These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CFC vs N3

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#81 - 2013-09-20 15:37:40 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Now? 4,000 ships (granted much higher and resource intensive than back then) 14 hour fight, and it's over to the point most groups cannot come back from.

In the game of isk that's awesome.

In a game of battles that's terrible.
That was after 6 or 8 weeks of war, at which point the war was mostly determined (TEST wasn't really contesting timers for some days before that one).
We had a lot of smaller battles, some where Goons won by putting a fleet to guard their onlining objective for half a day.
The 6VDT battle was more than 4000 ships, btw, it was topping at a little over 4000 characters in that system and smaller intermediary fights elsewhere.



Yea my point is with hardware caps and people escalating to ships they cannot afford to lose, they become over committed to try to present a status quo and therefore break themselves.

Unless you're the best at what you do, you'll never beat someone at their own game. You just simply cannot out bully a bully unless you're bigger.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#82 - 2013-09-20 16:29:13 UTC
I find it hilarious how people scream about how the game favors big alliances/coalitions and how timers protect them.

Fact #1: Without timers, sov would quickly become a timezone ping-pong. It would become far more worthless than it is now, since there would be no viable way to hold on to it. No viable way but...

...Cluster the F... up! Form a coalition of multiple alliances that can protect your assets from hostile numbers at any given time. But wait, doesn't this give more power to massive sov blocs like the CFC? Yup. It does. Whom does it hurt? Pretty much every structure/sov-holder that's up against said coalition. Malcanis' law, someone called it.

Thing is, null is a sandbox and in said sandbox a bunch of kids realized that if they quit beating the crap out of each other with plastic shovels and band up, they could build a better sandcastle than the other guys. A coalition is not defended or made easier by the mechanics - it's an effort of many people, from the leadership structures (anyone saying leadership's easy should try herding angry cats.) to line "F1 pushers".

An entity that wants to make an impact on an entity this big should outmatch it in some field. Come up with their own tools to "stick it to the man" rather than beg CCP to make things their way. (Come to think of it, I think I've seen the CFC and null crowd HTFU in general when it came to changes - tech nerf for instance. Hisec people seem to scream for no reason.)

Lastly, CFC vs. N3! Our stealth bombers will blot out the suuun!

...unless our blops runs out of fuel, or misjumps and gets ganked.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#83 - 2013-09-20 16:41:28 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I am really hoping the consolidation continues, until there is indeed only one blue blob.
That way, CCP may actually have to address the utterly failed mechanics that allow for the current state we have.


... like they did for Serenity One Blob?


I am hoping that CCP treats TQ differently than Serenity.

I can't speak to what CCP has in mind for the Chinese business model for Serenity from CCP's side (other than get as many subs as possible), but it is pretty clear what business model the "players" running the cartels on Serenity are all about. And clearly, there is a group on TQ that want to emulate that.

Whether CCP believes that the mindset of the player base on TQ, for the most part, is different than the Chinese player base on Serenity, remains to be seen. And if they do believe it, whether they will act on it to provide game mechanics to avoid TQ ending up like Serenity, also remains to be seen.
Leigh Akiga
Kuhri Innovations
#84 - 2013-09-20 16:53:50 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Whether CCP believes that the mindset of the player base on TQ, for the most part, is different than the Chinese player base on Serenity, remains to be seen


Well its a good thing then that CCP meets with and hangs out and communicates with the players to understand that mindset
Ka'Narlist
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#85 - 2013-09-20 18:54:53 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Now? 4,000 ships (granted much higher and resource intensive than back then) 14 hour fight, and it's over to the point most groups cannot come back from.

In the game of isk that's awesome.

In a game of battles that's terrible.
That was after 6 or 8 weeks of war, at which point the war was mostly determined (TEST wasn't really contesting timers for some days before that one).
We had a lot of smaller battles, some where Goons won by putting a fleet to guard their onlining objective for half a day.
The 6VDT battle was more than 4000 ships, btw, it was topping at a little over 4000 characters in that system and smaller intermediary fights elsewhere.



Yea my point is with hardware caps and people escalating to ships they cannot afford to lose, they become over committed to try to present a status quo and therefore break themselves.

Unless you're the best at what you do, you'll never beat someone at their own game. You just simply cannot out bully a bully unless you're bigger.

You really have no clue what you are talking about (like a lot of other people here). Maybe its not the best idea to base all your negative opinions on stuff you read on en24 or tmc but never have expirienced yourself Roll
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#86 - 2013-09-20 19:13:58 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Ka'Narlist wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Now? 4,000 ships (granted much higher and resource intensive than back then) 14 hour fight, and it's over to the point most groups cannot come back from.

In the game of isk that's awesome.

In a game of battles that's terrible.
That was after 6 or 8 weeks of war, at which point the war was mostly determined (TEST wasn't really contesting timers for some days before that one).
We had a lot of smaller battles, some where Goons won by putting a fleet to guard their onlining objective for half a day.
The 6VDT battle was more than 4000 ships, btw, it was topping at a little over 4000 characters in that system and smaller intermediary fights elsewhere.



Yea my point is with hardware caps and people escalating to ships they cannot afford to lose, they become over committed to try to present a status quo and therefore break themselves.

Unless you're the best at what you do, you'll never beat someone at their own game. You just simply cannot out bully a bully unless you're bigger.

You really have no clue what you are talking about (like a lot of other people here). Maybe its not the best idea to base all your negative opinions on stuff you read on en24 or tmc but never have expirienced yourself Roll



Pardon?

All my negative opinions? What on earth are you talking about? This is a game about numbers and how quantity has its own quality.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

Sorry you feel that reading is a terrible trait. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#87 - 2013-09-20 19:33:33 UTC
Trii Seo wrote:

An entity that wants to make an impact on an entity this big should outmatch it in some field. Come up with their own tools to "stick it to the man" rather than beg CCP to make things their way.


You'd think that would be common sense, but it's not. Like I said, lots of people prefer to externalize problems and failures rather than seek solutions (they don't want solutions anyways, they want hand outs). For many, it's easier to ask for help rather than to excert effort on a plan that might fail.

A banded together high sec could wipe out CFC in a week. Of course the high sec people would scream "what would we do it with, rifters?".

To which I'd respond "maybe start with those 60 bil isk mission runners and work your way down to those 5 bil isk incursion boats"..........

Quote:

(Come to think of it, I think I've seen the CFC and null crowd HTFU in general when it came to changes - tech nerf for instance. Hisec people seem to scream for no reason.)


People who "live" in null, low and WH space are the types to combat problems in the 1st place already, while the typical high se conly player is the type of person who feels that they cando little but shake their fist at the "evil" people while telling CCP how they'd get so many more subs if they did something about those evil people.
Khadi Nakrar
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#88 - 2013-09-20 20:01:13 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Not for a while. We'd win too fast if we did it now. :D


I really doubt SMA will have much to do with it, bringing 2 bombers to a BS fleet doesnt do much
Rekon X
Doomheim
#89 - 2013-09-20 20:21:18 UTC
Goons aren't going to attack anyone, their to busy with their "don't attack us and we won't attack you".

Definition of goon - a stupid person Those who can do, those who can't spew
Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#90 - 2013-09-20 21:13:09 UTC
Quickly, someone silence him! He knows about the nuts! We must make sure our secret motive for attack isn't revealed, or the enemy will know what to protect!

Also wow, Harry Forever is still around. I haven't seen him around VFK despite visiting lately, is he still running his "death2cynos" campaign of carnage?

Also, I must be getting confused. I was under the impression that the CFC invades regions to gain control of their resources and the recent assault on Fountain followed up by taking Delve was merely a result of the great Tech Nerf. Have we actually invaded a region on a "Nice region, we'll take it" basis?

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#91 - 2013-09-20 21:16:29 UTC
Leigh Akiga wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Whether CCP believes that the mindset of the player base on TQ, for the most part, is different than the Chinese player base on Serenity, remains to be seen


Well its a good thing then that CCP meets with and hangs out and communicates with the players to understand that mindset


You mean the group that supposedly represents a true cross-section of the player base?
What group would that be?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#92 - 2013-09-20 21:22:56 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Leigh Akiga wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Whether CCP believes that the mindset of the player base on TQ, for the most part, is different than the Chinese player base on Serenity, remains to be seen


Well its a good thing then that CCP meets with and hangs out and communicates with the players to understand that mindset


You mean the group that supposedly represents a true cross-section of the player base?
What group would that be?


The group that the supposed high sec majority couldn't be arsed to vote for even after CCP jury rigged voting in their favor...
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2013-09-21 04:03:28 UTC
Trii Seo wrote:
I find it hilarious how people scream about how the game favors big alliances/coalitions and how timers protect them.

Fact #1: Without timers, sov would quickly become a timezone ping-pong. It would become far more worthless than it is now, since there would be no viable way to hold on to it. No viable way but...

...Cluster the F... up! Form a coalition of multiple alliances that can protect your assets from hostile numbers at any given time. But wait, doesn't this give more power to massive sov blocs like the CFC? Yup. It does. Whom does it hurt? Pretty much every structure/sov-holder that's up against said coalition. Malcanis' law, someone called it.

Thing is, null is a sandbox and in said sandbox a bunch of kids realized that if they quit beating the crap out of each other with plastic shovels and band up, they could build a better sandcastle than the other guys. A coalition is not defended or made easier by the mechanics - it's an effort of many people, from the leadership structures (anyone saying leadership's easy should try herding angry cats.) to line "F1 pushers".

An entity that wants to make an impact on an entity this big should outmatch it in some field. Come up with their own tools to "stick it to the man" rather than beg CCP to make things their way. (Come to think of it, I think I've seen the CFC and null crowd HTFU in general when it came to changes - tech nerf for instance. Hisec people seem to scream for no reason.)

Lastly, CFC vs. N3! Our stealth bombers will blot out the suuun!

...unless our blops runs out of fuel, or misjumps and gets ganked.

Lol this is just some sort of romantic propaganda about how brave nullseccers risk life and limb to establish a foothold in space and bla bla bla.

If sov space didn't have timers or timers were mitigated by other changes then you would get sov ping pong, which means sov fights. Whats wrong with fights. That's how wars go, you take ground, you take casualties, you win grounds and cause casualties. You wear your opponent out.

When was there ever a battle where the objective was attacked, the attacker had to then wait 24 hours while they were winning, for the defender to reinforce themselves because the objective became invulnerable lol. Its ********.

And peace is useful, it allows resource collection so I'm sure if you were smart and:

* instead of taking as much space as you could, you took space strategically, so that it is defensible you could prevent a lot of ping ponging. If you made allies and those allies were available to help defend your space and vice versa, I'm sure it could be defensible.

What the alliances want and enjoy is immunity from any threat that is smaller than they are. And that's currently what they enjoy. Knowing that no smaller entity can hurt them because timers allow them to muster their entire force with 24 hours warning to crush that smaller player bloc.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
KuroVolt
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2013-09-21 04:07:35 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Trii Seo wrote:
I find it hilarious how people scream about how the game favors big alliances/coalitions and how timers protect them.

Fact #1: Without timers, sov would quickly become a timezone ping-pong. It would become far more worthless than it is now, since there would be no viable way to hold on to it. No viable way but...

...Cluster the F... up! Form a coalition of multiple alliances that can protect your assets from hostile numbers at any given time. But wait, doesn't this give more power to massive sov blocs like the CFC? Yup. It does. Whom does it hurt? Pretty much every structure/sov-holder that's up against said coalition. Malcanis' law, someone called it.

Thing is, null is a sandbox and in said sandbox a bunch of kids realized that if they quit beating the crap out of each other with plastic shovels and band up, they could build a better sandcastle than the other guys. A coalition is not defended or made easier by the mechanics - it's an effort of many people, from the leadership structures (anyone saying leadership's easy should try herding angry cats.) to line "F1 pushers".

An entity that wants to make an impact on an entity this big should outmatch it in some field. Come up with their own tools to "stick it to the man" rather than beg CCP to make things their way. (Come to think of it, I think I've seen the CFC and null crowd HTFU in general when it came to changes - tech nerf for instance. Hisec people seem to scream for no reason.)

Lastly, CFC vs. N3! Our stealth bombers will blot out the suuun!

...unless our blops runs out of fuel, or misjumps and gets ganked.

Lol this is just some sort of romantic propaganda about how brave nullseccers risk life and limb to establish a foothold in space and bla bla bla.

If sov space didn't have timers or timers were mitigated by other changes then you would get sov ping pong, which means sov fights. Whats wrong with fights. That's how wars go, you take ground, you take casualties, you win grounds and cause casualties. You wear your opponent out.

When was there ever a battle where the objective was attacked, the attacker had to then wait 24 hours while they were winning, for the defender to reinforce themselves because the objective became invulnerable lol. Its ********.

And peace is useful, it allows resource collection so I'm sure if you were smart and:

* instead of taking as much space as you could, you took space strategically, so that it is defensible you could prevent a lot of ping ponging. If you made allies and those allies were available to help defend your space and vice versa, I'm sure it could be defensible.

What the alliances want and enjoy is immunity from any threat that is smaller than they are. And that's currently what they enjoy. Knowing that no smaller entity can hurt them because timers allow them to muster their entire force with 24 hours warning to crush that smaller player bloc.



Soooooooooo...How do you explain all the alliances that have been around as sov holders since before Dominion?

BoBwins Law: As a discussion/war between two large nullsec entities grows longer, the probability of one comparing the other to BoB aproaches near certainty.
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#95 - 2013-09-21 04:14:11 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
What the alliances want and enjoy is immunity from any threat that is smaller than they are. And that's currently what they enjoy. Knowing that no smaller entity can hurt them because timers allow them to muster their entire force with 24 hours warning to crush that smaller player bloc.


You could have typed "Nerf making friends" and saved yourself a lot of time.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#96 - 2013-09-21 04:18:26 UTC
sov ping pong withour timers isn't fights

it's groups of supercaps burning down structures and leaving, then the other side does that at some point as well

the only fighting is against structures


and then we realize it's pointless to bother

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#97 - 2013-09-21 04:21:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Varius Xeral
Rhes wrote:
You could have typed "Nerf making friends" and saved yourself a lot of time.


"Make nullsec an even less desirable place to bother trying to live" would be even more appropriate and comprehensive.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#98 - 2013-09-21 04:34:42 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:


If sov space didn't have timers or timers were mitigated by other changes then you would get sov ping pong, which means sov fights. Whats wrong with fights. That's how wars go, you take ground, you take casualties, you win grounds and cause casualties. You wear your opponent out.

When was there ever a battle where the objective was attacked, the attacker had to then wait 24 hours while they were winning, for the defender to reinforce themselves because the objective became invulnerable lol. Its ********.

And peace is useful, it allows resource collection so I'm sure if you were smart and:

* instead of taking as much space as you could, you took space strategically, so that it is defensible you could prevent a lot of ping ponging. If you made allies and those allies were available to help defend your space and vice versa, I'm sure it could be defensible.

What the alliances want and enjoy is immunity from any threat that is smaller than they are. And that's currently what they enjoy. Knowing that no smaller entity can hurt them because timers allow them to muster their entire force with 24 hours warning to crush that smaller player bloc.


That was how warhammer online worked and it was terrible. And no it actually doesn't make fights, it makes fleets fly past each other to go cap whatever flag it is. I can remember how hilariously the playerbase either logged the side that was winning, rode past each other with nary a skirmish or circled the contested map the same way to ensure that neither army would touch.

and that was on servers that naturally compressed the playerbase into the same timezone...
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#99 - 2013-09-21 05:04:22 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
sov ping pong withour timers isn't fights

it's groups of supercaps burning down structures and leaving, then the other side does that at some point as well

the only fighting is against structures


and then we realize it's pointless to bother

Ever thought of killing the supers burning down the structures?

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#100 - 2013-09-21 05:07:49 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Ever thought of killing the supers burning down the structures?


Wait, wait, wait, I thought this was supposed to benefit smaller alliances? You do know how scap warfare works, right?

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal