Originally posted by Yalexy

Well. I hear you. I'm fed up with alliance-warfare after allmost 6 years myself, but solo is not going to happen.

Wormholes are really fun, but you need a small group of 3-5 players to roam and that's as good as it gets.

And then, there's still the testserver for fun 1vs1 PvP, if that's all you're interested in.

Well, not exactly.   I'm interested in almost all aspects of EVE, but feel very limited when I DO feel the urge for PVP action.   

I never feel the urge to be in a large alliance anymore.   I stopped enjoying that in 2006.     I don't think I should be considered a non-statistic just because of that.    

I never bothered with the test server.   If "all i was interested in" was 1v1 pvp, I'd play station games with cheap ships like everyone else who is bored and not part of a bloblliance.   STation games are dumb though, imo... I've done it plenty of times, so I'm not knocking without trying.   just too often are there dock-copouts and non-involved logistics playing favorites.   I have more fun running around looting and salvaging the losses than actually fighting in them.  It seems to be basically duels between two players who want to test out their ship loadouts, or a competition to see who has better intel and more alt accounts.    

I have had some fun in FW joining by myself or in my small corp of friends, but unfortunately, there's so much of the game that's locked out when FW is toggled that I find myself wishing I could go in and out of it more often.

{mod edit}

I have to be honest, I dont have fun in the combat, is dull as hell, the PvP is rubbish, the drama is out of proportion, skill training is annoying and boring, mining is a joke and everything else is simply not fun...

{mod edit}

plz... do yourself a favor and move forward...

ps: The only good thing are the pretty looking characters, some female toons look so appealing lol.... but thats it...

i'd like to see some kind of incoming damage stacking nerf, but it would also have to apply to RR, and possibly some other things. i wouldn't help single ships so much, but it would make huge difference between two fleets of different expertise.

currently, ability to focus damage is effectively linear with number of pilots. there is no incentive to spread fire as ship with 1 ehp is as good as as new. there is some incentive to spread e-war, but it's PITA to coordinate and gets countered by focus fire too easily.

tho, there is great resistance on official forums against it. some of it is understable. complexity of running large fleet might not be apparent to grunts, but higher up have full hands and then some. it would only add up more jobs for FCs. *shrug* i belive it would add up to tactical options and break homogenity of ship design. hopefuly, we'll live to tell.

Originally posted by gimmesome

Also, i honestly think the Lore would support such a change.   EVE is first and foremost a 'cold, dark, lonely universe where every pilot has to fend for themselves" <-- one would think that given that outlook of the life one lives in EVE that the technology advancement would go in the direction of making capsuleers' vessels superior to that of the general populace.    In the EVE novels, there's attention drawn to the agents and mission runners and how they are respected, and feared.   Attention drawn to how impressive capsuleers are in battle, given that their 1 ship is expected (and succeeds at) destroying entire colonies and bases of "rats" and pirate ships.     I would only assume that the ships capsuleers use should be superior in durability and technology AND firepower.   

Okay, this I can dig.  Still don't agree but the fact that I can hop in my CNR and pop in a Level 4 mission and perma-tank all those rats does say something.  Course, my CNR is setup to do so.  And I know to kill all the frigs with points first just in case I over-aggro and need to GTFO.  But, again, my ship is fit to tank that much damage.  Argueably you can fit your pvp ship to do the same.  But, due to almost all ships in PvP having a point, well....  You're still screwed.  If all the ships in PvE had points - woah - then I'd have no choice but to require a few friends (or multiple accounts).

As much as I hate it, since I've already stated that I prefer your aforementioned solo/very small gang playstyle, this is an MMO.  When there's a blob about the only counter is a bigger blob(period).  The alternative is to not engage them or allow yourself to be engaged.  If said roving blobs can't get kills they'll ship down and/or ship out.  EvE does not require multiple accounts or friends to play for many aspects of the game.  But for PvP... Well, while solo isn't dead - it's a whole lot more challenging than shooting rats/rox/markets and that's how it should be, imo, therefore nothing to "fix" again, imo.

Originally posted by Pelu

{mod edit}

 

A few others like

- Sci-fi junkies

- Mathematics junkies

- Business majors

- Economists

- Theory-crafters

- Old School MMORPG players (vets)

- space simulation enthusiasts

- anti-social people

- RTS gamers 

I'm one of the players that are intrigued by EVE, regardless of it's seemingly deep-rooted pyschological flaws...

 but yeah, I see where you're coming from.      As I said in my OP, I probably will cancel again and move on if I don't like the winter expansion.

Also, quit responding to the trolls!  :p  <3

Originally posted by Wraithone

Thats going to be quite a difficult sell in EVE. Keep in mind one of the famous sayings. "If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, you are doing something wrong...".  EVE combat isn't about balance or fairness, its about WINNING.  Thats why blobs exist. Thats why gate camps are set up the way that they are.  I really do not see CCP ever developing something like this, as the various gankers and griefers would be howling like banshees. 

And that is why 20% of their staff was laid off. I don't think you realize just how bad of a situation this is.

in theory this sounds fantastic...so does communism. Neither work. Here's the problem. If I'm Fc'ing and I call a target as primary..I am directing the firepower at my disposal as the commander onto a single target. IF damage is mitigated past three ships..then effectively you are dividing any group greater than 3 ships by 3. So if I am roaming with 12 others...I would have to assign targets based on squads. Not horrible, but again, this actually hurts small teams.

Do you see why? If you are roaming through losec with 5 HAC and come across a 4 BS group...you can only focus fire with 3 HACs on one target and 2 HACs on another. See the problem? If you encounter a group of 28 ships...3 of them couldn't even hit you, assuming all the hits registered at the same time.

Always put your example of change in the hunter's perspective as well. It sounds like it would work, but would actually be worse..if you fly with more than 2 other pilots at a given time.

So no thanks. Like the idea though...just wouldn't work. Good post though...you're not crying..you are asking for feedback..right?

Originally posted by CactusJack

in theory this sounds fantastic...so does communism. Neither work. Here's the problem. If I'm Fc'ing and I call a target as primary..I am directing the firepower at my disposal as the commander onto a single target. IF damage is mitigated past three ships..then effectively you are dividing any group greater than 3 ships by 3. So if I am roaming with 12 others...I would have to assign targets based on squads. Not horrible, but again, this actually hurts small teams.

Do you see why? If you are roaming through losec with 5 HAC and come across a 4 BS group...you can only focus fire with 3 HACs on one target and 2 HACs on another. See the problem? If you encounter a group of 28 ships...3 of them couldn't even hit you, assuming all the hits registered at the same time.

Always put your example of change in the hunter's perspective as well. It sounds like it would work, but would actually be worse..if you fly with more than 2 other pilots at a given time.

So no thanks. Like the idea though...just wouldn't work. Good post though...you're not crying..you are asking for feedback..right?

If you are referring to my solution, no it would be in your scenario of 9 ships, all 9 are going to get a to-hit penalty due to cross talk. My solution was only a method to provide a small group a possible chance to flee. That cross talk could diminsh over time eventually eliminating the penalty. It isn't an idea solution, just a possible one to the OPs question.

Please don't.

It really is that simple.

Sure, I despise blobs.  Hated running into them.  Hated running with them.

It is realistic though.

It really is that simple.

It is realistic.

Yes, it is boring as Hell waiting for a blob to go away.  Yes, it is boring as Hell trying to find targets in one.

But in the end, it is unrestricted.  Adding an artificial restriction...interferring...deus ex machina...

...please don't.

Originally posted by VirusDancer

Please don't.

It really is that simple.

Sure, I despise blobs.  Hated running into them.  Hated running with them.

It is realistic though.

It really is that simple.

It is realistic.

Yes, it is boring as Hell waiting for a blob to go away.  Yes, it is boring as Hell trying to find targets in one.

But in the end, it is unrestricted.  Adding an artificial restriction...interferring...deus ex machina...

...please don't.

 

Some people just want to watch it burn...

Originally posted by idgarad

Originally posted by VirusDancer

Please don't.

It really is that simple.

Sure, I despise blobs.  Hated running into them.  Hated running with them.

It is realistic though.

It really is that simple.

It is realistic.

Yes, it is boring as Hell waiting for a blob to go away.  Yes, it is boring as Hell trying to find targets in one.

But in the end, it is unrestricted.  Adding an artificial restriction...interferring...deus ex machina...

...please don't.

 

Some people just want to watch it burn...

I'm one of those people that is all for equalizing as much as possible PvP inside of an instanced encounter.  After all, the two sides are going to send in a group they think is going to win.  When it comes to world PvP/open PvP - such as what we have in EVE... then no, there is no pandering to be done.  The side that brings the best guns, biggest guns, and often the most guns - should win.  It's that simple.

People scout paths (or people should scout paths).  If you're flying in a dangerous area, you need to be as prepared as possible that something might go wrong...ie if you undock, dookie may happen.

EVE is not Space Carebears doing hands-across-the-Universe.  It is a competitive game - in almost every aspect.  Market?  Some of the most intense PvP takes place there with price wars.

If you're a solo player in EVE, accept your limitiations and work with them to the extent that you can...do not try to limit everybody else instead.

Originally posted by VirusDancer

Please don't.

It really is that simple.

Sure, I despise blobs.  Hated running into them.  Hated running with them.

It is realistic though.

It really is that simple.

It is realistic.

Yes, it is boring as Hell waiting for a blob to go away.  Yes, it is boring as Hell trying to find targets in one.

But in the end, it is unrestricted.  Adding an artificial restriction...interferring...deus ex machina...

...please don't.

 

Meh, in comes the 'realistic' debate.   I don't really ever see the point of that being brought to the table in a conversation about videogames.     

There's nothing realistic about ships in space that stop moving just because their thrusters are turned off.

There's nothing realistic about ships in space being required to make wide, 18-wheeler styled turns in order to make a 180 degree change in direction. 

There's nothing realistic about....   well, I don't need to go further.   The point is, it's still a videogame.    Not to mention the fact that I mentioned the usage of the unobtainium being introduced lore-wise first, as to protect the "realistic" feel and approach to EVE technology.    Given EVE setting, lore, and characters, it would indeed be very realistic if ships were made of such a material.  

***ALSO***  The idea isn't based on number of attackers as much as intensity of attack.     5 rifters attacking 1 battleship would not cause the battleship to go into said 'sustainable' mode.    Would not idealy be enough damage.   

Think of it more as a hybrid formula of number of attackers, type of damage done, intensity of damage done, vs ship + the same combat calculations already in place, such as velocity, transversal, signal radius, damage resistence, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about beating that dead horse and changing local.  I still believe that is a long overdue change.

Keep in mind it's a double-edge sword though...

...but still, the topic of the thread is basically suggesting that other people playing EVE is a problem for the solo pilot.

Originally posted by gimmesome

Originally posted by Pelu

{mod edit}

 

A few others like

- Sci-fi junkies

- Mathematics junkies

- Business majors

- Economists

- Theory-crafters

- Old School MMORPG players (vets)

- space simulation enthusiasts

- anti-social people

- RTS gamers 

I'm one of the players that are intrigued by EVE, regardless of it's seemingly deep-rooted pyschological flaws...

 but yeah, I see where you're coming from.      As I said in my OP, I probably will cancel again and move on if I don't like the winter expansion.

ya but when i said that this is a center of mental illness control, I actually mean it... I seriously mean it!!!!

+1

I was in a null sec alliance by teh name of ******* and I got into this home defense fleet, unfortunately i had to check the settings of my mic because the night before i did something in the computer... SO.... It took me a while to respond to the alliance in TS and it also took me a while to get my ship...

The final result... They thought taht I was a spy because I wasnt around with the fleet and i didnt talked in TS... I told them the true but they never listen...

That is what I call, massive paranoia, you kick random people because the enemies forward your alliance mails with derogatory comments...???

I know that you have spies and have to deal with them, but next time... Use the head when you have to deal with spies... Sometimes they are not spies, they are moles who sell information for some isk...

Originally posted by VirusDancer

 

If you're a solo player in EVE, accept your limitiations and work with them to the extent that you can...do not try to limit everybody else instead.

I'm not saying to limit everyone else.   I'm saying to adjust the dynamics that allow the small % of players that control EVE with out-dated tactics to a system that is more suitable for the setting, and the Lore.     

Trust me, Virus, I know what you're getting at, and I absolutely understand.    That's why I've loved EVE for so many years, and defended it even to those who I know will never understand the appeal.      I'm simply starting to feel hopeless, and taking much notice to the large number of like-minded players that feel the same.     I wish 'nothing was wrong' and "nothing needs to be fixed" but that's just not the case, considering how many players are leaving this game.      

My point is, I DON'T WANT EVE to shutdown.   I DON'T WANT players leaving, like I am/might be because they are discouraged.   I don't want EVE to fail.    But it looks like it's inevitable as more and more people are simply not about to conform to the "YOU MUST BE IN A BLOBLLIANCE MEGACORP SUPER FLEET" in order to be able to access PVP in any sort of competitive capacity.     

I posted this OP to share my thoughts on how to improve and keep more players interested, and possibly gain more.   As well as to hear other ideas on how to improve and adjust.     I understand some may just want to say "not gonna happen.  gtfo." but that's really the opposite of productive for players that want to be able to keep playing EVE.     

If the small % of EVE that controls nullsec, and blobs the gates, and the routes are the only ones in consideration by the devs, then everyone else will eventually leave, and the game can't survive with just them.     No one wants that, except for EVE haters that want every sandbox game to fail.

Originally posted by gimmesome

Originally posted by VirusDancer

Please don't.

It really is that simple.

Sure, I despise blobs.  Hated running into them.  Hated running with them.

It is realistic though.

It really is that simple.

It is realistic.

Yes, it is boring as Hell waiting for a blob to go away.  Yes, it is boring as Hell trying to find targets in one.

But in the end, it is unrestricted.  Adding an artificial restriction...interferring...deus ex machina...

...please don't.

 

Meh, in comes the 'realistic' debate.   I don't really ever see the point of that being brought to the table in a conversation about videogames.     

There's nothing realistic about ships in space that stop moving just because their thrusters are turned off.

There's nothing realistic about ships in space being required to make wide, 18-wheeler styled turns in order to make a 180 degree change in direction. 

There's nothing realistic about....   well, I don't need to go further.   The point is, it's still a videogame.    Not to mention the fact that I mentioned the usage of the unobtainium being introduced lore-wise first, as to protect the "realistic" feel and approach to EVE technology.    Given EVE setting, lore, and characters, it would indeed be very realistic if ships were made of such a material.  

 ***ALSO***  The idea isn't based on number of attackers as much as intensity of attack.     5 rifters attacking 1 battleship would not cause the battleship to go into said 'sustainable' mode.    Would not idealy be enough damage.   

Think of it more as a hybrid formula of number of attackers, type of damage done, intensity of damage done, vs ship + the same combat calculations already in place, such as velocity, transversal, signal radius, damage resistence, etc.

Some lack of realism does not mean you need to remove all realism.  It is a strawman argument to suggest otherwise.

It is silly that you argue that realism does not matter while arguing the potential realism of your point.  "Your" realism matters.  It is very common on the forums.  People take that point of view...only what they say matters, usually while arguing against the other person using the same points.

You say it would be realistic given EVE's lore for ships to be made of unobtanium.  Where?  Oh, the Jovians can do it!  Then I say that we should be able to fly peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.  Given EVE's lore, it is just as possible as unobtanium.  The Jovians can do it!

Seriously, blobs are boring - tedious - for both sides - often turn out to be little more than roaming chatrooms...

But hey, let's look at your scenario again, eh?

20 ships jump 1 ship.  The 1 ship takes 95% less damage from those attackers.  Guess what though?  Does not change the outcome.  It just changes how long it takes to get there... or does it even do that?

Cause all 20 ships would not have to attack.  Given your system, they likely would not.  Jammed/webbed, you'd be held in place while a couple of ships took you down.  The rest would just bounce you around...

...I mean, c'mon, man....seriously.

Have never played EvE enough to meet a blob live or even any larger battle. But from what I recognize "game of numbers" and "blobs" arent exactly the same issue. So here some almost outsider leaving some remark on unit blobs.

Blobs apparently simply result from the attempt to focus as much firepower as possible into a small area to hit enemies mostly all at the same time as early as they can hit you to. Thus protection from each other with maximum firepowser. Destroy a single target  in an instant without any noticeable disadvantage. Someone educate me if I am wrong.

But instead of creating a complex system revolving around complicated targets sequences, secondar, tertiary target combo attacks oreven on semirealistic level very fictional "rules" i.e. "special material with weird behavior" to counter sympthoms. Why not simply apply or boost the same simple yet still troubling reasons blobing doesnt work effectively in reality either to the game.

1) Huge debris from larger ships damages close nearby ships - lets say right after desctruction or blowing up a ship still is not "broken down" enough. For the next 2-3 seconds in close space arround the ship there huge chance a very close ship might be damaged hugely smaller ships might even get close to full destruction or lose their shields whatever. This effect wouldnt even need physical debris in the game or complex collission detection. A simple area of effect with mutliple ranges having higher or lower chance to damage your ship for X amount of damage would be enought.

Result: If you blob up and anyone in your blob happens to get destroyed. Enjoy a possible cluster**** chain reaction leaving half the blob fleet damaged and destroyed.

2) The good old AoE and cluster attacks. Bombs and mines and huge explosion are most effective the more targets they hit. Atleast in reality thats the case. An AoE attacks is weak against a single target, but summarizes effective against multiple.

Imagine a big blob of ship follows a single small ship. Now the single small ship keeps leaving some sort of stealth mines right behind it while flying straight away from them. Or even better shrapnel and cluster mines. Even if it was just an unharmfull AoE slowing effect.The blob of ship would be forced to scatter to evade it or scattered by its effects.

This must be realized by rebalancing effect of areal damage effects on targets. In reality this is often very effective because a single small shrappnel can completely disable or even kill a single unit. This is similarily to EvE also not the case in aircombat, but thats restricted mostly by the lack of movability in air while straight forward moving speed of both units and projectiles is huge and huge vulnerability to even tiny damages.

3) Noise. Too many ****** electronics and ships on the same spot? You could claim enemy detection, radars etc could be harmed by this and result  into lower hostile steath detection, shorter radar ranges etc. Missing the forest for the trees.

This could be realized by simply stacking "noise" state placed on everyone else within close range of yourself. While ofcousre everyone has the same effect. A single or two ships dont make any difference, a whole blob nearly blinds you.

Maybe some of these concepts are already in the game maybe not. Just some contructive thoughts as I dont really like the concept of careless blobbing either, but in empty space and lacking apparently very harmfull ranged AoE attacks this seem like a much bigger problem than on ground with many obstacles and restricted movement. However I dont see unit blobbing and quantitative strength only as two correlating issues.

If love the idea of large fleets but not of disorganized blobbing blobs just meddling around.

Originally posted by gimmesome

Originally posted by VirusDancer

 

If you're a solo player in EVE, accept your limitiations and work with them to the extent that you can...do not try to limit everybody else instead.

I'm not saying to limit everyone else.   I'm saying to adjust the dynamics that allow the small % of players that control EVE with out-dated tactics to a system that is more suitable for the setting, and the Lore.     

 And what I'm saying is...then the larger % of players should band together to deal with the situation.  Instead of acting like sheep and looking for somebody else to step in and save them...they could easily save themselves.

It is one of my fondest MMORPG memories...back in UO.  Running as a PKK.  There were problems with Reds killing folks.  We did not complain to the devs.  We grouped up.  We hunted the PKs down.  We policed our own world in an attempt to keep them in check.  Not every server had that - many people did not want to play with other people, organization was anathema to them.  Fel/Tram came along and most of the people I knew left.

You've said right here - the problem is from a small % of the players... so I ask, what is that large % of players doing to deal with it?

Trust me, Virus, I know what you're getting at, and I absolutely understand.    That's why I've loved EVE for so many years, and defended it even to those who I know will never understand the appeal.      I'm simply starting to feel hopeless, and taking much notice to the large number of like-minded players that feel the same.     I wish 'nothing was wrong' and "nothing needs to be fixed" but that's just not the case, considering how many players are leaving this game.

There are many things wrong.  You believe this is a key one?  Looking back over the past few expansions, I would say that is the reason.  Yes, I'm one of the Incarna-Told-You-So people....    

My point is, I DON'T WANT EVE to shutdown.   I DON'T WANT players leaving, like I am/might be because they are discouraged.   I don't want EVE to fail.    But it looks like it's inevitable as more and more people are simply not about to conform to the "YOU MUST BE IN A BLOBLLIANCE MEGACORP SUPER FLEET" in order to be able to access PVP in any sort of competitive capacity.

That was the game.  It was never hidden.  If somebody came to the game expecting something else, then that is on them.   

I posted this OP to share my thoughts on how to improve and keep more players interested, and possibly gain more.   As well as to hear other ideas on how to improve and adjust.     I understand some may just want to say "not gonna happen.  gtfo." but that's really the opposite of productive for players that want to be able to keep playing EVE.

Look at how many of the changes have driven players away...   

If the small % of EVE that controls nullsec, and blobs the gates, and the routes are the only ones in consideration by the devs, then everyone else will eventually leave, and the game can't survive with just them.     No one wants that, except for EVE haters that want every sandbox game to fail.

EVE's been around a long time, relatively speaking.  It has been a long time since CCP has considered any of the players that have been around a long time.  Changes have attempted to bring in people that will not stay around and have driven away older players.

At what point does a small gang become a blob?

To a lone pilot a gang of 5-6 would be a blob, to the gang of 5-6  a group of 15-20 would probably be a blob, to that group they would be getting blobbed when they run into a gang of 40-50, and to that gang a blob could be a fleet of 250. To that fleet they be getting blobbed if they ran into multiple fleets on the opposing side.

So, define where the blob begins and the small gang ends, then you can have a meaningful discussion about removing the blob, otherwise its all subjective.