These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Countering Titan Bridges - EVESP

First post
Author
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#41 - 2012-12-12 01:10:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Mutnin
X Gallentius wrote:
If you can't build it in low sec, then you shouldn't be able to field it in low sec.



In a perfect world this would be true, of course it will never happen. Maybe a better option would create a risk vs reward factor for Titian bridges. Right now there is little to no risk for the fleets that are bridged other than being counter dropped which is unlikely to happen given how fast an entire fleet can be bridged on some unsuspecting small gang with just a few ships.

I watched your buddies from DnD bridge on a carrier one night in Kinakka and the carrier was dead in under 30 or 40 seconds. Meaning there is little to no time for a counter in how Titian bridges are often used in low sec.

I'm sure in CCP's grand scheme they intended these ships to bridge gangs into ongoing battles and not just used as gank toys for risk adverse PVP in low sec.

One solution that might allow a bit of a nerf and add at least a minor amount of "risk" would be to make any ship that uses the Titian's bridge zero out it's capacitor when it uses that bridge. This still allows a wow or surprise advantage, but also adds a bit of risk into the mix as the bridged fleet will have a few moments where they needed to regain their ship's cap in order to fight.

I don't think Titian's are totally out of place in EVE but they have become far to common when just about anyone can get them and bridge on top of anything with little concern of risking much of anything. It should also cost a hell of a lot more for the fuel. Say 50-100 mil per bridge use. Meaning it should be a notable cost, which could act as a determent in it's own right to being overly spammy with bridging.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#42 - 2012-12-12 10:49:41 UTC
Mutnin wrote:


I watched your buddies from DnD bridge on a carrier one night in Kinakka and the carrier was dead in under 30 or 40 seconds. Meaning there is little to no time for a counter in how Titian bridges are often used in low sec.


Well, we had dreads on field for 5 minutes, and a cyno up for 10.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13775106
SAJUK NIGARRA
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2012-12-12 13:22:58 UTC  |  Edited by: SAJUK NIGARRA
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Mutnin wrote:


I watched your buddies from DnD bridge on a carrier one night in Kinakka and the carrier was dead in under 30 or 40 seconds. Meaning there is little to no time for a counter in how Titian bridges are often used in low sec.


Well, we had dreads on field for 5 minutes, and a cyno up for 10.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13775106



Also it's the dreads that killed the carrier, so even with no titan bridging the carrier would've still been dead, just that we wouldn't have had subcap support for the dreads in case things went **** up. So yeah, maybe they should nerf caps jumping to cynos too. Generally they should nerf anything above BC.

Also I find it hillarious that someone that doesn't undock ships costing more than 100 mil calls an alliance putting fleets worth 100+ bil in space risk adverse.
Princess Nexxala
Zero Syndicate
#44 - 2012-12-12 16:34:16 UTC
SOTF is a lot of things P, but they are NOT risk adverse, I've rolled with them and the amount isk they field is fairly sick and they wont hesitate to deploy that isk against even or greater odds. And we all do ganks, its how most of us fill the gaps between the gudfites.

Mutnin wrote:

I'm sure in CCP's grand scheme they intended these ships to bridge gangs into ongoing battles and not just used as gank toys for risk adverse PVP in low sec.

nom nom

Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2012-12-12 17:58:52 UTC
Mutnin wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
If you can't build it in low sec, then you shouldn't be able to field it in low sec.



In a perfect world this would be true, of course it will never happen. Maybe a better option would create a risk vs reward factor for Titian bridges. Right now there is little to no risk for the fleets that are bridged other than being counter dropped which is unlikely to happen given how fast an entire fleet can be bridged on some unsuspecting small gang with just a few ships.

I watched your buddies from DnD bridge on a carrier one night in Kinakka and the carrier was dead in under 30 or 40 seconds. Meaning there is little to no time for a counter in how Titian bridges are often used in low sec.

I'm sure in CCP's grand scheme they intended these ships to bridge gangs into ongoing battles and not just used as gank toys for risk adverse PVP in low sec.

One solution that might allow a bit of a nerf and add at least a minor amount of "risk" would be to make any ship that uses the Titian's bridge zero out it's capacitor when it uses that bridge. This still allows a wow or surprise advantage, but also adds a bit of risk into the mix as the bridged fleet will have a few moments where they needed to regain their ship's cap in order to fight.

I don't think Titian's are totally out of place in EVE but they have become far to common when just about anyone can get them and bridge on top of anything with little concern of risking much of anything. It should also cost a hell of a lot more for the fuel. Say 50-100 mil per bridge use. Meaning it should be a notable cost, which could act as a determent in it's own right to being overly spammy with bridging.


Increasing fuel cost won't do anything. The problem is really one of force projection being too great for those with Titan(s). The way to fix it is straight forward, but it vastly effects null sec coalitions so it won't happen.

Here is the fix:

You need to introduce two new variables that need to be checked whenever a pilot makes a cyno jump, is bridged, or uses a jump bridge. The first is new timer called the "cyno jump timer". This timer is similar to the jump clone timer, but its only an hour or two. The second is simply the "last system jumped from". Whenver a pilot jumps to a cyno beacon, uses a titan bridge, or uses a jump bridge the system first checks the "cyno jump timer". If the timer is 0, then jump according to existing rules and then set the "cyno jump timer" to 1-2 hours and set the "last system jumped from" to this system. If the timer is not 0, then check the distance in AU between the destination system and the "last system jumped from". If the distance is greater than 15AU you cannot jump or bridge.

At this point, you effectively limit the sphere of influece of a single pilot to a 30AU diameter. They can control that area of space, but cannot go outside that area unless they give up the ability to protect that space for a few hours. At this point we will no longer have entities running around the universe ganking stuff for ***** aand giggles unless they have the pilots to perform multiple operations at once.

Problem solved. If you get dropped from here on out, it is because somebody bigger and better than you has moved into your area of space.

.

Sheynan
Lighting the blight
#46 - 2012-12-12 18:18:42 UTC
The most glaring issue I see with titan bridges is that a small-medium sized gang is rarely able to kill the cyno ship in time before a substantial amount of enemies has jumped through.

Therefor the cyno should have a reasonable delay timer. Ships can only start jumping after the timer is over.
This would require a stronger presence (and thus risk) on the battlefield for the titandropping group to support the cyno (or several) and let them survive until the bridge opens, but also keep tackle on the enemy fleet that might use these precious seconds to escape.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#47 - 2012-12-13 11:53:49 UTC
The only thing still surprising is the fact how some still defend current cyno mechanics, suitable for ganktards only. Simply amazing.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Frozen Eddie Johnson
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#48 - 2012-12-14 00:58:01 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
The only thing still surprising is the fact how some still defend current cyno mechanics, suitable for ganktards only. Simply amazing.



Two thirds of the posters in this thread are from the alliance whose entire meaning of existance seems to be to abuse this mechanic, so its not all that surprising.
Dread Operative
Main Corporation
Prisoners With Jobs
#49 - 2012-12-14 01:50:29 UTC
Frozen Eddie Johnson wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
The only thing still surprising is the fact how some still defend current cyno mechanics, suitable for ganktards only. Simply amazing.



Two thirds of the posters in this thread are from the alliance whose entire meaning of existance seems to be to abuse this mechanic, so its not all that surprising.


You mad bro? You seem mad bro.
Dibblerette
Solitude-Industries
#50 - 2012-12-14 08:11:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Dibblerette
Dread Operative wrote:
Frozen Eddie Johnson wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
The only thing still surprising is the fact how some still defend current cyno mechanics, suitable for ganktards only. Simply amazing.



Two thirds of the posters in this thread are from the alliance whose entire meaning of existance seems to be to abuse this mechanic, so its not all that surprising.


You mad bro? You seem mad bro.


This is why we can't have nice things.

Honestly, I do think capitals, cynos and bridges need a look as a whole. I don't claim to be creative enough to come up with an alternate system, but I'm sure we can all agree to hate on whatever CCP decides to change. Whatever the case, being able to circumvent traditional paths via titan in a region where the only other method of doing so is your own titan, cloakies with a Black Ops BS, or an incredibly lucky wormhole, is a very powerful tool.

Hell, if it's powerful in nullsec where you can do something about it, and it's possible to field a lesser but fuctionally similar variant (jumpbridges) of your own, it might need a little balancing in a region where you can only try to mitigate damage after the deed is done.

On a side note, one fun idea I heard was that a titan bridge should turn the target cyno into a sort of wormhole. This would force the bridged force to defend until the cyno spooled down (generally what they already do, but only really afraid of enemy capitals/BS), in case some plucky ceptor pilot charges back through the hole and pops another cyno on the titan. Maybe this only works this way in lowsec, and 0.0 remains the same.
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#51 - 2012-12-14 10:49:48 UTC
> Reduce the bridge range
> Ships inside a FF cannot jump, bridge or be bridged
> the timer proposition sounds interesting too

Tada !

I'm curious what will happen with the forcefield-less POS that are coming next year.

I like how the titan-hugger are claiming that titan-bridging is fine (it's okay dude, me too I hug a titan sometimes). Please tell me how many bridge-titan died in EVE ? A very few. All of them died due to a pilot mistake (jumping instead of bridging like Progod "Darwin award" Legend, and some bumped out of the FF because the password was leaked).

As long as the titan itself is not at risk, bridging will stay an overpowered, unfunny tool. And any 'tard claiming that "the staging POS can be destroyed !1!!!!!" is just a troll knowing that a large tower is a pity to be destroyed, is very cheap and the titan will always escape.

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#52 - 2012-12-14 11:38:15 UTC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7AOyDFzzng

Probably one of the best fights ive been in was facilitated by titan bridges.

All parties will have had eyes on each others titans and they were simply used to get the fight started and keep it going.

If you keep falling for cyno bait, consider that a lesson in situational awareness. I know a guy who lost 6bn isk to a cov ops cyno the yesterday. Black Ops can bridge out of high sec, should they be nerfed too?

All this talk of nerfing bridges is highly partisan. Namely, the parties without them want them nerfed lol.
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#53 - 2012-12-14 11:40:37 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Namely, the parties without them want them nerfed lol.
Got the toy, still think it's bad for the game.

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#54 - 2012-12-14 11:54:07 UTC
Reppyk wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Namely, the parties without them want them nerfed lol.
Got the toy, still think it's bad for the game.


I dont think you can speak for a significant fraction of bridge users.
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#55 - 2012-12-14 12:13:59 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
I dont think you can speak for a significant fraction of bridge users.
At least I can speak for the last 4 lowsec regions where I lived and saw a huge decrease in the number of roaming gangs, as everything became more and more blob-hotdropped...

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !

Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#56 - 2012-12-14 13:23:54 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:

If you keep falling for cyno bait, consider that a lesson in situational awareness. I know a guy who lost 6bn isk to a cov ops cyno the yesterday. Black Ops can bridge out of high sec, should they be nerfed too?

Black Ops? Likely, no. Ganktarded cyno mechanics? Hell, yeah!

Speaking of huge slug-fests which became possible solely (?) cause of bridges. The very damn point is in limiting ganktarded cynoes for ganks while leaving them pretty much as-is for blobs, in which they are - suprise, suprise - fine already. This can be done via multiple ways, including those I mentioned during my CSM campaign. For instance, it's surely possible to separate cyno generators into severtal groups and make the most blobby one (of little to no delay/penalties) applicable only to POS environment (making it impossible to activate it if POS is not present in the grid). If you want to lit cynoes at gates and shoot fish in the barrel, then sucks to be you - your new cyno will have a significant spool-up timer and/or will impose some penalties onto ships jumping through it.

It's really very simple, the only thing lacking is mere WILL.

CCP is not into small-scale PvP all that much (recent event proves their scale of combat is very blobtastic) and thus they show little desire to change things outside of blob environment.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Torijace
The Upside Down
#57 - 2012-12-14 18:18:29 UTC
I like the idea of a wormhole generator that generates an opening in both directions, It could allow for some pretty awesome fights on poses. Also why do titans need to bridge inside pos shields? seems like a strange mod to be allowed to activate in complete safety
Tekitha
Esshulls Retirement Club
#58 - 2012-12-14 18:40:24 UTC
Torijace wrote:
. Also why do titans need to bridge inside pos shields? seems like a strange mod to be allowed to activate in complete safety


Because the alternative is losing a 120billion isk ship everytime you try and use it. Every single lowsec bridging Titan is watchlisted by 100s of pilots, even moving one (whereby it's vulnerable for ~1 minute) is pretty risky business.

There are just too many clueless people posting in this thread for it to be constructive. I will say this tho, pretty much all the people posting about nerfing bridging in here are the kind of playrs that prefer small ships and small gangs, well guess what? ... Titans barely affect your playstyle, so why even bother worrying about it. I could even turn this around and say "it's too easy for BC and below to escape the field before the bridged ships can even load grid QQ. Triple align times and make grid loading faster please so I can bridge more destroyer gangs, kkthnx"
Tekitha
Esshulls Retirement Club
#59 - 2012-12-14 18:50:34 UTC
Dibblerette wrote:


On a side note, one fun idea I heard was that a titan bridge should turn the target cyno into a sort of wormhole. This would force the bridged force to defend until the cyno spooled down (generally what they already do, but only really afraid of enemy capitals/BS), in case some plucky ceptor pilot charges back through the hole and pops another cyno on the titan. Maybe this only works this way in lowsec, and 0.0 remains the same.


Are you suggesting the wormhole puts ships back into the pos (whereby hostile ships will be ejected immediately) or outside the pos (whereby they will be ripped apart by pos defenses), either way, thanks for the free extraction .. +1 for this idea.
islador
Antigen.
#60 - 2012-12-14 19:12:21 UTC
OP here, this thread was the result of research into countering titan bridges.

When DnD moved into Aridia they seemed like a great bunch to fight, but they relied heavily on titan bridges. Titan bridging gives the bridgers the initiative in a fight compared to non-bridgers. That ultimately means that no matter how aggressive or foolhardy a titan bridging force may be, they always engage on their own terms.

Fighting on your opponent's terms is the best way to welp a fleet, so I went looking for ways to counter DnD's bridges. If I could fight on my terms rather then on theirs I might be able to leverage faster ships and superior numbers to have a chance against their heavy-buffer triage doctrine. I was surprised to find that no such counters existed in lowsec. So I wrote up my findings and posted them for all to see.

I never intended to propose a change or fix, or even argue that bridges are broken or bad for the game. I even went so far as to say that I respect DnD for their tactics, and I do. All I wanted was to raise awareness, so thank you, especially to the trolls, you guys bring comedy to an otherwise bland thread.