These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Removing the titan bridge. A solution to many problems?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Minty Moon
#1 - 2012-12-02 04:24:17 UTC
No tl:dr version. Read the whole thing before making assumptions about whats stated here :)


So I was reading the EvEnews 24 article and reading about the titan bridge removal and why said person thought removing it was a good idea.

And like with many i've been on both sides of the titan bridge.

But it got me thinking.

That maybe that module is too over powered for null sec. In that it makes it a much smaller space. To send a fleet of a thousand anywhere within 8ly past every gate and every bubble, every obstacle of defense in an instance. And this can be done with the titan safely behind a POS shield no less as well.

But just think about the problems that have been discussed in null that everyone is desperate to fix.
AFK cloakies and smaller alliances unable to get a foothold in null and large power blocks controlling massive regions they should not be able to control with their numbers. To name a few.

AFK cloakies are just about a 0 threat. It's the fact they are linked with a titan bridge that makes them lethal and gives them power to shut down a system 24/7. No bridge less threat. They can still afk cloak all they want. But if they want a target they have to roam up to the pipe to engage and not just magically appear when they feel like it. And if they want to shut down a system they have to have the whole fleet in and do it. Which can be done and i've seen it done and been a victim of that style as well. And I approve of that. A hostile entity actively engaging in economical warfare against a system instead of passive economic warfare. Which does the same thing except they don't need to be their if they have a titan. They don't need to be exposed or threatened. They hide in the safety of a far off POS waiting for a vulnerability instead of engaging and pursuing.
Well many say "Well organize and fight back"
Though going into the second issue i mentioned small alliances having difficulty establishing an independent foothold in null. It becomes significantly harder to fight back. As instead of being able to thin them out at the gate, using defensive measures like anchorable bubbles, intel down the pipe, other hostiles picking off the agressing fleet. The 2 entities are merely "spawned" together into the single conflict system
Sure skilled enough small gang can take on large blobs I do not deny that and i've seen it done many times by veterans. But how many newer pilots are getting that training and experience now a days with bridged warfare?
It seems a strange concept to me that the invading army skips the tedious part of invasion...the trek to the warzone. Which in wars even in eve has a psychological toll on the fighters that can fundamentally change the outcome of the battle.
And pilots can safely stage themselves well out of the hotzone or even hot region. As fighter can be bridged in in blobs and support one after another. Removing defensive factors like gate camps to catch straggling reinforcements. Gate camps in SOV warfare now a days mostly amount to catching whats left from the fallen fleet. Catching pods and the solo ships that decide to not just log after the battle. just vultures picking up scraps rather then actively engaged in creating a complex fighting environment.
In addition to SOV warfare being more boring than it should be from this simple module
Roaming becomes potentially more boring as well as well as the risk being significantly reduced. What point is it for Small alliances to take over strategic points in a region. Setting up strategic JB's for defense and response within their territory. Bubbles to slow enemy movement. When a single cloaky can fly through everything and cyno in the entire fleet. Bypassing every strategic defense the SOV owning alliance should have to defend itself. The only defense becomes timers and docking up to deal with amounts to truly unknown numbers. Even in wh space the purest form of unknown. You have dscan to alert you of probes and ships moving through a hole catching them on scan a moment before they can cloak back up.
Removal would also force alliances to consider the possibility of stretching themselves too thin. Having to allocate resources to certain areas as the ability to instantly spawn and traverse strategically across the universe in mass would be removed.



(Player Opened Direct Wormholes) (Expanding on Wormholes)
Minty Moon
#2 - 2012-12-02 04:24:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Minty Moon
Though what becomes of the titan if you take its bridge away? That is after all, all it's used for now a days.
I would imagine the ship be re purposed. Either be expanded as a combat ship perhaps a carrier and dread booster of sorts? Giving carriers extra fighters, boosting triage and siege modes or perhaps other unique abilities that would make the ship applicable to be used within a large scale battle.
or be re-assigned as a sov warfare assistance vessel. Giving bonus's to defending space against sov attackers. I.E. increases structure resistances, or boost POS guns damage. Or if being used to take sov, penalize structure resistances or something not sure on that part.
Vague notions yes, but I think the Titan should stay a pinnacle of triumph for large alliance to own one and should remain within dealing with SOV warfare in some way. Just the way it is used now I believe is actually ruining SOV war.


Though if it becomes impossible to remove, that its too ingrained into the game and the loss of such a feature would topple alliances. Perhaps a few small changes to the titan bridge?
Max allotted pilots per a jump. With a set cool down time between activations.
Force the titan to enter into a form of siege mode that must be done outside a POS shield. Leaving the ship vulnerable during activation time. Beyond what it has at the moment. Being immobile for 60seconds in a POS shield is really no big deal at all :p

I imagine the original concept thought up by ccp that a titan would bridge in a fleet along with its self do battle alongside the fleet and then jump everyone including its self out. But as we can see its been exploited and sits mainly behind protected shields safely launching massive waves into the battlefield

As for people complaining that removing players ability to instantly move across large expanses of the universe in no time is crucial to keep players interested in war. I feel you neglect the player owned JB too much. Capturing strategic systems in your reach defending them and installing these can cut invasion times greatly and is how an invasion should be run and is more realistic. As well as creates a vulnerability for moving your troops.

(Player Opened Direct Wormholes) (Expanding on Wormholes)
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#3 - 2012-12-02 12:33:25 UTC
I read that article too but I didn't agree with his assessment that the bridge in and of itself is a problem. Burning around nullsec to the battleground sounds more sexy than it is. Back in the day, the endless burning back and forth to the battle zone was a drag. The bridge fixes this and speeds up game play.

The main problem with the bridge, if there is one, is that the fleet can wait safely inside the POS shields for a bridge so there is no real opportunity for a counter attack or any kind of harassment that could tilt the odds in the favor of the defenders. The solution to this is simple. Don't allow the bridge to be opened within a certain distance of an anchored structure, say 50km. That would complicate matters for the waiting fleet and open up possibilities for the defenders to choose between multiple options for defense.

T-
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#4 - 2012-12-02 16:57:23 UTC
Quote:
Removing the titan bridge. A solution to many problems?

Yes. Such a crappy concept should have never been implemented in the first place.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#5 - 2012-12-02 17:21:42 UTC
While I'm not going to agree to it's complete removal, maybe new limitations should be implemented.

Like Tinu Moorhsum said, maybe they should make it so you cannot use them within a certain distance of anchored structures. After all, they seem to think the use of fleet boosting from POS shields is not OK.

Also they could cap the amount of ship allowed through, much like wormholes.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Minty Moon
#6 - 2012-12-02 22:16:40 UTC
Tinu Moorhsum wrote:
I read that article too but I didn't agree with his assessment that the bridge in and of itself is a problem. Burning around nullsec to the battleground sounds more sexy than it is. Back in the day, the endless burning back and forth to the battle zone was a drag. The bridge fixes this and speeds up game play.

The main problem with the bridge, if there is one, is that the fleet can wait safely inside the POS shields for a bridge so there is no real opportunity for a counter attack or any kind of harassment that could tilt the odds in the favor of the defenders. The solution to this is simple. Don't allow the bridge to be opened within a certain distance of an anchored structure, say 50km. That would complicate matters for the waiting fleet and open up possibilities for the defenders to choose between multiple options for defense.

T-



In the last war I was in, we actually rarely were titan jumped into a battlfield and personally I never thought the burn was that bad. Oft times battles were waged near the borders. With good alliances resetting up their JB network to allow others farther out to burn quickly to the staging systems as well battegrounds. The burn only became longer as the oppossing forces campaign progressed taking out strategic systems and camping JB gates between systems. Forcing the fleet to use long routes.

I would imagine that "drag" would force leaders to rethink staging systems and how they fight the war. Either risking you closer to keep the mental drag down, or stage you farther but safer and risk losing pilots to the war.

Though I can respect trying to remove tedium from the fun activities of the game. But heres another idea I just thought of.
What if to use the titan bridge instead of using a cyno to bridge them in. You must use 2 titans?
The ability to span and instantly deploy your forces strategically to any system still remains for those that gain that power(though obvious limitations of removing its ability to deploy behind POS shields or near shields)
But no longer can massive alliances merely deploy a noob ship to light a cyno to bridge in hundreds. Only essentially risking a few million isk to change the course of the battle. Now they must risk something vital and have the support to back it up and protect it.

But what is does come down to, like with any debate in eve is Risk V Reward. And titan bridging there is no risk, but chances for massive rewards. At most like I said they can risk cheap stealth bombers, or even free noob ships to light cyno's and instantly send an attacking force anywhere. If their cyno ship gets popped, the fleet doesnt even bat an eye at the loss and can deploy an virtually endless amount till one succeeds (which isnt hard to succeed at all).

I would still say change the Titan so having an alliance that can only obtain one still has some strategic use out of it some way. But if they obtain 2 either by themselves or through a coalition they now have a powerful means to deploy, but to deploy must come with adequate risk. Which at the moment essentially comes to just about 0 risk. In fact if i'm not mistaken the biggest threat to a titan atm is merely being bumped out of a POS shield when bridging its forces Roll

(Player Opened Direct Wormholes) (Expanding on Wormholes)
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#7 - 2012-12-03 05:09:34 UTC
A decent JB network, as you say, really does help with force projection and rapid response. When in Delve, we could get down to Querious and Khanid lowsec in as little as 10 jumps. We could get titan bridged in one go.

Are Titan bridges ruining nullsec? not sure. Are they contributing to the CFC / HBC swallowing up all of EVE? Yes. Is nerfing Titan bridges going to change it? No. Not anymore. Even if Titan bridges were removed tomorrow, it wouldn't stop the juggernaut from swallowing all of Null within a year or two. It would just make them use JB networks more.

On the other hand, Titan bridging in lowsec...it's all about the ganks.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~