These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Tidi is gamebreaking for the smaller side

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2013-08-07 20:10:46 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
b) why would I attack something that would be able to outnumber me?


Because it did NOT outnumber you when you were attacking it. Because you wanted to hurt it more than you cared about it hurting you. Because you were still a greater force, despite being outnumbered. Because you (generally speaking, not you specifically) are a dumbass. I dunno.

Your question alludes to why there is a "blue donut". No one successfully attacks the blue donut because the blue donut will always be given the chance to outnumber them, always, guaranteed, 100%, unless some fool doesn't put strontium clathrates in his tower or something ridiculous.



well,
Grimpak wrote:
a) expect the unexpected.


and I, in no way, alluded to the so-called "blue donut", I alluded to the number one thing that happens in every kind of operation, situation, incident, and/or planned event ever created by humans: Don't **** around with Murphy's law, or it will **** you up.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#302 - 2013-08-07 23:51:53 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:

Agreed. However, why would you ever assault a target with less force than was required to neutralize it? Ideally, "attacker reinforcements" is an oxymoron. Why would you attack a hill with 50 dudes if you were pretty sure it was going to take 100 dudes to claim the hill? And, if you used 100 dudes but suddenly it became apparent that it would take 200 dudes to claim the hill, you'd withdraw, because you don't have enough dudes. There is the possibility that you had another 100 dudes available in that case, but then why did you only send 100 dudes to take the hill? Send 200!
tl;dr - An efficient attacking force should have its forces in position before the attack even begins.


It's pretty obvious from this that you've never been involved in a 'for real' 0.0 sov war. That is, it was pretty obvious from your other posts but now it's confirmed

Reinforcements are an absolutely key component of an extended fight. You see, those guys who lose ships, what do you think they do? Say "well played good sirs" and log off? Or do you think maybe they get in another ship and rejoin the fight?

In addition, it is extremely poor strategy to put your high value ships on the field until you're confident that they're going to be reasonably secure. No one fields supercaps into a battlefield without gaining subcap superiority (or at least having good reason to expect to have it).

I'm sorry but your conception of how these battles unfold is naive in the extreme. I suggest gaining some actual experience if you want to participate in discussions about them.

You're talking to some random idiot on EVEO GD, and you're sorry they don't know anything?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#303 - 2013-08-07 23:52:51 UTC
Sirane Elrek wrote:
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
You don't think Goonswarm is capable of defending ANY towers or stations under this scenario? Not even 1?

yeah we could probably keep two or so stations because we're large enough for around-the-clock coverage but you can count the number of alliances who can field a defense against 250 dreads at all times on one hand. of a blind lumberjack.

Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Your question alludes to why there is a "blue donut". No one successfully attacks the blue donut because the blue donut will always be given the chance to outnumber them, always, guaranteed, 100%, unless some fool doesn't put strontium clathrates in his tower or something ridiculous.

funny, you must have missed what happened in fountain two weeks ago
wait which of us is the blue donut here, is it us or test

I think non-CFC are the blue donut, and they will soon wipe us out.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#304 - 2013-08-07 23:53:15 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Sirane Elrek wrote:
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
You don't think Goonswarm is capable of defending ANY towers or stations under this scenario? Not even 1?

yeah we could probably keep two or so stations because we're large enough for around-the-clock coverage but you can count the number of alliances who can field a defense against 250 dreads at all times on one hand. of a blind lumberjack.

Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
Your question alludes to why there is a "blue donut". No one successfully attacks the blue donut because the blue donut will always be given the chance to outnumber them, always, guaranteed, 100%, unless some fool doesn't put strontium clathrates in his tower or something ridiculous.

funny, you must have missed what happened in fountain two weeks ago
wait which of us is the blue donut here, is it us or test


The people supporting the blue donut theory usually also support the TEST = CFC theory. The blue donut attacked the blue donut. It was also aided by other part of the blue donuts who weere helping the blue donut defend against the blue donut. Part of the blue donut was also put under contract by the blue donut.

I'm hungry for some donuts now...

Get a box of donuts. Start eating.

You prefer coffee or tea?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#305 - 2013-08-07 23:55:59 UTC
Sirane Elrek wrote:
you know in civilized countries a donut looks like a ring, not like a crescent
that's why literally everyone in EVE besides yourself is talking about all of sov 0.0 when they're speak of the mythical "blue donut"
but don't let that stop you from redefining "blue donut" as "CFC"

(also TEST is the largest alliance if you go by members, and somewhere in the also-ran category if you go by any other metric, but certainly nowhere near "second" or "most powerful")

Just call it a clusterfuck donut then.

You put in on your mouf.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#306 - 2013-08-08 00:14:25 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
1.You are making predictions about a system that has unstable elements and exhibits emergent behaviors, i.e. you are making predictions about a system that is inherently UNpredictable. I am not saying that server cap fleets will be "the standard" or that defense will be impossible. You are predicting that to be the outcome. I disagree with those predictions.


As I explained, an effective server cap was in place before TiDi. Fleets were designed to fight in the marginal performance that accompanied filling a system to that cap and letting the enemy jump in.

I'm predicting that to be the outcome because that's exactly what happened last time.

I have evidence to support my predictions.

What's your argument for, and what evidence do you have to support it being different under your system?

Quote:
2.Not everyone can field 1000 players, or even 500. Furthermore, why not just have 750 in system, then you could have your turkey shoot AND take the system. Meanwhile, there's a pissed off fleet of 1000 or 750 enemy pilots just sitting at the inbound gates or waiting at a titan somewhere while you ravage their system? Give me a break. If they're smart, they're going to go straight to one of YOUR systems and do the very same thing to you.


First, nobody's waiting at a Titan bridge because the system has been lost before they formed up.
Second, why risk a 4 to 1 upset? The current mechanics allow actual fights over structures and systems where everyone involved chooses their proportion of the total fight. Your system results in the attacker choosing everyone else's maximum participation.
Third, I won't have any systems because I'll have recognized that they cannot be defended.

Quote:
3.Firstly, camping routes of egress prevents the enemy fleet from getting out alive. 250 dreadnoughts for the price of a few towers? Deal!
Secondly, you and others have spent a lot of time and energy pushing the notion that jump drives != invulnerability. "Jump freighters die all the time.", you would say. But here you are now complaining the exact opposite, because it is convenient to your argument. Well, you can't have it both ways. Which one do you choose?


Current rules don't allow you to blockade a system by simply entering it. Your proposed rules do. Jump Drives + Server Cap = Invincible power projection unless you get rid of Jump drives and bridges entirely.
Currently, a fleet of dreads on the move does have to be somewhat concerned about being dropped (though it's a *lot* of DPS under one roof). Under your proposed system, they don't. Nor do a fleet of Stealth Bombers, a couple BLOPs, and a couple JF fuel trucks, since the server cap renders you invincible.

Quote:
4.Nothing is wrong with your friends getting to the party late, but your structure should be dead when they get there if the strike is executed efficiently. I don't know why the other side should be punished for being there on time and in force. Again, some noob in his Venture in Unpas doesn't get a chance to call his friends to the party when he's being one-shotted by a Thrasher. He has to act BEFORE hand to mitigate the risk of loss and the loss itself. Why shouldn't some multi-billionaire in null have to do the same?

5.Yet another prediction.


Under your proposal, the structure is dead no matter how the strike is performed. The analogy is the noob in the Venture getting locked out of his controls when the thrasher lands on grid.

Yes. We can make those. You "predict" that a server cap will not break the game based on (from what I can see) hopes and mescaline, while we predict that Sov warfare participants will abuse new broken game mechanics to their advantage based on the fact that they've done that with every such mechanic that's been introduced.

Quote:
What?! What "blue donut"? Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

The blue donut, you know; the organization that is wiping the second largest, most powerful alliance (Test Alliance Please Ignore) in New Eden completely off the map despite the intervention of quite a few other large, powerful alliances.


Roll

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#307 - 2013-08-08 00:23:35 UTC
As this thread has gone 'a bit' of topic, evolved into a 'you know noting! No! you know noting' argument which can hardly be considered a good discussion and is deemed not salvageable, it gets a lock.

And did I mention the sometimes blatant personal attacks? Yep, those too.....


2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)