Happy New Year Brisc. This random player wishes you all the best in 2021. I believe the future is cloud /stack based gaming. A true modern cloud could actually do this. Although I’ve no idea the investment required.
1 Like
Them stating the stream was “important for the game” is no different from people stating that making the game easier is “better for the newbies”. It’s really just self serving nonsense.
Literally nobody outside EVE’s inner circle is going to watch a TIDI fight for any length of time. People who aren’t in the know have zero idea of what they’re looking at, no idea of the scale of the ships involved and thus are entirely clueless of the scale of the fight. All they see are some coloured flags like they’re playing Risk but looking at the board from from 6m away, and it’s really really slow. They lack the context required to go “oh” and “ah”.
2 Likes
I started playing Eve from watching a tidi fight way back when. It was Mad Ani who was doing the play by play.
Eve fights are both the pixels and the eve community commentators, that is why people jump in to check it out. And with some luck you hope they stick around…
Not after watching the players game the system to avoid pvp though…
Ultimately, CCP needs to find a solution for large scale battles/wars - otherwise, the whole ‘space empires’ theme becomes pointless, and people will leave…
Assuming quite a lot about the reasons behind my question and my coding abilities …
… or what languages I use most of the time.
Bad publicity for the game…
1 Like
Have you considered the possibility that the actual objective of your enemy was not the structure, but rather was your fleet?
Armies of lemmings shouldn’t fight near cliffs.
No matter how hungry you are, never reach your hand into a meat grinder.
Doesn’t matter as long as there’s no possible counter to other players actions which thx to CCP is the reality.
When I jump a 100B ship on grid I’m ok not making out of there in one piece.
When I can’t reach the destination and only few people at a time are let in and wiped before the next group arrives that’s a broken game.
You can come up for any excuse in CCP defense you want but ultimately a fact remains simple. UNTILL we are told what is the server cap and what is the allowance of new grid spawns when certain number of players is reached then it’s nothing but some esoteric blah blah only CCP knows about which equals a broken game at some random unspecified (for us players) point.
That’s actually a ■■■■ move considering how “the greatest and the biggest + Guinness propaganda is spread by CCP.
Give me a number and whatever happens is fair play.
1 Like
Are you really this daft?
CCP: System cap is 5000 people
defenders: Thanks for telling us, we’ll have 5000 in system. Seems like we win.
Alternative. Jump and pray lmao.
Gtfo
It’s a game and it is supposed to be mechanically balanced.
If population cap breaks the balance that’s fair, people simply outsmarted the devs BUT if the actual system randomly creates a completely 1 sided experience (ability to project power/dps) then it breaks the balance tenfold because it allows the power distribution gap to grow / shrink without any contest.
Even actual space has lag. It’s not CCP creating the limitations of physical reality . . . or is it?!
Then STFU. What are you complaining about it for, then?
Yeah . . . and that broken game is called EVE Online. Do you think this is the worst aspect of EVE’s broken-ness? Consider the possibility that the person who ordered your ships to their doom works for your enemy.
I’m not defending CCP. I would never do such a thing.
I am attacking the assertion that you are intelligent. You have demonstrated quite the opposite.
Why didn’t you just go there and look? Does no one in your organization understand the concept of scouting, reconnaissance, force protection? Do you not have a throwaway ship and clone lying around that you can send in to tell you “Uhhhh, this is gonna take 20 minutes and you’ll just get blapped upon entry.”?
Yeah, right. I’m sure your interested in fair play, Goon . . . of if you’re not a Goon, you should at least be getting paid by them to spout this ignorance and petulance.
Send The Mittani my regards.
Reading comprehension and logic ftw lmao.
Everything you stated is based on game mechanic or some personal issues you decided to project.
Random spawn allowance caps are not game mechanics. Those are server side fixes to get the game running even thought at this state it already starts to ■■■■ on everyone and shouldn’t be running because it doesn’t provide equal performance/ ability to interact to everybody and instead only a certain amount of people are actually ABLE to play. This is a unspecified boundary. You wanna hypernet sov be my guest. Fortunately not everybody is that retarded and CCP will feel it at some point. It happened in the past.
Hi, @Brisc_Rubal !
An Issue
Based on the reaction to the last M2-X brawl, I decided to write this “heavy” post considering you are still a CSM member and will have a final meeting somewhere in February. Right? Looks like a lot of players are interested in who that M2-X guy is - The Macho BindObject. And how to figure out current issues. Well, I appreciate the CCP Devs’ sense of humor to name their server Exception Handlers this way. A lot of people, looks like, are disappointed with these miracles happening periodically.
About Warfare
Well, PAPI did maybe the riskiest and weirdest thing ever in EVE. After UALX-3 NC/PL did it again. Maybe in a parallel reality, on other servers, it could have been a heroic leap. Anyway, those old memes like KillahFlee are irrelevant and TEST definitely has “jurassic” big balls. Maybe Goonswarm prior to 2011 or 2014 could do something similar. But the modern Goonswarm is just too prudent and will not risk this way more than 10-25% of assets they have, without Plan B, C, D.
Maybe I’m not the best strategy person in EVE, but here’s my point of view regarding a long run campaign. This SOV war you lost like months ago, based on the available numbers of opponents able to play in different timezones. The PAPI have strong forces in Pacific/Au, EU and NA time zones proportionally. Therefore, you can’t use the in game timezone tanking effectively, by setting all those vulnerability timers to let say Monday morning. They have better control over territories. At the same time you can theoretically win this war based on the “fortress defense tactic”. It depends on how motivated PAPI will be to continue this siege. Well, the best “fortress tactic” opportunity or tempo for you already happened in M2-X (second). I think we should not expect that this will happen again anytime soon during the next decade. Also everybody knows that you’ll not be able to keep locked some of their Capitals in M2-X for a long time. And if PAPI will not surrender, you should do actually the same thing as they did during the last 6 months in a reverse mode. It’s very possible that lockdown will be cancelled in IRL and less players will be able to show up for SOV timers. Obviously you can’t just take your Supers and deploy them somewhere in Catch or Esoteria right now. What it means - countless hours to form up fleets to attack or defense different things. The main question right now is for how long the PAPI is ready to siege Delve and 1DQ or/and for how long Imperium is ready to sustain this siege. This is the core factor of this war, considering they’ll not make any insane risky movements anymore. I’m just interested. Are you ready to jump on their Keepstar in T5ZI-S after this, considering they’ll log in like 5000 pilots?
Now let’s do the math. In the best scenario for you, you managed to destroy 75 real Titans. In a scenario where they were without buffs, active modules and Fax support. It’s a big blow to TEST, but if they have enough resources, in a month all that can be rebuilded. But for PAPI entirely it isn’t so relatively big deal. Can you reach Catch until February? This is just evidence that more pilots in a system doesn’t mean more damage and destruction done. This time you destroyed less by having like two times more pilots. Of course you didn’t lose anything for known reasons. In 9-4 were destroyed like 3 or 4 Supers only, considering 6300 pilots in the system. Under 1000 pilots per side can not be enough to destroy a Keepstar, at the same time. So we know that the best performance/destruction ratio can happen if there are like 4000 - 4500 pilots in a system and like 2000 pilots per side. It’s quite manageable and allows even to bring in more reinforcements. The current reality is that these brawls can’t be scaled too much. Nothing will work for either side. As you mentioned, CCP spent millions of euros to upgrade their servers. Of course they’ll not spend $100M (FANG level) on servers to let 10000 nerds have fun once per two years. New technologies and possible new server algorithms can be a partial solution, but it will not happen in the near future. And even then the in game connection scalability will be an issue.
So, no matter how this war will end. The main question is: “Are you’ll invade Legacy with Titans or with Dreadnoughts and Carriers in the future?”. Now almost everybody talks that there is a big request to reduce the number of Titans in the game - to push the “Restart” button for the new meta where Capitals are super nerfed, compared to how they were.
My suggestions
Now a summary about what I mentioned above. It can be difficult to build a game mechanic to keep like 4000-4500 pilots in the system (2000 per side). At the same time I see a simple solution for this. It’s just a raw idea, which can be optimised differently. To some degree it already works for hi-sec Wardecs and Devs confirmed the ability to refactor the referred server code. It requires a coalition ID in game. All alliances interested to start a war should sign for a coalition pact firstly and declare a war secondly. The opposite side should do something similar. Obviously only the coalition members of the current war can use Entosis on I-Hubs, TCUs and benefit from other unique mechanics. Members not belonging to the coalition shouldn’t be able to use Tethering or to Dock while the war is active. Coalition ID privileges during the war should overwrite all alliance and corporation privileges towards pilots without their respective coalition ID flag. Something like it already works in FW. The Wardec under the coalition ID must be something like a contract and should put some serious penalties on all alliances that signed it. For example, you can refuse to defend assets, but you shouldn’t be able to leave the coalition and join the other side for the next 3 or 6 months as an alliance. The same should be true for corporations and individual members, but with less penalties in a descending order. It should be difficult for pilots to switch sides during a war by choosing who is winning and vice versa.
When there’s no point to defend anything anymore, the lost side should declare an act of capitulation if most leaders agree with it. It means that all remaining I-Hubs and TCUs automatically are transferred to the winner side to be distributed between alliances further. It means it will not be required for winners to spend months to reclaim all those Fozzie timers over regions. After capitulation all TCUs and I-HUBs should get transition flag marker, which means that all remaining SOV structures will be put in a capitulation stance for a month (for example). During this time they can be unanchored by current owners and assets inside extracted to Safety, otherwise they’ll switch to winners or will be destroyed after DT.
During SOV Wardec, while there is any TCU or I-HUB in the system, the maximum allowed number per coalition ID should be limited to 2000 pilots plus additional 500 spots for neutrals. These 500 neutral spots should allow use of Filaments, organise Dreadbombs and other activities for neutral parties and gapers in any sieged systems . Also it should be a little window for warfare operations for coalitions at war. Obviously, it will be risky to jump in a sieged system with a neutral capital fleet unable to Tether or Dock, especially before fight. If the available connections pool is full per coalition and neutrals based on their ID, any additional attempts to jump in by using different methods should be prohibited with a respective message for pilots attempting it. Also these limitations should work during Wardec period only and, during this time, it should put significant penalties on mining and ratting potency for parties interested to defend their mining fleets with neutral alts in local.
PS. No matter it was tedious for me to write this post, I tried hard.
The reason coalitions exist is because CCP made it too easy to project large forces anywhere in EvE. If you want to reduce coalitions, make travel harder and more dangerous, if you do this instead of just going round the map easily blobbing whoever they want alliances might have to stop bluing every alliance within 3 regions of them to find content. If you look at the earlier years of EvE there was always localised fighting, people in the north east fought vs people in the north west, people in the south fought others in the south as it was harder to go to the other side of the map for fights and took a lot of time and effort so you couldn’t blue everyone around you or you would have no content and history proved, take ASCN for example if you sit around idle with no content for your pvpers eventually someone will come and remove you you very easily.
Whilst its easy for alliances and coalitions to travel around blobbing whoever they like they will always band together and form these large coalitions as its so easy to and safe to do it. If CCP wants to break this current cycle they need to find ways to make EvE big again or we will juist carry on push up numbers and end up in the same situation. EVE numbers aren’t as high as they was 10 years ago and whilst blobs were very much around they was never to the scale they are now so it clear shows you that CCP has pushed 0.0 gameplay especially towards huge coalitions.
Maybe your understanding is limited and you dont know that you cant AFK-dock supercapitals in fortizars. On the other hand this is beyond your fixation with Vily and Papi. What if they didnt have a fortizar, they shouldnt have taken a fight because you managed to clog the system?
Obviously you also forgot in your basic elements of strategy, drag bubbles etc from an enemy controlling the grid controlling the grid …
In any case no one should be forced to tie up 24-48h of play time because o server issues
It is really sad…
But CCP doesnt care enough…
What if? What if what if what if what if??? LOL.
IF YOU EVER find yourself in an alliance sieging the keepstar of another major alliance(I don’t care who they are), and your alliance does NOT have a fort and several australia houses on grid or around system, then you need to leave that alliance because your leaders are incompetent.
Kind of like you because if you can’t read(which you can’t) let me re-iterate:
The FORT ISN’T THERE TO AFK SUPERS ON. AFK’ing supers on a fort is stupid. It’s there to dock your subs or be a tether spot to hit when you hit grid, store any reinforcement/replacement ships you want in system(even if that’s just a bunch of sabres and jackdaws), and be a potential safe-ish in-cyno spot for your super fleet. As well as SEVERAL off grid BM’s you should have made as an alliance before hand. Obviously a keepstar is better and should have been deployed beforehand, but we’re not going to delve into WHAT IF.
And Puuuuuuhhhh-lease! Drag bubbles have been in this game for FOREVER. If your FC’s are too incompetent to figure out how to deal with them… again, leave that alliance. But you’re understanding is so amateur and entitled you feel you should just be able to log in, click undock and press F1 and that’s all the work you need to do.
Almost every single incident of note that has EVER happened in this game has been the result of someone(s) spending days, weeks, sometimes even MONTHS OR YEARS planning them out. The Judge knifing CO2 in the back? Years in CO2 building trust and believing he was working for the alliance until he couldn’t do it anymore for various reasons. Hard Knocks wormhole getting toppled? Months going into pre-staging and planning stuff so the assets were in there when the time was right. Toppling of every major alliance that has risen and fallen in this game? Months, even years breaking them down or watching them stagnate until it was time to crush them. Even World War Bee was months of the Low sec alliances repelling Goons before the Casino guys got their feelings hurt and started chunking money at everyone, and then months and months of work to break Goonswarm at the time down. I can name more if you want. But this war has been going on for what? 6 months? And you don’t think you don’t have to plan a day or two ahead of time for what EVERYONE is hyping as the next biggest fight ever? A couple days AFTER the newest biggest fight ever?
Please… ‘no one should be forced to tie up 24-48 hours of play time because of server issues…’ Entitled, ignorant, and foolish. Every single major battle in this game, except for maybe Asakai and one or two others, is the result of many someone’s spending days preparing for it. If YOU can’t be bothered to move your character the day before, then YOU are the problem. And if your alliance can’t be bothered to take a fight seriously enough to move assets ahead of time, then again… leave that alliance. I don’t care what alliance it is. Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance
3 Likes
Let me explain the lag “advantage” to you. Hopefully I won’t need to draw you a picture but let me know if you still don’t get it:
Fleet A, let’s call them “Goons”, are on a grid, “One”. Fleet B, let’s call them “Morons”, are on a grid, “Two”.
Now, Fleet B, the “Morons” are assaulting grid “One” from grid “Two”. Fleet A, the “Goons”, are countering that assault by fire and fortification. They are slowing down the assaulting group’s advance and killing them outright.
We know that there is at least 1 second of interval between the arrival of the Fleet B “Morons” onto grid “One”, a server “tick”, and their ability to engage a target on that grid. Given TiDi, let’s say that is extended to 10 seconds, i.e. the server will acknowledge and initiate the next command signaled within 10 seconds. Think of it like a conveyor belt with buckets. You can only stick one (or a few) things in each bucket. You can’t just dump your whole load in one bucket immediately. Furthermore, in order to know which signals you want to send, you have to see what’s in the previous bucket, which also only gets updated in 10 second intervals. So, when you see an enemy ship, it could have been there anywhere from 0 to 10 seconds already. Assume, on average, 5 seconds and lets assume the Goons (the elite PVPer ones, at least) can wipe the Cheet-oh dust off their fingers or otherwise mitigate the filth on their fingers in 3 or 4 seconds to press the CTRL key on their keyboard while spamming their right mouse click on your ship. That gives them a full second of trying to kill you before you are even able to deliver a similar kill signal to the server.
Now, if I have a gun to your head and you have a gun to my head, and I pull the trigger 1 second before you, does the train to New York or the train to Los Angeles arrive first?
Lmao that’s probably the dumbest thing I ever heard in context of eve online.
Doesn’t even make sense unless it’s some small alliance doing mostly one sided thing.
Well, then you’re an idiot 
But, then again, that was obvious with your first post.
Eve is about planning.
/thread because OP doesn’t understand Eve is about planning ahead.
1 Like