EVE General Discussion

Let's say the server cap was 1000 players. Let's say there are 20,000 players in an alliance. That means that an alliance can cap 20 systems (with all their players logged on 23.5/7). How many systems can a 20,000 player alliance hold given the CURRENT game dynamics?



I'm not proposing anyone mount a defense in 5 minutes that can repel 250 dreadnoughts. That should take a miracle or some sort of space magic. But, you should be planning a defense of your structure before you ever anchor and online it, so that gives you more than 5 minutes. First rule of EVE: Don't fly (or anchor) what you can't afford to lose.

Park a few triage carriers nearby if it's that important.



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.

What if we put a flag on the top of every station and to capture that station you need to go and get that flag and take it back to your base?

So... you're suggesting that an alliance should not be able to keep any system they can't keep pegged at server cap 23/7/365. And this is good gameplay... how?



So.. you're saying you don't think anyone should be able to mount any defense ever.

How do the Triage carriers reach the structure? The system's at the server cap. For that matter, how do you detect the attack to even try throwing Triage Carriers into a Dreadfleet?(You do remember your proposal to remove attack mails, right?)



^^Making my point for me. How do you defend a structure when your proposed game mechanics prevent you from entering the system it's in until it is long dead and the attacking fleet departed?

a) expect the unexpected.
b) why would I attack something that would be able to outnumber me? if it did outnumbered me, then whoever did my intel needs to be fired.

1.No, YOU are suggesting that.
2.No, I'm not. See your no. 1 for clues.
3.A system cap mechanic does not preclude you from entering the system BEFORE the structure has come under attack. A system cap mechanic does not preclude you from camping likely routes of ingress for the attacking force. A system cap mechanic does not preclude you from camping likely routes of egress for the attacking force. A system cap mechanic does not necessitate that every attacking force be so numerous as to put the target system's population at maximum capacity. A system cap mechanic does not preclude you from retaliating, etc., etc., etc.
tl;dr - Use your brain.



You don't think Goonswarm is capable of defending ANY towers or stations under this scenario? Not even 1?



In EVE, every structure fight is an extended fight, because of timers, force projection, and to a lesser extent, because of TiDi. See the issue?



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.

what the balls is egress

i'm reporting him for obscene language just in case

If you cap the system and create a time dilated environment, it isn't 5 minutes of real time, but much much longer.

(Of course, once any defense jumped in they were on that same time frame, but they could leapfrog the clock in regards to forming up and getting there regardless of if they could save the tower, they might be able to inflict casualties on the attackers and maybe even recoup some loss in the form of wrecks).

1. You've got me and you mixed up. Under your proposals, the only way to defend a system is by pegging it at server cap 23/7/365. You're proposing those proposals. Ergo... you must feel that that being the only form of defense is good gameplay.
2. You're getting me and you mixed up once more. Under your proposals, mounting any defense is impossible, as you are locked out of the system being attacked for the duration of the attack. You're proposing these proposals. Ergo... you must feel that people being preempted from mounting any sort of defense against an attack in progress is appropriate.
3. So, once again, you're saying that the only defense under your system is to keep it pegged at the server cap. Because a server cap will immediately lead to doctrines based entirely on abusing it.

Know how I know? Because that's what happened before TiDi. Lag did not operate in an entirely unpredictable way back then, so if you tossed enough people into a system before the enemy showed up, you could have grid loaded and be sitting on the in gate ready for a turkey shoot. When they jump in, there's lag, but you could function (Arty functioned best). The people jumping in, on the other hand, got black screens and played the part of the Turkeys.
Your suggestion just removes the necessity of actually shooting the turkeys.

Do you seriously think anyone's going to say "Hmm, if I bring X people, I will take this system with no possibility of loss or defeat. NAHHHHHHHH. Let's cap our fleet at some smaller number."

As for camping routes of egress, what does that have to do with defending the system you just lost? Also, BLOPS for bombers, Titans for other subcaps, or a pure capital fleet and you've nothing to camp. I suppose here's where you mention that you want all forms of bridging and jump drives removed.



Nope. What's the problem with your friends wanting to fight even if they're late to the party?



The only way to hold space under your system is to actually ally yourself with every single group in EVE who has a dread fleet. And your system is supposed to help stop the imagined "blue donut"?




Mayhaw's whole premise is that his proposed server population cap and no timers would obviate the need for TiDi entirely. And his proposals are what we've been discussing for a few pages now, Murk.
The fact that it also obviates the need for defense (because it's impossible) or a coherent attacking fleet composition (because no defender can enter system to attack you) doesn't seem to faze him.

Agreed - TiDi is the problem.
Not the fact that you attacked a larger and more capable enemy.

Do you think that the removal of TiDi will be the only thing that evens the score between a small corp and a mega alliance with many friends?

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")