needs a lot of discussion and refinement - but hey, at this point as prospective candidates we're are supposed to be showing our thought processes and general take on a variety of issues and hopefully this kind of issue/thread can give an insignt into the sort of CSM reps we'd make.


Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 12:53:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Kelsin
Goumindong[snip for space]

Yes and a whole lot of no.

Titans are not solely responsible for blobbing. POS are also responsible for blobbing. But POS are not responsible for blobbing because they are centralized. Only because they require so many resources to take down[at least well set up ones do, loads of people are putting up POS which can be brought down by small BS gangs, and we have the killmails to prove it]

But doomsdays do make it worse and make it a lot worse.

Jade is wrong in wanting to decentralize Sov warfare. That will only make it harder for small forces to compete[since large forces get larger forces at each area] and creates even more balance problems[typically either making attack stupidly easy or making defense stupidly easy]. You must centralize sov warfare otherwise smaller forces will be unable to concentrate their forces to take space where defenders are weak. Now there are things you can do to get fights off the same grid[make dreads able to shoot at capitals/towers from off-grid], but at its heart it needs to be at a single objective. Defenders win if the POS is repped. Attackers win if the POS is destroyed.

Cyno jammers do not create blobbing and have actually prevented it to the largest extent from any currently implemented game mechanic. Before cyno jammers, sov warfare consisted of moving your capitals up to a system and then blobbing the **** out of it until the system was taken. Now sov warfare means carving a path in and out for your capitals. More fights, often less intensive[since they aren't all for stations].

That isn't to say there isn't a problem with cyno jammers. But its not with the design itself and only with the difficulty involved in taking them down.

Quote:

To me what I hear is upsetting to players facing Titans is that this very effective anti-fleet weapon was introduced without also introducing alternatives to fielding a large fleet.


Absolutely not. Titans are just as effective against small fleets as they are against large ones. And so are doomsdays. So are all AoEs[even "bouncing AoE" as you can simply game them by bringing a lot of your own forces]. Without removing the AoE that will not change.

Even if you had decentralized targets optimal play strategy would be to bring titans and DD the other side. This makes it less likely that people will want to fight. It being less likely that people will fight is bad for the game.

On the titan side a few things need to happen.

The AoE needs to be removed
It needs to be replaced with either an AoE ewar[strong, but won't wipe out a fleet], or single target ultra high alpha-blast.[which makes titans vulnerable to themselves and sets them up as capital killers, but vulnerable to small ships].

The answer is absolutely not making titans stronger against capitals without severely limiting their abilities against smaller ships. Alpha classes are bad for the game and titans are just that and with jades changes would be even more so.

There are other things that need to be done to give smaller gangs roles. But that has little to do with titans and more to do with not having enough stuff for people to do that has a quantifiable effect on an alliance[which means there is very little impetus for defenders getting out to defend NOW rather than getting out to defend later when they have a huge force superiority, of course, this target also has to be not so material that it cannot be left for obvious reasons]. And if there were any reason to not do stuff like that would be because of the current ability of small ships to run away. But not a reason to do this because of or in spite of titans.

If you want to get into how exactly how and why you can fix sov warfare and why its separate from titans i would be happy to oblige, but i do not have the time or the space at this present time

Anonymos CEO
Angry Miners in Stringtangas
Posted - 2008.05.15 13:08:00 - [18]
 

Thank you for your replys so far. Especially to Jade´s Post.
There are some really good points and ideas in it :)

Looking forward to see some more opinions from other candidates :)


Just to clear it up. Personlly i think the DD itself is fine how it is. It´s a powerfull single blast which is fine for a Titan Class Vessel. So removing it would be wrong at all.
Changes to the way titans are used this days need to be done :)
The "stacking" of Doomsdays combined with nearly total invulnerability is also one thing which is wrong is my eyes.

Kelsin
Dirt Dog Trading Company
Posted - 2008.05.15 13:09:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Kelsin on 15/05/2008 13:13:09
Well although the DD is obviously as effective in a single engagement against a small force as it is a large force (since the damage is not distributed), what you have to compare it to is not a single engagement but multiple small engagements vs a single large one. The Doomsday is not as effective against 10 10-man gangs attacking objectives in different grids and systems as it is against a single 100-man fleet attacking a single centralized target, since it can only take out of those 10 gangs.

EDIT: Oh also, in the book Ender's Game the humans have a weapon called the Little Doctor (I think) that set off a chain reaction when it hit a target that grew more and more destructive the more enemies were grouped together. Something like that is interesting in that it could be made to do less damage per ship to a small number of ships than it would do to a large number of ships - i.e. the damage of the AOE is calculated based on the number of targets within the blast.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 13:11:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 15/05/2008 13:15:48
Originally by: Kelsin
Well although the DD is obviously as effective in a single engagement against a small force as it is a large force (since the damage is not distributed), what you have to compare it to is not a single engagement but multiple small engagements vs a single large one. The Doomsday is not as effective against 10 10-man gangs attacking objectives in different grids and systems as it is against a single 100-man fleet attacking a single centralized target, since it can only take out of those 10 gangs.


the 10 10 man gangs die to the titans support fleet...

Or die to 10 different titans. The point is that the answer is always "titan" and always "as many titans as possible". Especially with what jade wants to do, making them an alpha class where the guy who has the titans wins.

edit: Its almost as if you two are playing a single player game where you want to see cool scripted events. It just doesn't work like that you have to take into account how people will play and what they will do.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 13:17:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 15/05/2008 13:21:00
Originally by: Kelsin


EDIT: Oh also, in the book Ender's Game the humans have a weapon called the Little Doctor (I think) that set off a chain reaction when it hit a target that grew more and more destructive the more enemies were grouped together. Something like that is interesting in that it could be made to do less damage per ship to a small number of ships than it would do to a large number of ships - i.e. the damage of the AOE is calculated based on the number of targets within the blast.


As stated earlier, you game the system and put more cheap targets in the area. If they attack with a force strong enough to do anything, you pop your AoE and wipe their fleet. If they don't you've got 100 rifters on a gate killing their small gang.

Originally by: "Jade Constantine"

Current malaise with Eve turning into "capitals online" is because in reality - not many capital ships actually die. Hit and run usage of Titan's is bad for this - so, as I said, nothing much wrong with the AOE doomsday - just ensure the ship that deploys it is committed to the fight and needs a support fleet.


Would you like to enlighten us as to why AOE DD's are not bad for the game. Because it seems to me that less fights and more blobs are bad for the game. Maybe its just me and maybe less fights and more blobs are good for the game, but i am kind of perplexed as to why you are making the argument that more blobs and less fights is good for the game.

And there is no arguing with whether or not it means less fights and more blobs, its the way that the reasonable theory plays out and we see it in the game right now, in practice as we are typing these words back and forth with each other.

Kelsin
Dirt Dog Trading Company
Posted - 2008.05.15 13:22:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
the 10 10 man gangs die to the titans support fleet...

Or die to 10 different titans. The point is that the answer is always "titan" and always "as many titans as possible". Especially with what jade wants to do, making them an alpha class where the guy who has the titans wins.


Well first, you're mistaken about what Jade has posted above - it doesn't say anything like that.

Second, let's stay within the realm of sensible counter-examples please.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 13:56:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Kelsin
Originally by: Goumindong
the 10 10 man gangs die to the titans support fleet...

Or die to 10 different titans. The point is that the answer is always "titan" and always "as many titans as possible". Especially with what jade wants to do, making them an alpha class where the guy who has the titans wins.


Well first, you're mistaken about what Jade has posted above - it doesn't say anything like that.

Second, let's stay within the realm of sensible counter-examples please.


No, it does say that, it just doesn't seem like it because Jade dressed it up in pretty words and other bull. A titan that is not only capable of blowing an grid clearing AoE DD but also a concentrated volley damage that can be a threat to caps is ridiculous. Its an alpha class that will destroy the game especially as more are created. It not only provides perfect defensive force against smaller opponents but provides offense against capitals. At least right now, a titan or two is vulnerable to concentrated capital forces[pointed/bubbled by a HICTOR, dropped by dreads], and Jade wants to make them actually good at killing the only thing they are vulnerable to!!

Jade has this problem a lot where he promises wild and vague "greatness" but fails to see how incomprehensibly stupid the suggestions are when actually put into practice. They simply do not do what Jade says they will do.

I mean, if i said i had this great idea for sov warfare and the idea was to move cyno jammers and guns inside POS shields because that people can use capitals at all is a terrible thing for the game. You would certainly not agree with me regarding this point, you would say "that will not have the effect you want it to". And so it is the case with pretty much everything he says and claims. Destroying stations will not be a boon to small alliances. It will mean that super-alliances won't have to rely on pets to hold space because they can reduce the effective amount of space by destroying infrastructure. Giving them greater mobility and concentration of capital forces with less need for defense[because if anyone puts anything up they can just go back later and blow it up, then leave again]. Distributing sov contesting mechanics will either make defending impossible or make attacking impossible. Removing jump bridges, cyno jammers, and[or limiting their deployment range to stations] other strategic POS modules will not make combat more dynamic it will return POS sieges to the era of jv1v and 9-9 and the rest of the war in the east[I use these, because its two fights i fought in, including the majority of the LV campaign after Scalding Pass fell(and a bit on the other side before it did), so its easier to describe and define] where you move your capitals up and then blob a system to death ignoring everything else to be taken down later.

And large scale AoEs will not fix blobbing, but only make it worse.

Here is how i would defend any system under Jades system

x titans + y motherships + Z dictors/hictors. Where x and y are as many titans or motherships as you can supply to the field and z is everyone else. If you had more titans and motherships you would win. You would RR blob the motherships/titans while volleying dreads. When enemy capitals are dead the gang would align out set off some DDs then warp 60 seconds later.

Only way to beat it? More titans and motherships than the other guy. Welcome to super-caps online. If the enemy has no caps its even easier, you just blow your load on half the titans, clear the field, then clean up.

Kelsin
Dirt Dog Trading Company
Posted - 2008.05.15 15:19:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
And large scale AoEs will not fix blobbing, but only make it worse.


I notice you say this a lot. And while the premise isn't quite accurate (that AOE is meant to "fix" blobbing, rather than just be an anti-blob weapon), I still don't see how AOE weapons make blobbing more prevalent/more desirable.

I think it's important that you take a step back and look at the larger context of how ships and weapons are used on the broad scale, rather than in discrete 1 force on 1 force matchups. So you say fielding as many Titans and Motherships as possible is advantageous? Well yes, it is. But the ISK and infrastructure required to field and support them is vast, and that same amount of resources could be used to conduct a broad and extensive sub-capital campaign to attack the ratting and mining operations of the Titan/Mothership-fielding alliance, which the Capitals would be far less capable of dealing with.

The answer to issues like this is finding the dynamic solution. In the case of the Titan Jade is highlighting concerns about their ability to appear on the battlefield, fire the Doomsday and nearly immediately warp off, and pointing out that it's that third part that's the real problem. Recognizing the core of the problem, he suggests solutions that bring the capabilities and vulnerabilities of the ship more in line with the role it's meant to have. That's just good reasoning and sound judgement.

Pezzle
Amarr
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2008.05.15 15:47:00 - [25]
 

AOE weapons of this scale promote more blobbing because they impact not simply one or two ships at a time but entire fleets or wings. With smart bombs you can pull out of range and still remain active in that engagement. With a DD you cannot.

So lets say you have 50 ships, the Titan lets off the DD. Some of your ships live (if you tanked for it). Another DD. Now you need another 50 or more ships to counter that. (no this is not suggesting you need 50 ships to kill a Titan, just an example).

In order to give yourself a chance of victory against fleets with Titans you have to pad your numbers in ever increasing amounts.

What you end up with is either a steamroller or utter stagnation.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 16:11:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Kelsin
...


Besides what Pezzle said. Lets talk global thermo nuclear war, and after we get the Mathew Broderick jokes out of the way we can look at...

"How not to get attacked"

There are two ways to not get attacked. Would Iraq please stand up? [Iraq stands up, explodes] That is not how to not get attacked. Would North Korea please stand up? [crickets] Good. That is how to not get attacked. You do one of two things. A: You have a defensive force so strong that anyone who attacks you will fail. B: You have a deterrent force so strong that anyone who attacks you will die.

Nuclear weapons are the ultimate non-weapon in the world. They come in two manners. Strategic[the big ones], and tactical[the small ones]. Strategic nuclear weapons are what is called a deterrent weapon. I.E. a weapon that doesn't stop an opponent from attacking, but a weapon that punishes him for doing so.

Strategic nuclear weapons have no comparable module in eve. What we have is tactical nuclear weapons with a few modification. Tactical weapons are defensive weapons, in that they are used to kill an attacking force and not punish someone from attacking you. The combination of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons[as well as conventional deterrents] have successfully prevented large scale conflicts in Taiwan, Korea, Eastern Europe, and probably a bunch of others that i am forgetting. Tactical nuclear weapons work by increasing the cost of attacking. If China attempted to invade taiwan, the U.S. would launch a tactical nuclear weapon into the Taiwan sea, and wipe out all of the Chinese forces in a single swipe. So if China wants to attack Taiwan and force it back into union, they need as many armies to attack as the U.S. can launch tactical nuclear weapons at plus 1 extra army.

Now, one of the things about nuclear weapons is that they cannot be used offensively. Because doing so destroys the value of what you are attacking. Doomsdays in eve have no such limitations. As such they are not limited to being defensive weapons. Because of this you have the same problem China has attacking Taiwan on offense and defense. If you want to attack and don't have a titan you need as many fleets as the opponent has titans plus 1. If you bring a weaker fleet they just kill you and don't waste the DD. If you want to defend and don't have a titan you need to bring as many fleets as the opponents has titans plus 1. If you bring a weaker fleet they just kill you and don't waste the DD.

If you have a Titan and your opponent doesn't you get this massive benefit that they do not. If you have a Titan and your opponent does then you both need massive fleets to get the job done and in the end its likely that your sub-capital ships simply don't get to have any fun. For examples of this. See BoB/LV before remote DDs were removed. Their conventional fleet dwindled because it didn't do anything, it just sat around containing the other fleet until it could get remote DD'd.

You might want to say "oh no, it totally prevents blobs". And I am going to say, "no, it prevents fights and if it did not, you personally would in all likelihood be dead right now due to a nuclear war that the world would have waged"

Quote:
So you say fielding as many Titans and Motherships as possible is advantageous?


The question is not "should it be advantageous?" the question is "how advantageous should it be?"

Quote:
Recognizing the core of the problem, he suggests solutions that bring the capabilities and vulnerabilities of the ship more in line with the role it's meant to have. That's just good reasoning and sound judgement.


Except that Jade isn't recognizing the core of the problem, he is making it worse. That is ****ty reasoning and terrible judgment.

Arithron
Gallente
Gallente Trade Alliance
Posted - 2008.05.15 16:15:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Arithron on 15/05/2008 16:15:29
I was wondering, Jade, if you could explain this apparent contradiction for me:

Quote:
Current malaise with Eve turning into "capitals online" is because in reality - not many capital ships actually die. Hit and run usage of Titan's is bad for this - so, as I said, nothing much wrong with the AOE doomsday - just ensure the ship that deploys it is committed to the fight and needs a support fleet.


Given that you are proposing that Titans become easier to kill, and that you acknowledge that such losses will impact on the large alliances, can you explain how this will PREVENT blobbing? Large alliances will bring HUGE fleets with a Titan to prevent its loss...

Elsewhere you have stated that you want to see smaller fleet engagements rather than blobs...your ideas for Sovereignty etc. These two different proposals of yours appear to be in conflict with each other?

Many thanks,
Bruce Hansen (Arithron)

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.15 16:17:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 15/05/2008 16:44:04

Originally by: Pezzle
AOE weapons of this scale promote more blobbing because they impact not simply one or two ships at a time but entire fleets or wings. With smart bombs you can pull out of range and still remain active in that engagement. With a DD you cannot.


No Pezzle, thats a silly argument. Goonswarm have already showed us that Blobbing is not the answer to killing Titans (having failed to kill Shrikes Titan with an uber blob attack that ultimately broke the node and allowed the target to escape.) The answer is quality not quantity, and this is going to become increasingly apparent as alliances present multiple Titans to double up on DD blasts. I'm afraid you just need to accept that you don't shoot a super-capital with a fleet of light ships and expect to win through on pure weight of numbers.

Ultimately you need to fight Titans with capital ships, and the issue that needs addressing is how to keep Titans committed to the fight rather than simply performing drive by DD attacks and escaping. Once Titans start dying in proper numbers to concentrated capital fights then the problem of Titan proliferation is going to reduce - these are very expensive ships and no alliance can handle regular losses in this class for any length of time. They will revert to a flag-ship role in only the most critical of engagements once we have mechanics in game to ensure that once committed they are likely to remain committed until battle outcome is resolved.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.15 16:23:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Arithron
Given that you are proposing that Titans become easier to kill, and that you acknowledge that such losses will impact on the large alliances, can you explain how this will PREVENT blobbing? Large alliances will bring HUGE fleets with a Titan to prevent its loss... Elsewhere you have stated that you want to see smaller fleet engagements rather than blobs...your ideas for Sovereignty etc. These two different proposals of yours appear to be in conflict with each other?



You can't PREVENT blobbing you can present disincentive to Blobbing. You achieve this best in the current environment by taking sovereignty warfare away from fixed and timed reinforcement battles at POS in favor of more distributed goals separated in space and opportunity and allowing some genuine tactics to enter the equation of force disposition and deployment.

Specific proposals in regard to the Titan are designed to ensure that consequence-free doomdsay deployment is off the table and use of these ships becomes more of an issue economically because entering a battle becomes a significant risk. Though related these two issues are not contradictory.



Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.15 16:56:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Jade Constantine
D:



Great, so the answer is to blob with capitals? And sod the rest of the fleet? Are you kidding me? The answer to titans is capitals online? You think that is good?

Go capital or go home? Seriously?


Pages: [1] 2 3

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