These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[November] Rorqual Changes

First post First post First post
Author
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#501 - 2016-11-29 23:23:02 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:

If you don't have friends who can support you, don't Siege your Rorqual. Just fit a Higgs Anchor to it and mine aligned out of Siege. Or just use an Orca.

5 Excavators, unsieged, mine 4,787 m3 per minute
5 T2 drones with T2 Core mine 4,000 m3 per minute

2 MLU Hulk with unsieged burst mines 3,121 m3 per minute
2 MLU Hulk with T2 Core burst mines 4,081 m3 per minute

3MLU Hulk with unsieged burst mines 3,401 m3 per minute
3MLU Hulk with T2 Core burst mines 4,447 m3 per minute

Something something cheap fit platinum insurance bunch of barges, you get the idea
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#502 - 2016-11-29 23:38:27 UTC
Zenon Itinen wrote:
Still struggling to find the theoretical 3 k dps this thing supposedly outputs even with all 5 skills , I'm getting about 1500 sieged...

With T2 core, 4 of the best officer drone amps, and a set of Augmented Ogres will give you 1636.

The only way you are getting anywhere near 2000 dps, is by adding 7 faction smartbombs to the fit for a total of 1986 DPS. The EP-705 implant will push you to 2005.

Because we all know locking yourself in place to use smartbombs on your own heavy drones is the thing to do.
Ascenity
Isolation Cult
Born of Darkness
#503 - 2016-11-30 04:44:40 UTC
Please God makes this able to dock in the azbel at least, and introduce a skill to reduce cycle time and fuel cost of the industrial core to make this less of a dangerous asset to use. (fuel reduction to make it same cost of fuel over time as now but in smaller cycles. that would make the rorqual less dead... But make it more worth using with more training.
Ascenity
Isolation Cult
Born of Darkness
#504 - 2016-11-30 04:50:06 UTC
Baki Yuku wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Baki Yuku wrote:
Cptcarter wrote:
Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of ****!

Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs.

Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect....

80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs

4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs

96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , **** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K.

that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build.

You do the math, titan builder.


http://i.imgur.com/JvO1KzN.png

There you go btw you do not need to mine 100b you just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing:) its not that hard bro.

I geuss we can trust your screenshots for as they are.

But you still haven't even covered any of your initial costs. You've got another 50b to go.

"You just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing"

Come on now, you've built a super before. You know better than to try and use mineral costs to judge the final price.


Mine another 12b yesterday so ya its fine:) as far as other cost go ya job install cost and cost for the building cits you got that right but at least I won't have any cost in regards to BPC's because I own all the bpos:) But you gotta remember that the setup cost gets broken down across multiple builds not just one.

Setup cost 5,8b for the Raitaru with T2 rigs and 100b for Sotiyo BPO (well not really since I also sell bpc's now so... doesnt really count as cost) 25b build cost for the Sotiyo 23b for the Rig. So thats an extra 58,8b setup cost. Which if spread across 10 builds is 5,88b extra cost per build.


So when testing this out I mine 27500 m3 per excavator cycle @ roughly 300m per hour per rorqual, 300m x 4 x 96 = 115200000000, so I'm assuming he was talking about 4days worth of full time mining, it is entirely possible, and bare in mind that the build cost of building one in ore is mote like 70b.
Cade Windstalker
#505 - 2016-11-30 17:25:46 UTC
Ascenity wrote:
Please God makes this able to dock in the azbel at least, and introduce a skill to reduce cycle time and fuel cost of the industrial core to make this less of a dangerous asset to use. (fuel reduction to make it same cost of fuel over time as now but in smaller cycles. that would make the rorqual less dead... But make it more worth using with more training.



There's a reason siege-type modules don't have a cycle time reduction. That's a fixed risk that you take, and you mitigate it in other ways and then take it or leave it.
Scath Bererund
The Suicide Kings
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#506 - 2016-12-04 13:45:36 UTC
Ok. After playing arounf with these for a while they need a few tweeks.

Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS and even light a cyno. Perhaps the PANIC should disable cynos and force disconect from all drones.

Right now PANIC isnt so much a "oh crap" last chance. Its more like a 7 min god mode button
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#507 - 2016-12-04 13:49:22 UTC
Scath Bererund wrote:
Ok. After playing arounf with these for a while they need a few tweeks.

Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS and even light a cyno. Perhaps the PANIC should disable cynos and force disconect from all drones.

Right now PANIC isnt so much a "oh crap" last chance. Its more like a 7 min god mode button

The former is wrong, and they're looking at the latter.

I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!

Olmeca Gold
Democratic Space Socialism
#508 - 2016-12-04 15:22:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Olmeca Gold
Scath Bererund wrote:
Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS


Wrong, the drone damage is reduced to 0 in PANIC mode

This being said, the problem with PANIC is it creates a huge gap between alliances with so many titans to protect their Rorquals, and alliances with no such incontestable force, in terms of Rorqual usability. Just check out latest mining stats in Delve.

We really enjoy killing defenseless Rorquals. But just for your information, CCP just gave titan superpowers a huge advantage over smaller alliances to build even more titans.

Solution?

Cheaper, system wide mobile cyno inhibs with significantly less anchoring time.

Covert Cloaky FC. Sustainable Whaler.

Youtube channel.

Cade Windstalker
#509 - 2016-12-04 22:24:50 UTC
Olmeca Gold wrote:
Scath Bererund wrote:
Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS


Wrong, the drone damage is reduced to 0 in PANIC mode

This being said, the problem with PANIC is it creates a huge gap between alliances with so many titans to protect their Rorquals, and alliances with no such incontestable force, in terms of Rorqual usability. Just check out latest mining stats in Delve.

We really enjoy killing defenseless Rorquals. But just for your information, CCP just gave titan superpowers a huge advantage over smaller alliances to build even more titans.

Solution?

Cheaper, system wide mobile cyno inhibs with significantly less anchoring time.


Any decent sized Alliance (say, 100 people active most days of the week in primary TZ) should be able to muster at least a small force to defend their Rorquals, even if that just means warping in with suicide ECM to break locks and get ships off grid when the PANIC drops.

Anything CCP can give you on the Rorqual that will let a little joe-blow 20 man Alliance defend a Rorqual against, say, Bomber's Bar is just going to let the bigger alliances defend a larger percentage of mining hot drops and spend less jump fuel to do it.

And a cheap system-wide Cyno Jammer is a pretty terrible idea. There is no reason ever not to put these in basically every system you control, and probably most of the ones you don't, unless they're ridiculously fragile. If they are then they won't be really effective, and if they aren't then they'll be OP for the cost. You could up the cost, but you said "cheaper" which implies fairly low price point.

Also something like a cheap and readily available cyno jammer is basically just a wet blanket on content generation.

I get that some people like smaller fights and smaller corps or alliances, but if you're going to self-select into that play style then you need to realize it comes with some in-built restrictions on what you can do and participate in.
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#510 - 2016-12-05 02:00:56 UTC
Removed post for linking kill mails and racism.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.

Olmeca Gold
Democratic Space Socialism
#511 - 2016-12-07 13:38:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Olmeca Gold
Cade Windstalker wrote:


Any decent sized Alliance (say, 100 people active most days of the week in primary TZ) should be able to muster at least a small force to defend their Rorquals, even if that just means warping in with suicide ECM to break locks and get ships off grid when the PANIC drops.

Anything CCP can give you on the Rorqual that will let a little joe-blow 20 man Alliance defend a Rorqual against, say, Bomber's Bar is just going to let the bigger alliances defend a larger percentage of mining hot drops and spend less jump fuel to do it.

And a cheap system-wide Cyno Jammer is a pretty terrible idea. There is no reason ever not to put these in basically every system you control, and probably most of the ones you don't, unless they're ridiculously fragile. If they are then they won't be really effective, and if they aren't then they'll be OP for the cost. You could up the cost, but you said "cheaper" which implies fairly low price point.

Also something like a cheap and readily available cyno jammer is basically just a wet blanket on content generation.

I get that some people like smaller fights and smaller corps or alliances, but if you're going to self-select into that play style then you need to realize it comes with some in-built restrictions on what you can do and participate in.


You don't get the gist of the problem my post states. The problem is not the small alliance. Their Rorquals get caught, they PANIC, they form a response fleet, clash happens between the attacker and the defender. Whoever wins wins. Content generated. Everything works perfectly. New Rorquals awesome.

When it is the big alliance (Goons, PL, NC etc.), you catch the Rorqual, it PANICs (or even does not PANIC), lights a cyno, 50 titans and 100 supers drop on you. There is no force in Eve that can contest such a defender fleet. And if such a force moves toward your space, you will notice from miles away, so you will just dock your Rorquals. So these people do not lose Rorquals. In the end they are able to bring 30-40 Rorquals in the same belt with no fucks given. (Interestingly PL dreadbombed such Goon response fleet the other day, inflicting heavy losses (killing 2 titans etc) on Goons while losing their own dreads. This is a good counter example to what I am saying but it happens every 3 years, so it is not that relevant as well))

So the problem is the major powerbloc alliances can use the Rorqual in almost complete freedom while the smaller alliances can't. So bigger alliances treat Rorquals as hulk fleets on belts, not hesitating on putting 30 Rorquals in indy core same belt, while the smaller alliance only maybe uses one if at all to boost its mining ships. So the system favors major powerbloc, and it builds even more titans with its immense mining capacity, to the extent that nobody will ever be able to contest these groups unless they fight among each other.



I've been thinking over the cyno inhib solution for a long time and perhaps should not have stated it here without a proper consideration.

The general problem in Eve is the N+1 logic. The game becomes meaningless when the only thing one can do to break a force is bringing a bigger fleet. CCP actively fights against that, e.g. Fozzie sov is supposed to be such a development to combat N+1.

N+1 is best experienced when the force you are dealing with is a Titan/Super fleet. Because if it is the ultimate decider, then the alliance with the biggest fleet will always win. This is not an interesting mechanic. Ideally one factor that should enable smaller forces beating bigger forces (at least with respect to the objective) by agility and mobility. So there are multiple objectives in a Sov fight, or some PvE ships to be killed in a major power bloc space, then there should be some options for the smaller fleet which utilizes mobility and agility very well.

Now this is not what we experience when we go whaling in these spaces. Apparently the Titan/Supercap becomes the most mobile force projection to do an objective in there, be it killing an astrahus or defending your Rorqual. Just have a bunch ready at a pos in jump range, and you have instant protection for your entire space. We tried to wear Goon titans' fatique out by doing multiple drops and even that didn't work. This is plain broken. All they have to do is allocate some alt accounts to def their entire space and do approximate %100 safe PvE in nullsec.



Now one solution I have been pondering is giving attacker fleets means to block cynoes in systems, so that the defender fleet cannot move its capitals that easily. Currently it is completely up to the defender (holder of the sov) to block a system to cynoes or not. But if the attacker has some options, then the defender actually needs some mobile, non-capital force to kill the attacker's cyno inhibitors to be able to bring in their Titans. I believe this would be an interesting change in both PvE ship defending issues, sov contesting/defending issues and general nullsec shenanigans. And it would absolutely be a factor to diminish the N+1 mechanic.

The challenge here is coming up with such a cyno inhibitor module that is also not exploitable. Say if 100 of these modules are dropped, good luck to a capital force to break that many on a timely manner. But here is my proposal on such a module:

Mobile System Cyno Jammer

- Seen on overview (so the mobile force that wants to remove them can easily warp to them)
- The cargo volume is a little above to an Astrahus (so normal ships can't carry them, you at least need a blockade runner)
- Works only in sov null space
- 1 minute anchoring time, blocks existing cynoes (so the target Rorq itself can't expect to survive just by cynoing)
- Not a lot of tank. Say 10k ehp when anchoring and 50k ehp when anchored

I am sure with enough brainstorm CCP can come up with a balanced module.

Covert Cloaky FC. Sustainable Whaler.

Youtube channel.

Cade Windstalker
#512 - 2016-12-07 14:29:46 UTC
Olmeca Gold wrote:
You don't get the gist of the problem my post states. The problem is not the small alliance. Their Rorquals get caught, they PANIC, they form a response fleet, clash happens between the attacker and the defender. Whoever wins wins. Content generated. Everything works perfectly. New Rorquals awesome.

When it is the big alliance (Goons, PL, NC etc.), you catch the Rorqual, it PANICs (or even does not PANIC), lights a cyno, 50 titans and 100 supers drop on you. There is no force in Eve that can contest such a defender fleet. And if such a force moves toward your space, you will notice from miles away, so you will just dock your Rorquals. So these people do not lose Rorquals. In the end they are able to bring 30-40 Rorquals in the same belt with no fucks given. (Interestingly PL dreadbombed such Goon response fleet the other day, inflicting heavy losses (killing 2 titans etc) on Goons while losing their own dreads. This is a good counter example to what I am saying but it happens every 3 years, so it is not that relevant as well))

So the problem is the major powerbloc alliances can use the Rorqual in almost complete freedom while the smaller alliances can't. So bigger alliances treat Rorquals as hulk fleets on belts, not hesitating on putting 30 Rorquals in indy core same belt, while the smaller alliance only maybe uses one if at all to boost its mining ships. So the system favors major powerbloc, and it builds even more titans with its immense mining capacity, to the extent that nobody will ever be able to contest these groups unless they fight among each other.


So what?

Manpower and organization OP, other lack of news at 11. That's the way the game works, if you put in the effort to have that many people and big ships then you get these sorts of advantages, where the only thing that's going to seriously contest you is another big power.

As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances.

Olmeca Gold wrote:
I've been thinking over the cyno inhib solution for a long time and perhaps should not have stated it here without a proper consideration.

The general problem in Eve is the N+1 logic. The game becomes meaningless when the only thing one can do to break a force is bringing a bigger fleet. CCP actively fights against that, e.g. Fozzie sov is supposed to be such a development to combat N+1.

N+1 is best experienced when the force you are dealing with is a Titan/Super fleet. Because if it is the ultimate decider, then the alliance with the biggest fleet will always win. This is not an interesting mechanic. Ideally one factor that should enable smaller forces beating bigger forces (at least with respect to the objective) by agility and mobility. So there are multiple objectives in a Sov fight, or some PvE ships to be killed in a major power bloc space, then there should be some options for the smaller fleet which utilizes mobility and agility very well.

Now this is not what we experience when we go whaling in these spaces. Apparently the Titan/Supercap becomes the most mobile force projection to do an objective in there, be it killing an astrahus or defending your Rorqual. Just have a bunch ready at a pos in jump range, and you have instant protection for your entire space. We tried to wear Goon titans' fatique out by doing multiple drops and even that didn't work. This is plain broken. All they have to do is allocate some alt accounts to def their entire space and do approximate %100 safe PvE in nullsec.


It's not actually true that the bigger fleet *always* wins, it just provides an advantage. Larger fleets still lose when they're lower quality, or when the FC is bad. What you're not going to see is a massive fleet getting regularly beaten by a much smaller force. That would require such colossal incompetence on the part of the FC of the large fleet that anyone responsible for such a loss would be punted out of their alliance instantly.

As for the inhib idea, that won't eliminate the home team advantage that these alliances enjoy, they'll just shift from one central staging area to anchoring their own cyno inhibs in every system and just parking a few supers everywhere they have assets that need defending.

End result, a little more logistics effort for these large groups and suddenly their systems are far more secure. Since they control the inhibs they can de-anchor them or shut them off if needed to move things around but attackers will need to come shoot the inhibs to attack, which in an active region of space will be noticed fairly quickly especially since they'd need to move in a reasonably substantial squad to take out 50k EHP quickly, probably across multiple systems.

There's a major reason cyno inhibitors are a fairly restricted device, they're massively powerful, and a mobile system-wide version would be ridiculously OP, to the point that I don't think it's balance-able as a core concept.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#513 - 2016-12-07 14:46:59 UTC
Olmeca Gold wrote:


SNIP



Large group of player used teamwork. It's super effective!!!
Olmeca Gold
Democratic Space Socialism
#514 - 2016-12-07 15:38:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Olmeca Gold
Cade Windstalker wrote:

So what?

Manpower and organization OP, other lack of news at 11. That's the way the game works, if you put in the effort to have that many people and big ships then you get these sorts of advantages, where the only thing that's going to seriously contest you is another big power.


Oh, not the `organization ` argument again :). Its not the teamwork and organization what gets rewarded here. All it takes to completely make all your space immune to attacks for a major powerbloc is to have few supercap alts and few extra clients ready at a pos, per carrier/Rorqual ratter. These alts sit idle in their pos for hours until someone is caught, then drop and F1 to get their smartbomb kills and cyno back. There is no teamwork here. If 60 ratters spread across Delve has 60 super/titan alts thats enough for %99 immunity. If anything groups that hunt PL/Goon Rorquals have way better teamwork and organization to be able to infiltrate that space in the first place. The problem here is actually that groups high average SP and lots of assets gets exponentially rewarded, and the more they have these assets the exponentially faster they can build them, especially with Rorqual changes.

If you think that's how this game works, then I would say it doesn't have to be, and it shouldn't be. If we are going to have 10 years more of PL NC Goons without anybody else being able to contest and be relevant, that's not an Eve as fun and interesting as it could have been. If you disagree with me on this it would take another forum topic to argue upon. I can make a quick analogy from FW. There is a reason why FW mechanics are made so the winning side shifts every so often. CCP could have easily made such a structure which Amarr kept winning for straight 5 years. Same people winning all the time is not that fun.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances.


The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward.

Cade Windstalker wrote:

It's not actually true that the bigger fleet *always* wins, it just provides an advantage.


It is close to be completely true for supercapital forces, which is the entire point of focus here.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
As for the inhib idea, that won't eliminate the home team advantage that these alliances enjoy, they'll just shift from one central staging area to anchoring their own cyno inhibs in every system and just parking a few supers everywhere they have assets that need defending.

End result, a little more logistics effort for these large groups and suddenly their systems are far more secure. Since they control the inhibs they can de-anchor them or shut them off if needed to move things around but attackers will need to come shoot the inhibs to attack, which in an active region of space will be noticed fairly quickly especially since they'd need to move in a reasonably substantial squad to take out 50k EHP quickly, probably across multiple systems.


That's the thing. If you get some experience in this kind of stuff you will realize one or two supers are easily contestable for a group that can infiltrate into your space without being noticed (e.g. groups using wormholes, blops groups, independent capital hotdroppers), and even major power blocs do not have as much supers to cover each of their systems with an uncontstable force (e.g. 5 combat titans 20 supers each system). So spreading their capital force is exactly what I would wish to promote.

This latter parts of your posts, about system cyno jam mechanics and comments about how infiltrating forces have to take gates etc., makes me doubt whether you have any knowledge at all on these issues. Alliances already have system-wide jammers as POS modules, and they can activate or deactivate them at will. So mobile jammers do not change their system control capabilities. Its pretty much the same. What it changes that it gives the attacker side some system control capability as well.

Furthermore, contrary to what you are saying, an attacking force will often be immune to these jammers, since they are either using covert cynoes, or wormholes, and rarely gates. You can't stop a blops fleet or a ragerolling wormhole group with cyno jams. So with all due respect it is pretty obvious from your posts that you have never been at that side.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
There's a major reason cyno inhibitors are a fairly restricted device, they're massively powerful, and a mobile system-wide version would be ridiculously OP, to the point that I don't think it's balance-able as a core concept.


I agree with your concerns of OP here. But I think one can overcome the challenges to make a balanced cyno inhib. Especially volume restrictions would help a lot for people to not deploy 100 of these at the same time. There could also be system-wide restrictions, such as not being able drop more than 1 of these at the same time in the same system etc.

Covert Cloaky FC. Sustainable Whaler.

Youtube channel.

Olmeca Gold
Democratic Space Socialism
#515 - 2016-12-07 15:39:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Olmeca Gold
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Olmeca Gold wrote:


SNIP



Large group of player used teamwork. It's super effective!!!


You meant skill points and Titans*

Because that's exactly what this game should reward right? How much SP and how many titans you have?

Its like the more titans and SP you have, the faster you should accumulate more SP and titans right?

Covert Cloaky FC. Sustainable Whaler.

Youtube channel.

jack1974
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#516 - 2016-12-07 16:28:09 UTC
Olmeca Gold wrote:

Cade Windstalker wrote:
As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances.


The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward.


Most people don't dread bomb because they themselves are risk adverse. People are too tied to killboard statistics so they never get to experience sacrifice for the bigger picture. People will consider losing a 1 million ISK ship to kill a 6 million ISK ship but not consider ,in mondays case, sacrificing 100 bill to kill 600 bill.

Null-sec alliances are very vulnerable to traps because they tend to expect conventional escalation from another major block. However if I was to drop a battleship on a gate within staging range I wouldn't think twice if it were bait.....

So I agree in the sense that people are cowards which enables null entities to thrive.
Cade Windstalker
#517 - 2016-12-07 17:00:24 UTC
Olmeca Gold wrote:
Oh, not the `organization ` argument again :). ...

-SNIP-

If you think that's how this game works, then I would say it doesn't have to be, and it shouldn't be. If we are going to have 10 years more of PL NC Goons without anybody else being able to contest and be relevant, that's not an Eve as fun and interesting as it could have been. If you disagree with me on this it would take another forum topic to argue upon. I can make a quick analogy from FW. There is a reason why FW mechanics are made so the winning side shifts every so often. CCP could have easily made such a structure which Amarr kept winning for straight 5 years. Same people winning all the time is not that fun.


If you want to contest the major powers than go nation build. It's not even like NC/PL/Goons have been the major powers for 10 years. 8 years ago the biggest power in the game was Band of Brothers and Goons were this kinda up and coming upstart power. Now 8 years on BoB is nowhere to be seen (and neither are half the other big Alliances from 8 years ago, Atlas Alliance anyone?) and Goons just got kicked out of their space.

The reason FW has more dynamic power blocks is because it's smaller scale and easier for someone to break into. That's also why you rarely hear about major FWar upsets but there were articles about Goons losing on mainstream news sites that don't focus on games.

I'd also like to point out that you just said that "all it takes" to keep a Rorqual safe is like 30-40 times the value of the Rorqual in assets sitting around doing nothing. Not listed: all the stuff it takes to keep those few Supers from getting dunked if someone drops them when they respond. So yes, I would say it takes a lot of planning and organization to keep a major Alliance running. There's a reason the jump fatigue changes were careful not to aggravate the Logistics people because those guys are two steps from insanity on a good day.

Olmeca Gold wrote:
The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward.


Again, they aren't entitled to any real or perceived safety, they got it by having enough stuff, time, and organization to deter or beat people who come to make things dangerous for them.

If you don't like it, and feel it's OP, then go build your own big alliance and kick their door in. It's happened before and it'll happen before, but it won't be fast and it won't be done by whining on the forums about how you can't reliably kill Rorquals with 200 bil in assets playing bodyguard.

Olmeca Gold wrote:
It is close to be completely true for supercapital forces, which is the entire point of focus here.


Again, because people aren't idiots with their ships. Numbers are an advantage, if you want to win a fight you need to make sure that you have as many advantages as possible. This is not going to change without turning Eve battles into weirdly restricted fights like WoW battlegrounds or Arenas.

People with a clear super cap advantage can and have lost fights when they were stupid and got countered, like your dread-bombing referenced above.

Olmeca Gold wrote:
That's the thing. If you get some experience in this kind of stuff you will realize one or two supers are easily contestable for a group that can infiltrate into your space without being noticed (e.g. groups using wormholes, blops groups, independent capital hotdroppers), and even major power blocs do not have as much supers to cover each of their systems with an uncontstable force (e.g. 5 combat titans 20 supers each system). So spreading their capital force is exactly what I would wish to promote.
-SNIP-


They don't need to cover every system, they just need to cover the ones the Rorquals are in for that day, and with their own cyno-jammers up in each system they can ensure that they have local force superiority.

Also you just contradicted your own point about this being a case of "a few alts" just sitting AFK on standby.

Cyno-Jammers aren't easilly scattered around to every system at present, what you're proposing would be an extremely cheap way to do what now takes an expensive module, upkeep, and an IHUB. I seem to recall there also being other restrictions that make it impractical to just spam Cyno Jammers around in every system, but I may be somewhat out of date there.

Wormholes and gates aren't going to be bringing many if any supers through, or enough sub caps to deal with even a small cap support fleet.

Also nowhere did I say the OP-ness was restricted to your attack-fleet case, I just said they'd spam them everywhere and turn them into another defender's advantage. There's a reason Cyno-Jammers are a defender's advantage thing and required Sov to use.

Overall I'm just not seeing this as a convincing argument, you're basically complaining that large organizations (that take a ton of work to keep going) provide too many advantages for the effort required.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#518 - 2016-12-07 18:10:48 UTC
jack1974 wrote:
Olmeca Gold wrote:

Cade Windstalker wrote:
As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances.


The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward.


Most people don't dread bomb because they themselves are risk adverse. People are too tied to killboard statistics so they never get to experience sacrifice for the bigger picture. People will consider losing a 1 million ISK ship to kill a 6 million ISK ship but not consider ,in mondays case, sacrificing 100 bill to kill 600 bill.

Null-sec alliances are very vulnerable to traps because they tend to expect conventional escalation from another major block. However if I was to drop a battleship on a gate within staging range I wouldn't think twice if it were bait.....

So I agree in the sense that people are cowards which enables null entities to thrive.


The cowards exist because the game enable this cowardliness. This fact, while we can't really change it, is always present. People are usually much more aggressive and do more bone headed move when it's all meaningless. Calling the players coward is essentially being mad because human being are well, human being. Why don't they always dread bomb? Well because every dread bomb set them back a lot and they'd rather stay where they are than have to climb back up. HTFU is only really hardcore on the forum. In game, it's protect what you have with all possible mean unless the possession of it is irrelevant to you.
Cade Windstalker
#519 - 2016-12-07 18:48:14 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
The cowards exist because the game enable this cowardliness. This fact, while we can't really change it, is always present. People are usually much more aggressive and do more bone headed move when it's all meaningless. Calling the players coward is essentially being mad because human being are well, human being. Why don't they always dread bomb? Well because every dread bomb set them back a lot and they'd rather stay where they are than have to climb back up. HTFU is only really hardcore on the forum. In game, it's protect what you have with all possible mean unless the possession of it is irrelevant to you.


I wouldn't even say the game enables 'cowardliness' it's that the game has to offer choices in order to be a game, and one of those choices has to be to not fight in order for the game to be a sandbox.

Otherwise we may as well replace the game with a lobby queue and the Alliance Tournament arena.
Olmeca Gold
Democratic Space Socialism
#520 - 2016-12-07 19:23:03 UTC
jack1974 wrote:


Most people don't dread bomb because they themselves are risk adverse. People are too tied to killboard statistics so they never get to experience sacrifice for the bigger picture. People will consider losing a 1 million ISK ship to kill a 6 million ISK ship but not consider ,in mondays case, sacrificing 100 bill to kill 600 bill.

Null-sec alliances are very vulnerable to traps because they tend to expect conventional escalation from another major block. However if I was to drop a battleship on a gate within staging range I wouldn't think twice if it were bait.....

So I agree in the sense that people are cowards which enables null entities to thrive.


I would have loved to dreadbomb null entities if I had the means to do it. I just hate the idea of free riskless PvE anywhere in nullsec.

But the SP/ISK/commitment investment threshold to this kind of operation is so high. It is also a minus sum game. You will kill more titans etc., but you will lose billions in suiciding dreads as well. That's why you are not seeing people doing them all over. Blaming people with cowardice is an easy and simplistic answer but it is not informative. People are just doing risk reward assessment.

All in all, being able to disturb major powerblocs' PvE activity should be more accessible than having that many dread pilots and isk to throw away.

Covert Cloaky FC. Sustainable Whaler.

Youtube channel.