| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Soyemia
Minmatar
SolaR KillerS
    |
Posted - 2008.10.03 18:14:00 -
[1]
As you should probalble alreayd start you're CSM campaing, I want to ask You about what you think of small gang PvP and its future? With the nano nerf, how do you think about the survival of this type of PvP? I life of small scale PvP and roaming and shit. But now the with the upcoming nano nerf it might actually really die in 0.0. Now I dont mean small scale PvP within 5 jump radius. I mean roaming.
As alliances get bigger and bigger with more and more advanced jump bridge networks, how do you think we are able to do w/o nanos? Or are you just supporting 'blob yourself, too' approach, as many do. I want to hear what you think about this future. I have 2 votes to give and the one who has the best ideas and dedication to support my style of gameplay. Disscus!
Official BoB fanboy. Called Stabemia. Corp hopper. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 19:37:00 -
[2]
Given that applications for the CSM don't close for another week, and it'll probably be a week after that until the list of candidates goes live, I don't think many people are going to start campaigning until the middle of the month. There's only one candidate who has announced as of now. And you have until November 21 to vote, so there's no hurry on that either.
Your question is a good one, though a little bit wide-ranging for me to answer right now(I have to go out in half an hour). But if you want it to be a topic of debate for CSM candidates, wait 2-3 weeks, until the race is actually on, and ask then.
------------------
Fix the forums! |
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 20:01:00 -
[3]
Well, I'd happily have a large discussion about this. But the question here is extremely wide.
First of all, the nano nerf, WHILE it's long due, is a sign that something more wrong than nano is on. Nano happens mostly due to the blobs going on. It's simple cause(blobs) and effect(Nano).
But small gang PvP has died tons of times at this point. Having been a pirate ever since I started playing, small-gang warfare is still extremely viable. At this point, even without nano. You would be surprised how well a HAC or two can PvP in the right areas.
It's still beyond me why jump bridges had to be implemented. It's just as bad as nano's. It encourages blobbing.
At this point, anti-blob weapons and things like that are an oxymoron. I honestly believe what needs to happen is that CCP needs to rework warfare so that small gangs are encouraged. We discussed how we could move something like the factional warfare system into 0.0, just much more advanced and multi-tiered. I think that's a solution.
Blobs will never die, nor should it be restricted. But people should benefit from having a smaller gang! |
NanDe YaNen
The Funkalistic
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 21:49:00 -
[4]
Not running for CSM, but have taken a large part in the discussions with a lot of parties on all ends and had the opportunity to look over what's been said from a lot of angles.
I do believe there are some unhealthy things about 0.0 and that most of the start with the one-trick-pony POS solution.
Particular to the whole small-gang/blob argument is that there is no granularity. On the low end, we have solo players as targets. On the high end, we have towers as targets (arguably station services, but who really cares.)
If an alliance chooses to escalate the scale of engagement, there is no dimmer switch. It's either on or off. You either work very small or very large. No targets lie between the two extremes. There's not much of a role for medium sized subcap gangs. Once you go capital, you're committing and end up having to blob to try and avoid being rolled.
The fight broker in 0.0 warfare basically boils down to the POS, and warfare at the POS is essentially a binary engagement mechanic.
The binary nature is created by the time-zone balancing system that exists to protect alliances from getting "3am blitzkrieged." POS timers effectively eliminate the potential for hit-and-run tactics. Surprise suffers greatly.
The solution I believe is to look at the current system, figure out what's working, and duplicate the working bits in between the extremes of POS and no POS.
As a fight broker, POS's are functioning correctly. The stront timer mechanic does tell us when to meet and does keep time-zone from being a dominant or reliable mechanic.
With regard to allowing more mobile and tactically interesting warfare, the solution is simply that the fight needs to exist on several grids simultaneously and with increasing returns for presence at the majority of those points.
To add the granularity that the system currently lacks, implement new structures that derive their value from increasing the income of 0.0 and exist at a level smaller than the POS and with a smaller maximum reinforced timer. Smaller timers, smaller rewards, smaller risks, and smaller defensive advantages. Everything the POS is as a fight broker and an income instrament, but in a smaller bite that will attract action to medium sized gangs.
In short, the solution will look like this: A multi-grid instrument of income that acts to add more granularity in targets, engagement sites, risk/reward, and fight-brokering.
In addition, following on the philosophies I've been pushing forward in the ACDC thread, I'd like to see these new structures implemented as auto-constructing with a much smaller initial investment and a focus on PvP success affording one the ability to field them rather than PvEve grinding to come up with the fuel/BS/godforsaken-trip-to-empire required. |
Soyemia
Minmatar
SolaR KillerS
|
Posted - 2008.10.04 10:54:00 -
[5]
Appreciate your answers. I know my Q was quite large. For Vista this was about 0.0. I know you can PvP q/o nanos in small gangs in lowsec. Not in 0.0. You simply cant go much further down the pipe that 2-3 jumps from empire, you'll get titanized most likely or blobbed like *****. Ofc atm its possible in the south, because BoB isnt home but when they come this are goes down the drain.
And for the other answer: This wasnt for the guys who want to take POS down. This was about getting fights, trying to make living of PvP and generally ganking peeps in 0.0. I dont care much for sov anyways. |
NanDe YaNen
The Funkalistic
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 04:40:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Soyemia
And for the other answer: This wasnt for the guys who want to take POS down. This was about getting fights, trying to make living of PvP and generally ganking peeps in 0.0. I dont care much for sov anyways.
I attribute the low population of 0.0 most of the time to the fact that you only need a high population for that duration that a meaningful fight is going on. That's 0.0 for the most part. Nobody, a random scout or nano, some gatecampers, and then huge blobs. The rare mid-sized roam and finding two of them in the same area is incredibly improbable.
We're talking about non-nano PvP right? There's nothing in the gap between the lone nano's and the large blobs when it comes to targets, so there are no attackers or calls for defense at those engagement sizes. You can size up the enemy and determine if they can hit a POS and instantly know whether to log or go defend a POS.
Other than that, participation is very voluntary. With a little luck and a lot of watching local and maybe both, it's really hard to get ganked in 0.0 in your own system. For countering roaming attackers, this means it's possible to simply let the tide go back out.
Basically what I'm saying is that the reason why it seems like 0.0 is either rapiers at chokepoints or blobs smashing towers is because there's nothing in between to demand anything else and 0.0 lifestyle has evolved into a culture driven by that fact. If there was an intermediate facility between naked space and the POS, there would be intermediate-sized objectives, and medium sized responses.
You're not just asking about why people use nano's right? That's tactical. Midsized gangs can go roam and do some decent havoc when they catch the right targets flat-footed, but they have a harder time forcing engagements and a much harder time getting out of bad ones. Nano's offer both those advantages and that's their sexy.
At the point of rambling More granular sources of attention would lead to more granular tactics of harassment to draw more granular responses in less blobbable environments. This would work in favor of the small gang who could then pick an objective appropriate to their goals and shape the size of the response. At current, the targets are pretty binary and so are the responses.
At least that's what was on my fortune cookie at Lee Po House of Soy. |
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 10:37:00 -
[7]
I think there should be objectives for small gangs, so it can be profitable to have a quick and disciplined raid against a larger foe. Large fleets also take a longer time to assemble and to respond, by the time the small gang of raiders should already have had a chance to escape...
Large groups should patrol their space, and small groups should be able to sneak behind enemy lines and cause actual damage (and get some nice booty in the process).
I've supported issues regarding these problems in this CSM, and it is absolutely something I want to put more effort in in the next CSM incarnation.
---
Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
|
Rorin Cutter
Caldari
Ghosts of the Past
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 13:37:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I think there should be objectives for small gangs, so it can be profitable to have a quick and disciplined raid against a larger foe. Large fleets also take a longer time to assemble and to respond, by the time the small gang of raiders should already have had a chance to escape...
Large groups should patrol their space, and small groups should be able to sneak behind enemy lines and cause actual damage (and get some nice booty in the process).
I've supported issues regarding these problems in this CSM, and it is absolutely something I want to put more effort in in the next CSM incarnation.
This is a great idea. |
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 14:34:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Rorin Cutter
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I think there should be objectives for small gangs, so it can be profitable to have a quick and disciplined raid against a larger foe. Large fleets also take a longer time to assemble and to respond, by the time the small gang of raiders should already have had a chance to escape...
Large groups should patrol their space, and small groups should be able to sneak behind enemy lines and cause actual damage (and get some nice booty in the process).
I've supported issues regarding these problems in this CSM, and it is absolutely something I want to put more effort in in the next CSM incarnation.
This is a great idea.
Definitely is and one of the big reasons I hope Ank gets re-elected for the 2nd term.
... nothing ever burns down by itself
|
Arithron
Gallente
Gallente Trade Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 15:53:00 -
[10]
With the advent of small anchorable structures coming, these might just be the ticket small gangs are looking for to utilise 0.0 space. Essentially, what is really missing is a true covert ops/black ops that can sneak down pipes and setup requisite jump points for a small gang to jump to from empire...that would create a bit of fun and mayhem behind the lines. Of course, the small gang would still need to get back...
Alternately, look at the pipes which present natural choke/easily defendable points to prevent access to 0.0 space. Making it easier to jump into 0.0 space could be one possibility...
You have to define the goals of small player gangs a little more:
Are they for PvP in 0.0 against alliances etc (annoying to alliances, but no longer term damage done).
or
Are they for quick mining/spawn/exploration runs (quick isk-making ventures with risk)
or
Are they small-scale war groups sent by other alliances to test/destroy/harass the local Sov holders and allies.
Perspective is everything. Depending on what goals you have, your envisioned solutions might be different (and end results wanted). I included other possible goals (and probably missed some!) as I see any solution as having to be suitable for any small gang (regardless of goal).
I'm for the ability to loot and pillage...lightning strikes, quick getaway, nothing permanent done that can't be fixed with a bit of isk and tender-loving care. Black ops gangs...
I'd listen to any sensible idea though on the matter. I'm of the opinion that it could be something that CCP could look at to enrich this style of gameplay though!
Take care,
Arithron
Better to be a live dog than a dead lion... |
|
NanDe YaNen
The Funkalistic
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 17:57:00 -
[11]
Edited by: NanDe YaNen on 06/10/2008 18:00:08
Use more lotion. "Small gang targets" is kind of a landmine to some people.
I just had a fairly promising "what if" that goes like this:
What if the route to being a permanent 0.0 power went like this:
1) You can build standalone self-constructing facilities that produce the backbone income of 0.0, but require production facilities in high-sov systems in order to process into space bling. They are more vulnerable, but with low risk. Income is transient if you can't defend anything, but flows quickly if you can win some quick battles.
2) Once you get your station(s) etc and get some high sov systems with planetary control (going on the basis of Fahtim's 0.0 thread a few pages down) you can build the "high society" structures that eat production from the initial structures in order to build space-bling. This is the backbone of turning the young emperors into space pimps who are middle men for space bling.
3) Once you get enough constellation sov and other cool stuff, you can build research facilities that crank out BPC's for really nice space bling. At this point, it's a true player empire.
In short, give up-and-coming players into 0.0 a fast route to access, but make it transient and unstable as well as tethering it to the production means of larger alliances, just as players are tethered to empire for NPC fuel etc.
This might be the key to getting a more granular system that the large alliances won't throw a fit at. Their empires will be constantly eroding and they will be losing raw materials, but if those materials have to go through them, the overall power landscape still moves relatively slow.
The granular structures become the subject of mid-sized gang warfare while the alliances duke it out over the top-level production facilities and research capacity etc. 0.0 is more accessible and more meaningful in the same stroke.
Everyone Wins |
Bunyip
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 22:42:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Bunyip on 07/10/2008 22:44:37
Hello all,
In general, I think the nano nerf is a bad thing. It was only rumored to be included in one of the trinity expansions, and we saw the Alloyed Tritanium Bars market take a nose-dive because of it.
My solution would be this: have webs operate a bit differently. Momentum should still be a factor, but it should be less of a factor than it is now. If you're going at 3km/s and get webbed, you can usually break it without breaking a sweat.
The reduction thing can be changed as well, so that top speed is not cut as greatly, but the momentum thing should be looked at. From my experience with PvP (nano and non-nano), this seems to be the hinge point.
I feature an option for smaller deployables on my webpage here, but generally this does seem like the way to go. As far as the industrial side, I've had other ideas that I have yet to post on my website, but will post it soon.
-Bunyip
"May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table. |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |