Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
1188
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:39:00 -
[241] - Quote
Altivs Obvisivs wrote:Maybe I've missed it and appologise if I did, but will PoS fuel cost reductions apply only to FW corps/alliances or will it apply to everyone within a system?
Current plan is for it to apply to everyone.
Aryth wrote:So why is lowsec/FW receiving the very fixes all of null needs for production? Is there a plan to give the same upgrades to null?
Honestly it's because we're working on FW this release. Once we get to Null, encouraging local industry and reducing reliance on Jita is high on the to-do list. Game Designer | Team Game of Drones https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Lock out
Shadows Of The Federation Drunk 'n' Disorderly
256
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:42:00 -
[242] - Quote
Any plans for implementing a system where a corp can tax LP or at least player can donate LP to their corp ?
As things are atm, FW corps are relying heavly on donations from their members. Granted, their members are filthy rich and contribute, but would be nice for them to have the possibility to contribute without effectively transfering isk from their wallets. |
fingie
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:49:00 -
[243] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I want more reasons for people to want to participate in FW.
Except when you don't, I guess :) |
Del Vikus
Gradient Electus Matari
17
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:55:00 -
[244] - Quote
Without geting into the substance of the changes, can I just say that I'm really happy with this new culture of interaction, interation, and community consulting you guys are doing? It's extremely encouraging. :) |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1108
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:58:00 -
[245] - Quote
I've never seen an answer to this question. Is there plans to make FW missions only spawn in systems that border your factions space? what I mean is If FW missions spawned one jump into enemy space, then enemy missions would spawn next to where you run missions. Thus making the PvE in FW almost a kind of PvP and justifying the rewards!
plus it focuses more player into the fighting area, makes grouping up more natural.
So if this isn't such a good idea can't you just tell me why? : / http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
526
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 17:58:00 -
[246] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Aryth wrote:So why is lowsec/FW receiving the very fixes all of null needs for production? Is there a plan to give the same upgrades to null? Honestly it's because we're working on FW this release. Once we get to Null, encouraging local industry and reducing reliance on Jita is high on the to-do list.
Hot! Thanks. Please look at a PI depletion modifying upgrade while you guys are at it. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
658
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:00:00 -
[247] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Altivs Obvisivs wrote:Maybe I've missed it and appologise if I did, but will PoS fuel cost reductions apply only to FW corps/alliances or will it apply to everyone within a system? Current plan is for it to apply to everyone. Aryth wrote:So why is lowsec/FW receiving the very fixes all of null needs for production? Is there a plan to give the same upgrades to null? Honestly it's because we're working on FW this release. Once we get to Null, encouraging local industry and reducing reliance on Jita is high on the to-do list.
Sooner rather than later, please. But make sure it's done right. I'm, uh, not sure nullsec players will put up with a botched revamp.
This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Aprudena Gist
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:02:00 -
[248] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Aryth wrote:So why is lowsec/FW receiving the very fixes all of null needs for production? Is there a plan to give the same upgrades to null? Honestly it's because we're working on FW this release. Once we get to Null, encouraging local industry and reducing reliance on Jita is high on the to-do list. So thats what only 2 years out from nullsec not being a giant ******* waste of time to do anything but circle jerk in stations in? |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
275
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:04:00 -
[249] - Quote
corestwo wrote:Sooner rather than later, please. But make sure it's done right. I'm, uh, not sure nullsec players will put up with a botched revamp. WHAT!?! I thought you lot LOVED the awesomeness of Dominion
It was always the schedule to put FW to bed and then go full tilt on nulls arses as far as I know. 'Tis a big job and they'll probably need all hands on deck to pull it off in a timely manner. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
737
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:25:00 -
[250] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:corestwo wrote:Sooner rather than later, please. But make sure it's done right. I'm, uh, not sure nullsec players will put up with a botched revamp. WHAT!?! I thought you lot LOVED the awesomeness of Dominion Dominion will be a good expansion when CCP finish it. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
197
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:32:00 -
[251] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: * Attacking complexes don't pay anything in vulnerable systems: currently it is possibly to still gain LPs and VPs in vulnerable systems, not only allowing you to farm the system instead of taking the I-hub, but also give you a huge VP buffer as they keep piling up indefinitely. Plan is to stop attackers from getting LPs and VPs when system is vulnerable - we would still leave a small VP buffer for attackers, but nothing bigger than 100-200 VPs.
I suggest that you are not able to buffer the vulnerability of systems at all. I very much like the idea that a bunker busting fleet can't just farm a system to a very vu;nerable state, drop a blob on it and kill it. Instead, a bunker busting fleet should be forced to bring a diverse role of ships that can defend complexes during the bunker bust. It adds urgency to the defense of a system "if I can get just this one plex that whole fleet can't hit the bunker anymore". Can lead to epic king of the hill micro-cosm battles within a larger fight for a system. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Ushra'Khan
84
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 18:41:00 -
[252] - Quote
chatgris wrote: I suggest that you are not able to buffer the vulnerability of systems at all. I very much like the idea that a bunker busting fleet can't just farm a system to a very vu;nerable state, drop a blob on it and kill it. Instead, a bunker busting fleet should be forced to bring a diverse role of ships that can defend complexes during the bunker bust. It adds urgency to the defense of a system "if I can get just this one plex that whole fleet can't hit the bunker anymore". Can lead to epic king of the hill micro-cosm battles within a larger fight for a system.
Couldn't agree more. Far and away the most fun I had during a system flip was when my roaming gang of frigates and destroyers got roped into defending plexes in Uusanen from FWedditors while LNA guys in tier 3s blitzed the bunker. There was a small fight on the bunker in an attempt to break up the bash fleet, and then the wartargets scattered to the system's plexes and and we had to chase them out and keep more from entering system. Make flipping a system a frantic scramble to get it done before the other side comes in an decontests it. If we do have a VP buffer, make it very, very small. |
Gabriel Darkefyre
Gradient Electus Matari
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 19:13:00 -
[253] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Altivs Obvisivs wrote:Maybe I've missed it and appologise if I did, but will PoS fuel cost reductions apply only to FW corps/alliances or will it apply to everyone within a system? I hope it applies to EVERYONE in the system. I want more reasons for people to live and work in lowsec (and move industrial operations there - creating food for pirates) and I want more reasons for people to want to participate in FW. No, I don't care if my enemy saves fuel cost in my upgraded system. By all mean, come on in and set your POS up.
Personally, I'd hope for it to only apply to Militia Members of the Faction holding Sovereignty. Anyone else should not be affected by the Upgrades.
If someone wants to take advantage of the Rewards of an upgraded FW System, then they should need to sign up to the Militia and be exposed to the Inherent Risks of being in the Militia (Ships and Structures become a legitimate target to the opposing 2 Militias, for one)
And more targets is a good thing, right? |
M'uva Wa'eva
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 19:57:00 -
[254] - Quote
Having extra manufacturing and research slots is all very well, but doesn't guarantee the benefit is received by FW members. I think the controlling faction should be able to reserve these in-station benefits to their members/those who have actively supported their cause.
Suggestion: Anyone can, in theory, use research and manufacturing slots in FW stations - BUT instead of paying install and time-based fees in ISK, you pay in LP.
Result: Active militia pilots gain the benefit from manufacturing and research bonuses, rather than upgrading a system only to see neutral third parties gain the industrialist benefits of upgrades. |
Souisa
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 20:07:00 -
[255] - Quote
I really think CCP should nerf the amount of LP you get per mision when doing FW. Atm i just have to do 10 missions then i can solo upgrade an i-hub to tier 5? Getting 100k LP is easy.
Also with this amount of LP i can wait until Tier5 LP discounts, and basically get a **** load of stuff
I had an idea about companions. Basically Faction Warfare is a Player/NPC hybrid so why not take this to the next level. With upgraded infrastructure hubs you would be able to call upon some kind of NPC's to assist you in case you get attacked, a gate is camped or what not. It would need balancing to avoid solo people gaining too much of an advantage. But having the option of increasing security, only a tiny bit, would most likely boost low-sec activity. |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1074
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 20:22:00 -
[256] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:Alot of the farmers will quit as the profits will not be the same. vOv
They'll go back to farming incursions, I guess.
The STAIN Travel Bookmark Collection - 451 Bookmarks |
Mackenzie Ayres
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 20:26:00 -
[257] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Altivs Obvisivs wrote:Maybe I've missed it and appologise if I did, but will PoS fuel cost reductions apply only to FW corps/alliances or will it apply to everyone within a system? Current plan is for it to apply to everyone.
Things I think you need to consider when making your changes:
1. The ability for FW pilots to dock in the opposing factions highsec stations. 2. Restrict nuetrals with a low standings with faction from docking in their stations. It just seems silly to have FW pilots locked out of stations in systems they dont own but yet allow them to dock in same factions highsec stations, continuing this thought, when considering pirates who shoot FW pilots on a daily basis, why would the faction continue to allow them to dock in stations while they attack their pilots.
CCP really needs to consider risk vs rewards for FW because even after these changes they provide FW pilots with all the risks, while nuetrals and others benefit from the upgrades provided, which now includes POS fuel savings!
Mac |
spellbound spirit
Wolfsbrigade Lost Obsession
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 20:31:00 -
[258] - Quote
Any thoughts on introducing more ties between FW and Empire factions that would actually mean something? F/x after joining FW I was quite dissapointed that amarr sentry guns were still agressing me in "my own" systems, not to mention amarr navy in highsec ;) I think it might actually provide at least little reason to participate in FW instead just being a lowsec resident and doing missions with alts in "enemy" militia. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
456
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 20:39:00 -
[259] - Quote
Gabriel Darkefyre wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Altivs Obvisivs wrote:Maybe I've missed it and appologise if I did, but will PoS fuel cost reductions apply only to FW corps/alliances or will it apply to everyone within a system? I hope it applies to EVERYONE in the system. I want more reasons for people to live and work in lowsec (and move industrial operations there - creating food for pirates) and I want more reasons for people to want to participate in FW. No, I don't care if my enemy saves fuel cost in my upgraded system. By all mean, come on in and set your POS up. Personally, I'd hope for it to only apply to Militia Members of the Faction holding Sovereignty. Anyone else should not be affected by the Upgrades. If someone wants to take advantage of the Rewards of an upgraded FW System, then they should need to sign up to the Militia and be exposed to the Inherent Risks of being in the Militia (Ships and Structures become a legitimate target to the opposing 2 Militias, for one) And more targets is a good thing, right? The argument for allowing everybody to use upgrades is a little weak. If getting more targets (err... players) into low sec is a goal with these upgrades, then CCP should simply apply these upgrades to all low sec systems.
But I guess FW is a testbed as well. If it works in FW space, then they can implement some sort of upgrade mechanic in all of low sec ,NPC 0.0, and 0.0 with these upgrade features available as well.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
456
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 20:41:00 -
[260] - Quote
Mackenzie Ayres wrote:CCP really needs to consider risk vs rewards for FW because even after these changes they provide FW pilots with all the risks, while nuetrals and others benefit from the upgrades provided, which now includes POS fuel savings!
Mac The only reason I will put LP into the hub is for increased LP payouts from running plexes in the future. A sort of FW LP multiplier. And, tbh, this might be more than enough for FW players. The upgrades are nearly meaningless to most FW players (except for the cynojammer for corps with caps). |
|
Mackenzie Ayres
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 20:50:00 -
[261] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Mackenzie Ayres wrote:CCP really needs to consider risk vs rewards for FW because even after these changes they provide FW pilots with all the risks, while nuetrals and others benefit from the upgrades provided, which now includes POS fuel savings!
Mac The only reason I will put LP into the hub is for increased LP payouts from running plexes in the future. A sort of FW LP multiplier. And, tbh, this might be more than enough for FW players. The upgrades are nearly meaningless to most FW players (except for the cynojammer for corps with caps).
Yes, the ability to produce T2 at half the time without the requirement of a POS is of no interest of anyone in FW. With nuetuals having access to the beneifts, all manufacturing, copy and material research slots will be full of nuetral jobs!
Mac |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
456
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:09:00 -
[262] - Quote
Mackenzie Ayres wrote: Yes, the ability to produce T2 at half the time without the requirement of a POS is of no interest to anyone in FW. With nuetals having access to the beneifts, all manufacturing, copy and material research slots will be full of nuetral jobs! Mac
I stand corrected. It's only of no interest to players like me who have no real industrial skills. There's plenty of FW players out there who know how to do that stuff. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Ushra'Khan
84
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:25:00 -
[263] - Quote
I agree it seems rather undesirable to pass out all these new slots only to have them snapped up by neutral third-parties, but I don't really know how you could ensure that contributing militia members got first crack at the ME/Copy slots (I'm not really worried about the others). Maybe give priority access based upon rank in the controlling militia? I'd be pretty bitter if I ended up paying tens of thousands of LP so neutral industrialists could gouge me on T2 gear. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2812
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:35:00 -
[264] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:chatgris wrote: I suggest that you are not able to buffer the vulnerability of systems at all. I very much like the idea that a bunker busting fleet can't just farm a system to a very vu;nerable state, drop a blob on it and kill it. Instead, a bunker busting fleet should be forced to bring a diverse role of ships that can defend complexes during the bunker bust. It adds urgency to the defense of a system "if I can get just this one plex that whole fleet can't hit the bunker anymore". Can lead to epic king of the hill micro-cosm battles within a larger fight for a system.
Couldn't agree more. Far and away the most fun I had during a system flip was when my roaming gang of frigates and destroyers got roped into defending plexes in Uusanen from FWedditors while LNA guys in tier 3s blitzed the bunker. There was a small fight on the bunker in an attempt to break up the bash fleet, and then the wartargets scattered to the system's plexes and and we had to chase them out and keep more from entering system. Make flipping a system a frantic scramble to get it done before the other side comes in an decontests it. If we do have a VP buffer, make it very, very small.
I support this. Like, 3 plexes worth of buffer at the MOST. Give the little guy a chance to make a difference, thats what FW is all about. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
539
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:40:00 -
[265] - Quote
And what if they do g+¦uge you? Several things might happen. First - you shoot them in the face and they go away. Second, you keep shopping at Jita and the prices have to come down. Or third - other industrialists notice the upgrades and the profit and move out to low sec too. Competition drives the prices down.
If I were an industrialist and I saw that I could produce goods faster in low sec, I'd approach an entity like Iron Oxide and ask to set up shop in the system. In return for setting me blue I promise to sell a third of my goods in Arzad at Jita prices. And hey - 50% less taxes anyways!
The bottom line is CCP is trying to populate low sec a little more. They want more trade hubs. This is the carrot. The stick, as they hinted, is to nerf high sec efficiency. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2812
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 21:48:00 -
[266] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Mackenzie Ayres wrote: Yes, the ability to produce T2 at half the time without the requirement of a POS is of no interest to anyone in FW. With nuetals having access to the beneifts, all manufacturing, copy and material research slots will be full of nuetral jobs! Mac
I stand corrected. It's only of no interest to players like me who have no real industrial skills. There's plenty of FW players out there who know how to do that stuff.
The way I see it is this - FW PvPers with no industrial skills are not going to be dumping LP into upgrades to obtain the industrial bonuses. Sure, they'll scatter their LP around to keep a tier level so the juice keeps flowing, but it will be spread to the systems where its cheapest to get WZC points, not poured vertically into a single system, 24/7. Someone who really wants to invest in an operation within a specific system won't be able to just rely on the resident PvPers to keep their bonuses going. If someone *depends* on these upgrades, and wants to have a static operation - they'll directly participate, even if its through an alt.
I think a lot of this has to do with the emotional "why do they get something they didnt work for" argument rather than looking at the fact that the industrialists that are serious about moving an operation into FW space in order to maximize profits cant afford to depend on the casual whim of PvPers making random upgrades to make sure all their projects are cooking on schedule. They will have some means to fill the gaps themselves. So yes, I DO think they will participate in the warzone on some level. Maybe they'll make an agreement with the local militia - you guys keep the system upgraded, I'll toss you some goods. But there has to be either direct participation, or direct negotiation, in order to maintain these bonuses. And that's a good thing.
I think its naive to think that everyone is going to put their industrialist characters (who may also be doing the hauling and transport) directly into the militia in order to install jobs, and becoming part of an active war dec. I think at that point we are right back to the risks of lowsec massively outweighing the rewards. They won't even have the protection of GCC and sec status at that point....and thats a lot for most industrialists to swallow. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Thorvik
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 22:02:00 -
[267] - Quote
First off, thanks for making changes in what is, obviously, a flawed mechanic. It's a bit more of a nerf than I would have liked but, meh, if it gets more pvp then I'm all for it.
Defensive plexing is boring enough, but when a system goes vulnerable the offending side can continue flipping more systems into vulnerable, not taking them but drive them further and further beyond 100% GÇô and continually getting paid. I'm told (although I cannot verify this) that some systems have been pushed well over 300%.
I do both defensive and offensive plexing, as needed, but it's just insanity to expect someone to d-plex (for nothing or even 50%). I know there are several Minmatar pilots that have alts in Amarr militia specifically to flip the system in order not have to beat down 300% of a systems status in order to get it out of vulnerable.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2812
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 22:08:00 -
[268] - Quote
Thorvik wrote:First off, thanks for making changes in what is, obviously, a flawed mechanic. It's a bit more of a nerf than I would have liked but, meh, if it gets more pvp then I'm all for it.
Defensive plexing is boring enough, but when a system goes vulnerable the offending side can continue flipping more systems into vulnerable, not taking them but drive them further and further beyond 100% GÇô and continually getting paid. I'm told (although I cannot verify this) that some systems have been pushed well over 300%.
I do both defensive and offensive plexing, as needed, but it's just insanity to expect someone to d-plex (for nothing or even 50%). I know there are several Minmatar pilots that have alts in Amarr militia specifically to flip the system in order not have to beat down 300% of a systems status in order to get it out of vulnerable.
That's exactly why Ytterbium said they will be stopping the formation of this 300% buffer to begin with:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Plan is to stop attackers from getting LPs and VPs when system is vulnerable - we would still leave a small VP buffer for attackers, but nothing bigger than 100-200 VPs.
This way no one should ever have to chew through the buffer, the most you'll ever D-plex a system to get it back to stable is a few plexes more than it took to get it to vulnerable. This should be vastly more attractive an option than flipping the system and possibly taking a WZC hit (and losing payouts militia wide) only to plex it back. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
456
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 22:12:00 -
[269] - Quote
Quote: Part of the fix is to increase LP amounts required to upgrade a system to the new numbers mentioned below:
* Level1: 40,000 * Level2: 60,000 * Level3: 90,000 * Level4: 140,000 * Level5: 200,000 * Buffer: 300,000
Quick Math. 120 plexes to make a system vulnerable. 10k LP/plex @ 10% degradation = 120k LP max LP degradation if the system is not defended. 300k - 120k = 160k. No further LP upgrades = L4 until the other side decides to run a bunker busting fleet. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
539
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 22:18:00 -
[270] - Quote
Why not make refining more efficient as a FW upgrade? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |