These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Suggestions to break up the blob

Author
Sigras
Conglomo
#1 - 2014-09-17 17:50:51 UTC
Right now groups blob up because they have no reason to split up.

A single blob can travel from place to place thrown around by Titan bridges. They are never forced to be in two places at once, so they simply stick together smashing into whatever is in their way.

I would like to brainstorm some ideas on how to change this... My first thought is to allow an alliance to sync RF timers so they all come out at the same time, but I would like your thoughts.

What mechanic would be enough of an incentive to prevent blobs from forming in the first place?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2 - 2014-09-17 17:53:00 UTC
Sigras wrote:


What mechanic would be enough of an incentive to prevent blobs from forming in the first place?


What mechanic would be fun enough to make you not play with your friends?
Kell Braugh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#3 - 2014-09-17 18:00:45 UTC
The blob isn't the disease, only a symptom.
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2014-09-17 18:02:32 UTC
They don't split up because if they did they would not be able to break hostile logistics.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2014-09-17 18:11:47 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
They don't split up because if they did they would not be able to break hostile logistics.


If you brake the group into small enough ones, logi stop being broken.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#6 - 2014-09-17 18:40:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
Nothing wrong with blobs. I've had my most fun in fleets 100+. Some of us like those epic battles ya know, and enjoy prancing around decimating all that stands in the way.

Your issue seems to be with sov mechanics or asset attack/defense, not blobs.

Hey guys.

Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2014-09-17 18:48:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Amyclas Amatin
Steppa Musana wrote:
Nothing wrong with blobs. I've had my most fun in fleets 100+. Some of us like those epic battles ya know, and enjoy prancing around decimating all that stands in the way.

Your issue seems to be with sov mechanics or asset attack/defense, not blobs.


I for one, sit with bomberwaffe and watch the 4-sided 200-a-side brawl from 300 km away, sipping our tea, while we take bets on whether mainfleet is going to get pipebombed or bomber bombed...

Blob battles are beautiful.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#8 - 2014-09-17 23:36:41 UTC
Sigras wrote:

What mechanic would be enough of an incentive to prevent blobs from forming in the first place?


Idea 1 : outside of pos fields and station grids, allow only one capital per grid, AND capitals can't target anything in the grid they are on. They need a sub cap target pointer on the other grid the target they are shooting at is.

Idea 2: all non DPS effect, including repping, suffer the same decremental effect than modules of the same type have when they are fitted to a ship. I.e. Having more than three logistics repping any one ship does not increase the rep effect.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project

Kell Braugh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2014-09-18 17:47:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Kell Braugh
Saisin, thanks for two completely un-thoughtout, un-helpful, and pre-primed for failure ideas.

Again, I go back to my original comment that focusing on introducing mechanics simply to counter blobs is not the way forward and will not fix the problem. Capping # of fleets means just making multiple fleets. Putting a stacking penalty on repping only makes blobs more powerful, since they now have very little repping power to break through. At least now, reps are able to keep a primaried ship alive (if it has enough resists/buffer to get reps in).

Having caps not be able to target things and require a target 'pointer' only makes the power of a blob of alts (now sitting off-grid!) in caps ridiculously powerful.

Think about WHY the blocs make huge blob fleets. One reason is that, outside of 'for fun', they usually aren't forced to really go out and fight to defend their space, they can just sit in a cyno jammed system and blob the 1-2 structures in system that have any effect on them if attacked. (The jammer if present and one of the silly sov structures.) Also, there are silly little timers which basically tell the FCs: "For this 25 minute period, you need to blob the crap out of this grid over here, and have a second blob of carriers come in and rep this one structure, and all will be safe."
Krops Vont
#10 - 2014-09-18 18:30:03 UTC
Simple solution for all of EVE. Make everything have a stacking penalty. Similar to TP's, Damage mods, Station manufacture cost, ect. EVERYTHING.

--==Services==--

Propaganda/Art/Media

Wormhole Finding & Selling

o/ Play for fun

Sigras
Conglomo
#11 - 2014-09-18 18:41:29 UTC
Kell Braugh wrote:
The blob isn't the disease, only a symptom.

this is exactly what im saying, the blob is the symptom, the disease is not having any reason to split up...

lets fix the disease and the symptoms will take care of themselves...

suggestions?
Kell Braugh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#12 - 2014-09-18 18:42:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Kell Braugh
Krops Vont wrote:
Simple solution for all of EVE. Make everything have a stacking penalty. Similar to TP's, Damage mods, Station manufacture cost, ect. EVERYTHING.


Including damage? So we all have a civilian gun fit and lock up our gank boats and 'max out' the ability of the other fleet to damage them? Well thought out.

There is a reason why stacking penalties are for fitting of ships and not offensive actions.
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#13 - 2014-09-18 18:52:24 UTC
Kell Braugh wrote:
Saisin, thanks for two completely un-thoughtout, un-helpful, and pre-primed for failure ideas.
Again, I go back to my original comment that focusing on introducing mechanics simply to counter blobs is not the way forward and will not fix the problem.
...
Think about WHY the blocs make huge blob fleets. One reason is that, outside of 'for fun', they usually aren't forced to really go out and fight to defend their space, they can just sit in a cyno jammed system and blob the 1-2 structures in system that have any effect on them if attacked. (The jammer if present and one of the silly sov structures.) Also, there are silly little timers which basically tell the FCs: "For this 25 minute period, you need to blob the crap out of this grid over here, and have a second blob of carriers come in and rep this one structure, and all will be safe."[/

We can agree to disagree on the quality of the ideas I support (not being mine only, they have already been brought up countless times so they must have some validity in the mind of some others...)

I do agree with you about the last part, and hopefully the SOV structure work underway will address those without falling back into what was the tower controlled SoV.. I am strongly on board with sov maintenance requiring player activity..

Kell Braugh wrote:
Capping # of fleets means just making multiple fleets.

Yeah, I do not support capping the number of fleets.

Kell Braugh wrote:

Putting a stacking penalty on repping only makes blobs more powerful, since they now have very little repping power to break through. At least now, reps are able to keep a primaried ship alive (if it has enough resists/buffer to get reps in).

I think you are wrong, imho it will make fleet fights more interesting as rep will be only one element of the success, instead of being the core element as it is currently.
Furthermore, seeing ships explodes is more fun overall for the large fleet fight player experience, and massed reps prevent that from happening.

When massive DPS is applied and rep does not follow, ships blow up, and suddenly this is all about the management of your DPS application. A fleet that can for example organize to target and destroy 5 ships when the other fleet still do only one shot on one primary will become more efficient.

One of the underlying effect is forcing large blobs to split up their commands into smaller structures, thus making it closer to small gangs warfare. They still have the power of body count and DPS, but would have to be less mindless in their managing of DPS application, as well as rep choices...

Kell Braugh wrote:

Having caps not be able to target things and require a target 'pointer' only makes the power of a blob of alts (now sitting off-grid!) in caps ridiculously powerful.

This is not about fighting the game of alts issue (if even it is an issue). It wont make caps more powerful as they will need a sub cap to point, and if this sub cap is destroyed another one must take its place, requiring coordination within the fleet and multiple interactions. Again, this is akin to my previous argument of forcing smaller combat units to operate within larger blobs.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project

Krops Vont
#14 - 2014-09-18 18:56:29 UTC
Kell Braugh wrote:
Krops Vont wrote:
Simple solution for all of EVE. Make everything have a stacking penalty. Similar to TP's, Damage mods, Station manufacture cost, ect. EVERYTHING.


Including damage? So we all have a civilian gun fit and lock up our gank boats and 'max out' the ability of the other fleet to damage them? Well thought out.

There is a reason why stacking penalties are for fitting of ships and not offensive actions.


Considerate of you to actually reply to this :) But no in reality, you couldn't quite do that with damage (server wise I think it would add another strain). If only though, it would limit capability of blobs Roll

--==Services==--

Propaganda/Art/Media

Wormhole Finding & Selling

o/ Play for fun

Kell Braugh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2014-09-18 18:58:48 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Kell Braugh wrote:
The blob isn't the disease, only a symptom.

this is exactly what im saying, the blob is the symptom, the disease is not having any reason to split up...

lets fix the disease and the symptoms will take care of themselves...

suggestions?


My suggestion would be removing rehauling the holding of sovereignty to not create situations where there is a single point of attack/defending available depending on what rung of the sov. contesting ladder you are on. What that actually looks like is the hardest nut to crack, but some good ideas are floating around.
Kell Braugh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2014-09-18 19:06:21 UTC
Krops Vont wrote:
If only though, it would limit capability of blobs Roll

Even if the server processing was free and they did that, the blobs would just start having multiple target callers, hitting 5-10 ships at a time. This would mean blobs would just bring more logi to keep 5-10 ships alive at a time instead of the 3 or 4 they try to keep alive now, Blobs would get bigger, but more organized and split up.

If one can assume each side only has X amount of pilots they can bring to a battle area (which is questionable itself, but w/e) Then the only balanced way of forcing those blobs to split into manageable groups it to force them into a situation where they need to be deployed simultaneously to multiple objectives.

While this is a nice avenue of thought, the downside is that it is doable if you are one of the major blocs with 2000+ pilots to order around, not if you are a smaller entity with only 200. So really, it doesn't help the underlying issue of the major blocs holding power without contest.
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#17 - 2014-09-18 19:09:55 UTC
Kell Braugh wrote:
Krops Vont wrote:
Simple solution for all of EVE. Make everything have a stacking penalty. Similar to TP's, Damage mods, Station manufacture cost, ect. EVERYTHING.


Including damage? So we all have a civilian gun fit and lock up our gank boats and 'max out' the ability of the other fleet to damage them? Well thought out.

There is a reason why stacking penalties are for fitting of ships and not offensive actions.

agreed, the DPS is the only thing that should not have any stacking penalty, like it is currently in the modules' design.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#18 - 2014-09-18 19:10:30 UTC
You don't directly nerf the blob you strike at the need to have the blob in the first place.
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#19 - 2014-09-18 19:13:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Amyclas Amatin
You do know that there are areas of space with mechanics that encourage small-gang work.

Blobs are a sov-null thing. And come with a level of organisation that can't be seen in any other game besides EVE.

The CFC has better IT infrastructure and bureaucracy than most small and medium sized businesses. One wonders if this is even a game anymore...

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#20 - 2014-09-18 20:10:24 UTC
I don't think there will be a 1 solution fix to n+1 warfare.

1. It's too easy to quickly travel to where the fight is, and quickly redeploy to another threat that might arise somewhere else. This is especially true since most blobfests happen under 10% tidi, which gives everyone else to respond 10x faster then what would normally be possible.

a. By making it take longer from point a to point b, it allows more room for the little guy to try to take a piece of sov. It also would make alliances think twice about deploying their full force on one side of the New Eden, because it could open up an attack on the other side.

b. This would probably help lowsec be more active as well since more people would be willing to commit ships in more dangerous areas with a lower threat to be hot dropped.

2. There are very limited sources of AOE in the game. Most other MMOs have several AOE capabilities for all their classes, and not just restricted to AOE directly next to them that damages friendlies next to them.

a. I do feel that smartbombs are in a pretty good place.

b. The only AOE that is actually projected, takes alot of skill to use. I mean, could you imagine Eve, if everyone had to pan their camera to look at the target they wanted to shoot? At least for this part I would like to see stealthbombers be able to lock their target, and have the bombs travel to the place where the target's trajectory would take them at the time of their launch with a variable time fuse between 5-15 seconds. If the target were to change it's trajectory, the bomb wouldn't know any better then to explode at the predetermined grid coordinate. This could either be introduced by changing the current bombs, or by adding guided bombs that bombers can choose from.

c. I think this would be a horrible idea to implement, but I will still throw this out there. AOE ammo for all weapons. The reason why I think this would be a terrible option would be the load on the server would be 200 times worse if there were two 200 man fleets facing each other, and they were both using fleets were using AOE weapons, and everyone was getting hit by them. And this type of ammo would also be stepping on the toes of the stealthbomber in it's current form.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.

12Next page