Gaming Largest space battle in gaming history

MJR

C++ developer in the mix
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
United States
Think of it in real life terms. Would you have your carrier group sit still while the enemy is mobilizing and closing in on multiple directions to cut off a tactical retreat? Hell no. That just sounds so illogical. I mean, at least like Urwumpe said, move around a bit to buy time for reinforcements. What could be more simpler than that? I mean, just because you have an extremely powerful ship doesn't mean it is infallible to destruction. I think they got a little too excited with what they were rolling in with.
 

statickid

CatDog from Deimos
Donator
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
1,683
Reaction score
4
Points
38
From the sound of the other articles though, this was a group of people that would attack smaller isolated ships with a fleet of huge ships (if that's what "fishing" is idk) so I'm thinking that their mental strategy capabilities were limited. People accustomed to winning by just being huge and indestructible don't know what strategy is, or if they do, it's possible to forget
 

n122vu

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
42
Points
73
Location
KHNB
People accustomed to winning by just being huge and indestructible don't know what strategy is, or if they do, it's possible to forget

I think you nailed the problem with that statement.

"His strategy suggests....two-dimensional thinking."

**EDIT** Seems like we're pulling off-topic a bit from the OP of this thread, which was not my intent. I've said all I have to say on this part of it, but if there's enough to discuss about the $9k loss, maybe we could start another thread?
 
Last edited:

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,748
Reaction score
1,410
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
From the sound of the other articles though, this was a group of people that would attack smaller isolated ships with a fleet of huge ships (if that's what "fishing" is idk) so I'm thinking that their mental strategy capabilities were limited. People accustomed to winning by just being huge and indestructible don't know what strategy is, or if they do, it's possible to forget

I think it is a good way of game balancing. But then, it can of course get out of hand, because only the bigger alliances can support the bigger ships then.

And I am not sure if this really gets off-topic, but I think a thread about space combat tactics and strategies wouldn't be bad, since I am pretty sure we have enough people with interest there... but I think one thread already existed and slowly went down...
 

MJR

C++ developer in the mix
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
United States
This actually reminds me of war scenarios from think tanks about the US 5th Fleet in the Strait of Hormuz during a U.S./NATO war with Iran. While our ships are very large and powerful, as this person's was, asymmetrical warfare can hamper that advantage. What many were saying was that Iran would use there smaller ships to "harass" and potentially be used as "bombs" against the battle ships, like what happened to the USS Cole in a way. It sounds a little far fetched, but if you think of it, smaller ships move much much faster and are harder to target.

Carrier groups are the lifeline of any superpower's military! If these are damaged severely or destroyed, then the capability to project force hundreds of miles in-land is diminished. It is a lot less riskier than to send troops directly into land warfare. So in this case, the "carrier" should have stayed a little bit back while the other smaller ships duke it out with the enemy's smaller ships. It could have been a definite game changer if the person would have developed and had a thoughtful plan. You never send in your strongest forces to the front line! They are used as a contingency most of the time. Think if all U.S. Carriers were destroyed in a battle. Do you think the war would be won?
 
Last edited:

jangofett287

Heat shield 'tester'
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Messages
1,147
Reaction score
9
Points
53
ok so how much was time slowed? if they battled for 5 hours, what was the approximate "real time" length of the battle?

The maximum time dilation in EVE is 10% of realtime. Assuming that this was hit almost as soon as the battle started (not unlikely), then 5 hours * 0.1 = 0.5 hours = 30 minutes
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,748
Reaction score
1,410
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
You never send in your strongest forces to the front line! They are used as a contingency most of the time. Think if all U.S. Carriers were destroyed in a battle. Do you think the war would be won?

That is wrong... you use the big one (tm) as important tactical asset. This means deploy them in a very sensible way, and don't go high risks. This does not mean, stay away from the front line. But when you deploy them at the front line (eg, a battleship in WW2) you deploy them not alone and independent of others, but in concert with all the other ships. When the big one goes forward, all the smaller ones move with it, because it is the center of gravity. You don't deploy the big ones at some random point in the front line, but where the big ones get deployed, you suddenly will have the most critical section of the front line and pull all other units to reinforce it. (How to do it wrong, see Operation Rheinübung)

Of course, this must happen surprising for the enemy, so you usually don't move all the small ships with the big one, like those small fish around a shark. The big one is somewhere at the distance, assisting maybe from second row and is only important because it exists. The enemy will wait for a chance to unexist it (as you see in the EVE example). And suddenly, and in a way that only experts will notice this from the incomplete knowledge of the battlefield (you have no god view in real combat), the motions change subtile in a slow dance, and suddenly, the big one is forward, slicing through the units of the enemy at a weak spot and all the smaller ships assist.

And of course, if you are caught like that, you do the only possible way: Retreat and regroup. It is better to give up space, than to give up important units or time. Space can be won again, smaller units can be rebuild, but the big ones are hard to replace in a war. And lost time never comes back.
 

jedidia

shoemaker without legs
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
10,162
Reaction score
1,283
Points
203
Location
between the planets
Ah, Eve seems to be outdoing itself every other week lately. Interesting! If I were its publisher, I'd start sponsoring conflicts behind the scenes to draw new players... Wait a minute, this really starts to look like the real world.

So now the events in online games pass as news.

Yes, and it's about time. You have news articles about movies or books every other day. Games deserve the same coverage and recognition. Eve has over half a million subscribers, and lately generates rather interesting events rather frequently. They deserve to make the news.
 

Hielor

Defender of Truth
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
May 30, 2008
Messages
5,580
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Your going to need to invest serveral months if not years to actually get to the stage of being able to participate in something like this without getting blown into tiny little pieces in a single shot.
Common misconception, actually. A week-old player can easily be a valuable participant in fleet battles.

If you specialize in a single ship type, you can easily be on par with veterans in that ship type within a couple months.

It really comes down to getting into a good corp that will help you do what you want and is willing to include you in activities.

If you're interested in trying it out I can hook you up with a longer free trial.
 

MJR

C++ developer in the mix
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
United States
That is exactly what I meant to say. I think you misunderstood me. :p
I was just saying how your main forces, especially if they have much more weak spots than others, should stay back unless they have proper reinforcements and residual forces protecting them. Of course they are used as a spearhead, only when used properly though.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,748
Reaction score
1,410
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
That is exactly what I meant to say. I think you misunderstood me. :p

Me German. Der ver zwei peanuts, valking down der strasse, and von vas . . . assaulted! peanut.

I was just saying how your main forces, especially if they have much more weak spots than others, should stay back unless they have proper reinforcements and residual forces protecting them. Of course they are used as a spearhead, only when used properly though.

And never do strategy by the book. Something stupid like doing a landing at Inchon, can be a smart move. And something smart can be very stupid, like having two task forces for taking Midway.
 

MJR

C++ developer in the mix
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
United States
Me German. Der ver zwei peanuts, valking down der strasse, and von vas . . . assaulted! peanut.



And never do strategy by the book. Something stupid like doing a landing at Inchon, can be a smart move. And something smart can be very stupid, like having two task forces for taking Midway.
I want to talk a bit in German, but I am afraid everyone will be alienated. :D

Yep yep. I always think of war as being extremely dynamic pending the confounding variables in play. Though a certain tactic worked for one era, it may not work for the other.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,748
Reaction score
1,410
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
Yep yep. I always think of war as being extremely dynamic pending the confounding variables in play. Though a certain tactic worked for one era, it may not work for the other.

Well, from my experience, the very abstract parts of "The Art Of War" and "On War" are timeless. regardless which kind of conflict you have and which technology it is based on, they will always find their application.

But of course, strategy requires more than just learning the books and be creative. It also requires you to either have a high logistic skill, or have advisors, who handle the logistics optimally for you. The rest after the logistics are done, is just tactics and often pretty boring from a commanders perspective. You go, you see and you win.

The loss of such a carrier is thus not inevitable, even with so many people hunting it and even with a traitor telling them where the carrier will be next. if you plan your moves carefully, you will know in advance, that something is in the air, even if you can't yet point at the traitor. If you then ignore your bad feeling about this and go on like planned before... well, you deserved it. See the Battle of Midway there, where some proper intelligence and reconnaissance by the Imperial Japanese Navy before the battle could have told them that something is not as planned.
 
Last edited:

mojoey

Bwoah
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
3,623
Reaction score
0
Points
61
Just goes to show, that the Soviet Brute-Force approach of the 40s won't always work.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,748
Reaction score
1,410
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
Just goes to show, that the Soviet Brute-Force approach of the 40s won't always work.

It is rather the German "Wunderwaffe" religion vs the Soviet Brute-Force-approach. Who cares if many newbs die in the battle, as long as the almost indestructible supercarrier is destroyed.
 

2Gm over cxc

New member
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The largest capital ship is nothing without proper escort and screening.

Yamato with her 71,000 ton displacement and 18.1" naval guns would be as potent as a rowboat against a single WWI-era S-boat submarine without efficient destroyer escort. And her depth-charging, deck-launched float planes would be effectively blind without an escort providing active and passive sonar screening.

Same goes with maintaining a combat air patrol to protect against torpedo and dive bombers.

And then once the capital ships are lost, the poor-performing escorts are completely vulnerable against enemy capital ships - or aircraft if the carrier force is neutralized.

I would imagine the same principles would apply in space fleet conflicts - capital ships maintain standoff distance and take pot shots at each other, escorts protect capital ships, and fighter bombers and submarines (or stealth spacecraft) attempt to neutralize capital ships to allow their fleet to move in and deal the coup de grace.

I would also imagine that the massively increased range of gravity-free kinetic energy and electromagnetic weapons would only increase the importance of a fleet's ability to maintain standoff range.....

In short, shoulda protected that big ass ship! :thumbup:
 
Last edited:

Izack

Non sequitur
Addon Developer
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
6,665
Reaction score
13
Points
113
Location
The Wilderness, N.B.
Except that any drone-swarm with a power source and lasers could effectively ablate the armour of a large spacecraft cheaply and effectively without giving a damn for its escorts. We return again to the "Russian brute-force solution." :)
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
36,748
Reaction score
1,410
Points
203
Location
Langendernbach
Except that any drone-swarm with a power source and lasers could effectively ablate the armour of a large spacecraft cheaply and effectively without giving a damn for its escorts. We return again to the "Russian brute-force solution." :)

And then we come to EW, drone hunter/killers and rail-guns as air-defense. Also laser could be effectively blocked by a smoke screen. You would need to produce a lot of smoke to upkeep it, but still it would be a simple solution against lasers for everything that is moving slowly.

While drones can be a nice addition, I don't think they are the ultimate weapon for the next decades. Even a poor (and drugged by airforce doctors) brain is better in evaluating the situation than any UACV projected. It will take a while until drones could be smart enough to be not fooled by a human.
 

MJR

C++ developer in the mix
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
United States
And then we come to EW, drone hunter/killers and rail-guns as air-defense. Also laser could be effectively blocked by a smoke screen. You would need to produce a lot of smoke to upkeep it, but still it would be a simple solution against lasers for everything that is moving slowly.

While drones can be a nice addition, I don't think they are the ultimate weapon for the next decades. Even a poor (and drugged by airforce doctors) brain is better in evaluating the situation than any UACV projected. It will take a while until drones could be smart enough to be not fooled by a human.
Or a mirror! Hahaha.
 
Top