1 (edited by Phalanxx 2011-02-06 07:34:49)

Topic: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

How has the fighting changed since the anti-blob mechanics increase in the Feb. 4th patch.

The Koykili fight Feb 5th had some large numbers involved. I'd like to hear some views of the participants of that fight regarding the effects of the increased interference.

-Would appreciate if posters would state whether they have been involved in a large scale fight since the patch or are theorizing- Ekim is excused, edited after his post

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

anti - blob? whats that

the interference system does nothing to stop blobs at all infact its makes the problem worse  for the small gang as they cant lock stuff

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

It's effective -- but unfortunately if you can move your interference onto a small group and they then have less numbers and are crippled as bad as you are.

What happened today with the passive hack being on a dead end outcrop... the group that gets trapped in here is the group that ends up getting the other groups interference pushed onto them.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

i have tried to come up with some way to deal with it and have decided id rather not be the dev assigned to fix the issue

i think the only way to deal with it is to get rid of the whole intrusion thing because thats the only time these huge fights happen perhaps something more along the lines of multiple saps that go active every hour and if you hold it you get access to minerals or loot etc

the reason people blob up is because the fighting is scripted and organised in advance if there was a way to make it feel more like a front line on a battlefeild with multiple battles taking place over strategic resources simultaneously that would make it more interesting

i think the new planting thing will make an interesting dynamic and may help the problem i know m2s are happy cuz now we have a reason to come visit every now and then:D

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

to counter the interference mechanics, you have to bring a nexus guy with the two sensor nexus running. Though, its more likely that the bigger group has a place for a nexus buffer.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Annihilator wrote:

to counter the interference mechanics, you have to bring a nexus guy with the two sensor nexus running. Though, its more likely that the bigger group has a place for a nexus buffer.

Pro-blob mechanics working as intended!

            _
           /(|
          (  :
         __\  \  _____
       (____)  `|
      (____)|   |
       (____).__|
        (___)__.|_____
->You just lost The Game<-

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

its not that i was against a debuff...
my suggestions was multi-hit weapon effects that would only affect the big, crammed group.

Overrunning a smaller group would have a negative effect for the big one as they would start to hit each other.

The interference system is more a pro-mech blob vs. small bot blob mechanic. not an anti-blob mechanic after all.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Anti blob consequence's are in real life,

The result is a 1 + -1 = 0  for the larger number.

The smaller number is just out of numbers.

Strength in numbers,.

its contradictory, or an Infinity,. it is what it is..

A whole different concept needs to be explored,..

9 (edited by Xini Nemesis 2011-02-07 13:37:22)

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

They just coded it wrong.

How it should be "The interference field generated by the specific electronic circuits unique to the programming of every corporations bots and to a lesser extent by the interation of sparks on each other when linked in a squad combine to create a unique and shared interfence field for members of the corp / squad within the area".

In laymens terms corp A interference is on a different frequency to Corp B and does not affect it.  If Squad C has a member of Corp A then A & C are combined into the same interfence field.

That way the blob will suffer but smaller squads wont as they will either be further away or not suffer from the 1 + -1 phenomen due to the different interfence  field.

Hope that makes sense smile

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Yes, co-operation in mmos should be punished!

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Xini Nemesis wrote:

They just coded it wrong.

How it should be "The interference field generated by the specific electronic circuits unique to the programming of every corporations bots and to a lesser extent by the interation of sparks on each other when linked in a squad combine to create a unique and shared interfence field for members of the corp / squad within the area".

In laymens terms corp A interference is on a different frequency to Corp B and does not affect it.  If Squad C has a member of Corp A then A & C are combined into the same interfence field.

That way the blob will suffer but smaller squads wont as they will either be further away or not suffer from the 1 + -1 phenomen due to the different interfence  field.

Hope that makes sense smile

It would, but corps would jsut squad up with themselves and not others in the alliance. And in most cases, except for norhoop, there would be no interference effects at all but we'd still have the same numbers on the field under one logical banner. Unless you do a:

If relation is blue/green/neutral you receive interference from this unit. If relation is red/yellow you don't + squad mechanics that you outlined. This still has the potential to be exploited but would be worth it since there would be FF happening relatively often.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

GLiMPSE wrote:
Xini Nemesis wrote:

They just coded it wrong.

How it should be "The interference field generated by the specific electronic circuits unique to the programming of every corporations bots and to a lesser extent by the interation of sparks on each other when linked in a squad combine to create a unique and shared interfence field for members of the corp / squad within the area".

In laymens terms corp A interference is on a different frequency to Corp B and does not affect it.  If Squad C has a member of Corp A then A & C are combined into the same interfence field.

That way the blob will suffer but smaller squads wont as they will either be further away or not suffer from the 1 + -1 phenomen due to the different interfence  field.

Hope that makes sense smile

It would, but corps would jsut squad up with themselves and not others in the alliance. And in most cases, except for norhoop, there would be no interference effects at all but we'd still have the same numbers on the field under one logical banner. Unless you do a:

If relation is blue/green/neutral you receive interference from this unit. If relation is red/yellow you don't + squad mechanics that you outlined. This still has the potential to be exploited but would be worth it since there would be FF happening relatively often.

Scratch that, upon further review this wont work. Blobs will just set allies to yellow and hostiles to red.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Xini Nemesis wrote:

They just coded it wrong.

In laymens terms corp A interference is on a different frequency to Corp B and does not affect it.  If Squad C has a member of Corp A then A & C are combined into the same interfence field.

That way the blob will suffer but smaller squads wont as they will either be further away or not suffer from the 1 + -1 phenomen due to the different interfence  field.

Hope that makes sense smile

Makes perfect sense,. we can insert as many layers as we want,. or fraction it up infinitely ,. the result is the same..

The larger value will still be larger,. There is no way to make 1 = 2,. could be possible to get it close no doubt, but then what about 1=3 ? ,.. insert more layers?,.. its an infinity. it cant be rationalized with.

There is no solution to prevent strength in numbers.

The only thing I can think of is some type of layer that effects the targeting of a group trying to zerg lock and spike one target,. some type of interference or feed back to make it more logical to spread out the dps. but again,. I dont see this preventing the strength of simply out numbering the competition..

14 (edited by Tiggus 2011-02-07 21:47:56)

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Greenleaf wrote:

There is no solution to prevent strength in numbers.

yep.  Devs are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole with this one.  Any tool you give to both sides will be more effective when used by the side with more numbers.  This includes aoe damage and all the other solutions I have heard.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

GLiMPSE wrote:
Xini Nemesis wrote:

They just coded it wrong.

How it should be "The interference field generated by the specific electronic circuits unique to the programming of every corporations bots and to a lesser extent by the interation of sparks on each other when linked in a squad combine to create a unique and shared interfence field for members of the corp / squad within the area".

In laymens terms corp A interference is on a different frequency to Corp B and does not affect it.  If Squad C has a member of Corp A then A & C are combined into the same interfence field.

That way the blob will suffer but smaller squads wont as they will either be further away or not suffer from the 1 + -1 phenomen due to the different interfence  field.

Hope that makes sense smile

It would, but corps would jsut squad up with themselves and not others in the alliance. And in most cases, except for norhoop, there would be no interference effects at all but we'd still have the same numbers on the field under one logical banner. Unless you do a:

If relation is blue/green/neutral you receive interference from this unit. If relation is red/yellow you don't + squad mechanics that you outlined. This still has the potential to be exploited but would be worth it since there would be FF happening relatively often.

Interference from anything thats not on landmarks.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Shaedys wrote:
GLiMPSE wrote:
Xini Nemesis wrote:

They just coded it wrong.

How it should be "The interference field generated by the specific electronic circuits unique to the programming of every corporations bots and to a lesser extent by the interation of sparks on each other when linked in a squad combine to create a unique and shared interfence field for members of the corp / squad within the area".

In laymens terms corp A interference is on a different frequency to Corp B and does not affect it.  If Squad C has a member of Corp A then A & C are combined into the same interfence field.

That way the blob will suffer but smaller squads wont as they will either be further away or not suffer from the 1 + -1 phenomen due to the different interfence  field.

Hope that makes sense smile

It would, but corps would jsut squad up with themselves and not others in the alliance. And in most cases, except for norhoop, there would be no interference effects at all but we'd still have the same numbers on the field under one logical banner. Unless you do a:

If relation is blue/green/neutral you receive interference from this unit. If relation is red/yellow you don't + squad mechanics that you outlined. This still has the potential to be exploited but would be worth it since there would be FF happening relatively often.

Interference from anything thats not on landmarks.


You could set your friends to yellow though, and display them on landmarks, and then it's pointless.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Tiggus wrote:
Greenleaf wrote:

There is no solution to prevent strength in numbers.

yep.  Devs are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole with this one.  Any tool you give to both sides will be more effective when used by the side with more numbers.  This includes aoe damage and all the other solutions I have heard.

exactly

the only way to fix it is to have more options for pvp and way way more things to fight over

get rid of the whole intrusion thing entirely  maybe even get rid of outposts on beta as well ( or at least introduce islands without outposts)

have systems where a pvp group can attack an npc mining facility and loot if for minerals
have things that a small group can accomplish with out being tied to a bigger naofest or commiting to "living" on the beta

I also think this type of game could use instanced type battle zones were small groups and people new to pvp can go and get a taste of combat without being ultimately absorbed into on of the bigger corps or being ganked at a teleporter and never coming back

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Ekim wrote:
Tiggus wrote:
Greenleaf wrote:

There is no solution to prevent strength in numbers.

yep.  Devs are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole with this one.  Any tool you give to both sides will be more effective when used by the side with more numbers.  This includes aoe damage and all the other solutions I have heard.

exactly

the only way to fix it is to have more options for pvp and way way more things to fight over

get rid of the whole intrusion thing entirely  maybe even get rid of outposts on beta as well ( or at least introduce islands without outposts)

have systems where a pvp group can attack an npc mining facility and loot if for minerals
have things that a small group can accomplish with out being tied to a bigger naofest or commiting to "living" on the beta

I also think this type of game could use instanced type battle zones were small groups and people new to pvp can go and get a taste of combat without being ultimately absorbed into on of the bigger corps or being ganked at a teleporter and never coming back

No instances, it's bad for immersion and it's not part of a sandbox.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

to repeate myself - the interference system is not a general anti-blob mechanic - mainly against bot-blob. in that whole system, mechs, especially tyrannos and gropho, got the most advantages.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

GLiMPSE wrote:

It would, but corps would jsut squad up with themselves and not others in the alliance. And in most cases, except for norhoop, there would be no interference effects at all but we'd still have the same numbers on the field under one logical banner. Unless you do a:

If relation is blue/green/neutral you receive interference from this unit. If relation is red/yellow you don't + squad mechanics that you outlined. This still has the potential to be exploited but would be worth it since there would be FF happening relatively often.

True, but it brings a whole new range of "balance checks" that weaken the blob. No longer could they bring 2-3 remote reppers and keep a 100-man fleet perma-repped, there would need to be one or two repper in every squad. The main FC couldn't see where everyone outside his radar range was, thus "follow the yellow dots" would be eliminated for zergling fodder who are too slow/too new.

Also, anything that includes friendly fire provides a significant issue for the blob.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

21 (edited by GLiMPSE 2011-02-08 23:27:24)

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Syndic wrote:
GLiMPSE wrote:

It would, but corps would jsut squad up with themselves and not others in the alliance. And in most cases, except for norhoop, there would be no interference effects at all but we'd still have the same numbers on the field under one logical banner. Unless you do a:

If relation is blue/green/neutral you receive interference from this unit. If relation is red/yellow you don't + squad mechanics that you outlined. This still has the potential to be exploited but would be worth it since there would be FF happening relatively often.

True, but it brings a whole new range of "balance checks" that weaken the blob. No longer could they bring 2-3 remote reppers and keep a 100-man fleet perma-repped, there would need to be one or two repper in every squad. The main FC couldn't see where everyone outside his radar range was, thus "follow the yellow dots" would be eliminated for zergling fodder who are too slow/too new.

Also, anything that includes friendly fire provides a significant issue for the blob.

I don't agree.

You'd divide your RR amongst the squads (making it easier for the RR to know who to rep), you'd all be in the same comms, and you'd all be blobbed on-top of each other... it'd actually work out better for blobs that have any sort of competent leadership -- they'd have less interference.

22 (edited by Ekim 2011-02-09 10:38:37)

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

GLiMPSE wrote:
Ekim wrote:
Tiggus wrote:

yep.  Devs are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole with this one.  Any tool you give to both sides will be more effective when used by the side with more numbers.  This includes aoe damage and all the other solutions I have heard.

exactly

the only way to fix it is to have more options for pvp and way way more things to fight over

get rid of the whole intrusion thing entirely  maybe even get rid of outposts on beta as well ( or at least introduce islands without outposts)

have systems where a pvp group can attack an npc mining facility and loot if for minerals
have things that a small group can accomplish with out being tied to a bigger naofest or commiting to "living" on the beta

I also think this type of game could use instanced type battle zones were small groups and people new to pvp can go and get a taste of combat without being ultimately absorbed into on of the bigger corps or being ganked at a teleporter and never coming back

No instances, it's bad for immersion and it's not part of a sandbox.


and why is that ? i have never understood the whole its bad derp derp
  give me some examples of why its bad ? dont just make a statement with no

here ill start :

its bad because people will just do them all the time instead of coming and getting killed in  "real pvp"

cool what if people in a sandbox game as you have stated this is don't want to come *** it up with massive numbers and want to have a quick fight before they go to bed ?

eve has it but they call it a test server has that broken the "immersion" ?

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Sandbox mmos have several system inherent ideas - like having to prevail with the tools one has got in that coherent world - that sandbox wants to be. Consequences are a key element - possibly not prevailing in that world also - instances cripple that.

In fact consequences and political system as well as goodies are missing. Things get boring when you can do what you wanna do - sounds contradicting to games? Not at all - its the key element.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Redline wrote:

Sandbox mmos have several system inherent ideas - like having to prevail with the tools one has got in that coherent world - that sandbox wants to be. Consequences are a key element - possibly not prevailing in that world also - instances cripple that.

In fact consequences and political system as well as goodies are missing. Things get boring when you can do what you wanna do - sounds contradicting to games? Not at all - its the key element.

Thanks red. you saved me from having to say -- take your arena's back to wow

For this I will give you +5 cool points.

Re: Anti-Blob Mechanics Since the Feb 4th patch

Redline wrote:

Sandbox mmos have several system inherent ideas - like having to prevail with the tools one has got in that coherent world - that sandbox wants to be. Consequences are a key element - possibly not prevailing in that world also - instances cripple that.

In fact consequences and political system as well as goodies are missing. Things get boring when you can do what you wanna do - sounds contradicting to games? Not at all - its the key element.


see i hear this type of thing all the time followed by the obligatory " go back to wow lol"
and i cant find  how adding another place to have some pvp without having to go look for it and only finding some miners or a blob is taking anything away from this game
I wager it will bring way more to the game than it takes away from it, for starters there are many people playing perpetuum who have never pvp'd and if they have some easy pickup fights they might find they enjoy that aspect of the game and get involved in the " real game"

you say consequences like an arena instance system cant have them it could also  -gasp-
have rewards too!
things get boring when you cant do what you want to to as well in a "sandbox"game


so any way back to this whole topic has a separate thread now so back to what ever the hell this thread is about