These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The Office of the Chairman: A ~chill place~ for constituent issues

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Johan Krieger
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#341 - 2011-12-07 16:50:54 UTC
Blake Zacary wrote:
My question is mainly about blobs.... The game seems to be heading in a direction again where we have no counter at all to massive blobs.With Time Dilation and the way sov works it will end up like it did a little while back,where null eventually settles down and becomes very static and boring with space being held for years by Alliances with no real way to challenge their sov.

Personally I would love the end game to be epic.Where skills, imagination and tactics play a more important role than having loads of characters with average skills who only need to press F1 when told to do so.Imagine if you can wars,instead of being based on single focal points at a time are run over massive battle lines.Where you have both large battles and small battles raging along the 'battle front'.Using different tactics like guerrilla warfare, interception of enemy supply lines,disrupting the industrial side of the enemy(moons,pi) etc,etc.The potential list is endless and would open up some epic gameplay.

Now as I said the game is getting pushed towards massive blobs again and the old 'bring more' or 'you need more friends' isn't a valid argument to let the game go this way.Is the CSM really pushing for null to be this way or are positive steps being looked at to improve gameplay in null so it encourages more people to partake in it and lets all Alliances and Coalitions have a chance to play a role without having to piggy back onto a large blob just to play.


The only way you could have multiple battles going on at the same time is if one of the Alliances split their forces (which is stupid) and attacked multiple things at the same time. Even then, the defending alliance would most likely just take their blob and wipe out each smaller attacking fleet with ease.

If it were to happen, you would have to have more FC's and your logistics team would have to work harder to keep multiple staging systems stocked with war supplies. No one wants to have to fly 20 jumps to get a new battleship just so they can have their small gang ~elite PvP~.

Then, if all that could magically happen, both alliances would still have to agree to use that style of warfare, which I doubt they would.

CCP has pretty much no control over how many people gang up to fight each other. The ONLY way that blobs are going to disappear is if alliances agree they want to have small gangs instead of blobs.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#342 - 2011-12-07 17:10:13 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
There's absolutely no problem of having arenas where people can match skills against others in controlled circumstances. Hell, CCP could allow people to even place bets on who would win, once they finish off WiS. Imagine having a hall of people watching a large viewscreen showing the 1v1, 2v2, 4v4 arena action. All this would do is make EVE as a universe deeper, and I see absolutely no problem with that.


There is one such arena already, it's called Sisi.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#343 - 2011-12-07 17:42:18 UTC
I think you'll find that the reason the game is being pushed ever further towards bigger and bigger blobs is because the SOV system basically requires it. You either overpower the enemy once every 2nd day or so, or all your progress is reset.

If the SOV system had been much more dynamic and allowed multiple systems to be under attack, smaller fleets could be incentivized into being used, instead of today's situation where one fuckoff fleet smashes into another fuckoff fleet until either all the timers are smashed through, or you're repelled.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#344 - 2011-12-07 17:44:35 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
There's absolutely no problem of having arenas where people can match skills against others in controlled circumstances. Hell, CCP could allow people to even place bets on who would win, once they finish off WiS. Imagine having a hall of people watching a large viewscreen showing the 1v1, 2v2, 4v4 arena action. All this would do is make EVE as a universe deeper, and I see absolutely no problem with that.


There is one such arena already, it's called Sisi.

You're not getting the point.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Blake Zacary
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#345 - 2011-12-07 17:46:51 UTC
Johan Krieger wrote:
Blake Zacary wrote:
My question is mainly about blobs.... The game seems to be heading in a direction again where we have no counter at all to massive blobs.With Time Dilation and the way sov works it will end up like it did a little while back,where null eventually settles down and becomes very static and boring with space being held for years by Alliances with no real way to challenge their sov.

Personally I would love the end game to be epic.Where skills, imagination and tactics play a more important role than having loads of characters with average skills who only need to press F1 when told to do so.Imagine if you can wars,instead of being based on single focal points at a time are run over massive battle lines.Where you have both large battles and small battles raging along the 'battle front'.Using different tactics like guerrilla warfare, interception of enemy supply lines,disrupting the industrial side of the enemy(moons,pi) etc,etc.The potential list is endless and would open up some epic gameplay.

Now as I said the game is getting pushed towards massive blobs again and the old 'bring more' or 'you need more friends' isn't a valid argument to let the game go this way.Is the CSM really pushing for null to be this way or are positive steps being looked at to improve gameplay in null so it encourages more people to partake in it and lets all Alliances and Coalitions have a chance to play a role without having to piggy back onto a large blob just to play.


The only way you could have multiple battles going on at the same time is if one of the Alliances split their forces (which is stupid) and attacked multiple things at the same time. Even then, the defending alliance would most likely just take their blob and wipe out each smaller attacking fleet with ease.

If it were to happen, you would have to have more FC's and your logistics team would have to work harder to keep multiple staging systems stocked with war supplies. No one wants to have to fly 20 jumps to get a new battleship just so they can have their small gang ~elite PvP~.

Then, if all that could magically happen, both alliances would still have to agree to use that style of warfare, which I doubt they would.

CCP has pretty much no control over how many people gang up to fight each other. The ONLY way that blobs are going to disappear is if alliances agree they want to have small gangs instead of blobs.
You seem very negative towards change.You honestly don't think the current end game is as epic as it could be ? Like I said just now it's being pushed more and more towards larger blobs with absolutely no counter to this.I don't think cramming as many people into one system is the best way it can work.Giving us the tools to create more varied and fun content in null would add so much more to the game and hopefully would encourage more people to give null a try.Just now I don't believe the current way the game is heading does that.

I love big battles but I don't think they should be the only option that is open in null to actually do anything.I would love skills,tactics and imagination to be rewarded as well,rather than just being able to push F1 being the only tactic.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#346 - 2011-12-07 18:05:47 UTC
Key words: descriptive sovereignty.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#347 - 2011-12-07 18:15:41 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
I think you'll find that the reason the game is being pushed ever further towards bigger and bigger blobs is because the SOV system basically requires it. You either overpower the enemy once every 2nd day or so, or all your progress is reset.

If the SOV system had been much more dynamic and allowed multiple systems to be under attack, smaller fleets could be incentivized into being used, instead of today's situation where one fuckoff fleet smashes into another fuckoff fleet until either all the timers are smashed through, or you're repelled.

Whats stopping this now? CFC has enough people that we could easily keep 4-5 systems reinforced at any given time(and maybe even the intel resources to arrange for them all to come out at the same time to force a choice) and we don't, for a reason.

If we do this and our enemy doesn't, then they just crush the fleets one at a time, titan bridging to the next system we are attacking as soon as the first is crashed and taking on the rest. Without an I-Win button, the only counter for numbers is more numbers.

There is no mechanic preventing or causing either situation, other than the pure mechanics of warfare. When both sides have equal equipment, the side with more people wins, and in eve there is no such thing as a technological advantage, and at the bloc level if your fleet members aren't able to field strong ships, your already failing.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Johan Krieger
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#348 - 2011-12-07 18:30:00 UTC
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
I think you'll find that the reason the game is being pushed ever further towards bigger and bigger blobs is because the SOV system basically requires it. You either overpower the enemy once every 2nd day or so, or all your progress is reset.

If the SOV system had been much more dynamic and allowed multiple systems to be under attack, smaller fleets could be incentivized into being used, instead of today's situation where one fuckoff fleet smashes into another fuckoff fleet until either all the timers are smashed through, or you're repelled.

Whats stopping this now? CFC has enough people that we could easily keep 4-5 systems reinforced at any given time(and maybe even the intel resources to arrange for them all to come out at the same time to force a choice) and we don't, for a reason.

If we do this and our enemy doesn't, then they just crush the fleets one at a time, titan bridging to the next system we are attacking as soon as the first is crashed and taking on the rest. Without an I-Win button, the only counter for numbers is more numbers.

There is no mechanic preventing or causing either situation, other than the pure mechanics of warfare. When both sides have equal equipment, the side with more people wins, and in eve there is no such thing as a technological advantage, and at the bloc level if your fleet members aren't able to field strong ships, your already failing.



Exactly my point. It's the players who decide how the battles are going to work, not CCP.

Short of CCP limiting the amount of people that can be in system I really don't think there is anything they can really do to change how warfare works. It will have to be the players who decide how they feel like playing the game.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#349 - 2011-12-07 18:33:16 UTC
Blake Zacary wrote:
I love big battles but I don't think they should be the only option that is open in null to actually do anything.I would love skills,tactics and imagination to be rewarded as well,rather than just being able to push F1 being the only tactic.


You'll find that it takes quite a level of skill, tactics and imagination to manage a fleet of 200+ battleships.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Dunbar Hulan
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#350 - 2011-12-07 18:42:35 UTC
Can you outline why you would be worth voting for in the next election ? Outline what you feel you have achieved for the EVE community in your role as a CSM.
And as a follow up, can you outline what your thoughts are on the future role of Null sec and in particular, NPC null (Where I live.)

 ** Manchester United - Paul Scholes= Genius**
Velicitia
XS Tech
#351 - 2011-12-07 19:05:17 UTC
Andski wrote:
Blake Zacary wrote:
I love big battles but I don't think they should be the only option that is open in null to actually do anything.I would love skills,tactics and imagination to be rewarded as well,rather than just being able to push F1 being the only tactic.


You'll find that it takes quite a level of skill, tactics and imagination to manage a fleet of 200+ battleships.



... but the fleet commander .... he held it together

:i was there: Lol

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Blake Zacary
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#352 - 2011-12-07 19:44:21 UTC
Andski wrote:
Blake Zacary wrote:
I love big battles but I don't think they should be the only option that is open in null to actually do anything.I would love skills,tactics and imagination to be rewarded as well,rather than just being able to push F1 being the only tactic.


You'll find that it takes quite a level of skill, tactics and imagination to manage a fleet of 200+ battleships.
Maybe for one guy but the other 199 just need basic skills and know how to align,warp to,jump and lets not forget the most complex one of all pressing F1.Not really a good advert to encourage people to stay long term in the game to train up better skills,increase their experience and think out the box on different tactics,as numbers are what gives the biggest rewards just now not what I listed before !

I'm not against blobs as such,I just don't think they should be the only real option in null and with no real counter except trying to bring even more people into the one grid.I can see null eventually becoming very static and boring like it was the other year,with Alliances holding the same sov for years.And no chance for anyone to build up their own empires and actually fight for something without having to beg for scraps from entrenched Alliances/Coalitions just to get into null.Is it really such a bad thing to want null to be more dynamic and changing with a wide range of content,that will encourage more people to try it out and hopefully attract more long term people into Eve in general.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#353 - 2011-12-07 19:44:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Whats stopping this now? CFC has enough people that we could easily keep 4-5 systems reinforced at any given time(and maybe even the intel resources to arrange for them all to come out at the same time to force a choice) and we don't, for a reason.

If we do this and our enemy doesn't, then they just crush the fleets one at a time, titan bridging to the next system we are attacking as soon as the first is crashed and taking on the rest. Without an I-Win button, the only counter for numbers is more numbers.

There is no mechanic preventing or causing either situation, other than the pure mechanics of warfare. When both sides have equal equipment, the side with more people wins, and in eve there is no such thing as a technological advantage, and at the bloc level if your fleet members aren't able to field strong ships, your already failing.

Simple. If we split our forces over 2 or 3 systems, then worst case, the other guy will just defend one system a day, resetting all progress we've made as they save each system. There's nothing stopping this behavior, so the only thing an attacker really can do is devote all resources to one system at a time until it has been taken over, or attack more than i think 5 or 6 systems at a time.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Derkata
#354 - 2011-12-07 23:53:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Derkata
The problem with setting up these kind of flanking attacks is the mobility and projection of power. It works in the real world when your army cant possibly cross the country in a day to defend both east and west borders. Traveling by gate takes time, but you could go from corner to corner in eve within the time needed to take over a system. Now factor in jump bridges and its even less time. Now factor in titans bridging from the spot of the defense and it would be easy for a fleet of 1000 to crush 5 separate fleets of 200 in short time.

In the real, and even in RTS games a small force used as distraction really gives you a hand up while another force hits hard on the other side but it simply isn't like that in eve. The Sov mechanics as they are right now and the ability of fleets to move prevent it.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#355 - 2011-12-08 00:13:10 UTC
Yes, that's what I've been saying, and that's one of the main things I think should be implemented/enabled when/if CCP actually does improve nullsec SOV fighting.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#356 - 2011-12-08 09:37:47 UTC
Derkata wrote:
The problem with setting up these kind of flanking attacks is the mobility and projection of power. It works in the real world when your army cant possibly cross the country in a day to defend both east and west borders. Traveling by gate takes time, but you could go from corner to corner in eve within the time needed to take over a system. Now factor in jump bridges and its even less time. Now factor in titans bridging from the spot of the defense and it would be easy for a fleet of 1000 to crush 5 separate fleets of 200 in short time.

In the real, and even in RTS games a small force used as distraction really gives you a hand up while another force hits hard on the other side but it simply isn't like that in eve. The Sov mechanics as they are right now and the ability of fleets to move prevent it.


Which is why I advocate changing the Titan jump bridge mechanism such that the Titan jumps to the cyno and takes any ships within, say, 5000m with it. Remote DD was ridiculously OP because it allowed the Titan to have a massive effect on the battlefield without committing anything except a disposable cyno ship, and remote bridging is OP in exactly the same way.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#357 - 2011-12-08 10:24:21 UTC
Tbh I'm not convinced that's really the way to go. If any ship should do the whole jump to cyno to deliver fleet maneuvers, it would be the mothership, and for that to happen pilots would have to dock with it prior to jumping.

Actually, I just had an idea. Why not make it so you need two titans to initiate bridging? Source and destination titan. It can be argued that everything else which is bridging other ships than themselves needs a source and destination structure, why not titans. Bridging equipment is huge and requires a lot of fuel and power etc and all that jazz. That way you make it more dangerous to hotdrop something, and you avoid the problem where CCP would invariably just suck up everything in a radius of 5000m, including POS structures or the POS itself, and move it to the cyno system, along with AFK people. Otherwise you'd have a hell of a time taking a titan into POSes or station undocks and bridge AFK people into hostile space and leave them there just because you can.

Tbh I think the whole movement possibilities of fleets is less a problem the whole SOV system is, and I'd much rather CCP put effort into making that better, more dynamic and actually strategic with the possibility of feints and surprise attacks etc.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Arkanon Nerevar
UK Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#358 - 2011-12-08 14:35:05 UTC
Dear Mittens, a few questions regarding Null life in general, as always i leave it to you to answer as you see fit.

1.On a number of occasions when talking with friends/aqquaintences about playing eve, i pitch the sandbox pvp as the main point (null-sec) to subscribing, this leads to the claims that eve endgame is controlled by giant douchebag conglomarats, that are united by the fact that they are all by nature, complete and utter ass-holes, im never quite sure what to say to that, so i ask the (in)famous Mittani for guidance.

2.Null corps have in general a VERY bad rap when it comes to a non multi-year vet applying, storys are abound of endless scams and dashed hopes, do you belive this rap is justified, that it is truly hard to "break into" Null and what impact it has on the state of Null life today.

3.Null corps have (il admit rather old) rap for being highly dominering, most people do understand the concept of following the chain of command but there are limits to this (ultimately fictional) concept, Example: a player wishes to become a soldier in a null corp to participate in null battles, he will follow his superiors orders and fly the appropriate ship/fit/broad skill plan, but say he is told he must dedicate his skill training to some hyper specific plan for the next 6 months to fulfill the a extremely specific role as dictated to him with no deviance, do you support this philosophy and belive it is affecting the desire for people to plunge into Null.

Trust Not in God, but Have Faith in Antimatter
Ispia Jaydrath
Reib Autonomous Industries
#359 - 2011-12-08 14:45:27 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Tbh I think the whole movement possibilities of fleets is less a problem the whole SOV system is, and I'd much rather CCP put effort into making that better, more dynamic and actually strategic with the possibility of feints and surprise attacks etc.


Okay you ************, I've had enough of this **** and I'm not going to take it any more.

Sov is short for sovereignty. It's an abbreviation, not an acronym, and capitalizing it makes you a bad person. Now that you know this, I sincerely hope that you turn your life around and stop being wrong on the internet.

Good day, sir.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#360 - 2011-12-08 14:47:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV.

Enjoy.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat