Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Trebor DeCaldar
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 18:02:00 -
[1]
Since I hear that the Occupancy means nothing everytime we turn around, how's this for a simple solution:
1) Create Sentries at the gates and stations that will change ownership to the Occupying force. These sentry guns will fire on enemy militia members.
2) Create roaming Navy NPC spawns in roid belts. These will change depending on Occupying force. These too will fire on enemy militia members.
Now you won't have an "enemy" ship parked at a gate or station in "occupied territory" due to the sentry guns.
And, you give the invaders a little extra loot to pick up if they want to go Navy NPC busting in belts.
This seems to be a much simplier solution than the station services I have heard about.
|
Pierre Dumonte
Aurora Security
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 18:46:00 -
[2]
tanking sentries is easy, pirates do it all the time. the issue is the way occupancy is won or lost. the work vs reward aspect of it all. the same time spent running missions or mining or ratting is much more worth while imo.
loyalty points and victory points need to be replaced with something more tangible to make people want to run the plexes in the first place.
station services... well in 0.0 if you lose 'occupancy' you lose access to the station, your gear there as well as the right to dock.
how do we make that work for faction war, without creating rivers of noob tears?
docking fees can be levied for docking in any station in a system you have lost occupancy of. this can then be redistributed as isk rewards for plexes, balancing the economics of FW.
as for the mechanics of winning back a lost system. this needs to be made less time intensive imo. make the control bunker more like a sov tower. put it into reinforced one day, kill it the next. no need to run plexes other than to generate isk and reward points.
random navy spawns at stations/belts/planets/gates etc is a good idea tho
im only a month into FW and i can see that the mechanics of occupancy are broken, but the war target aspect of it is wonderful. but im more for pvp than pve in any case. _________________________________________________ Aurora Security is recruiting
RECRUITMENT THREAD |
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 19:01:00 -
[3]
Yes occupancy should matter, but just doing this would add even more positive feedback, and negative feedback is needed. The more systems a militia has, the harder it should be to get new ones, not easier like now.
|
Pierre Dumonte
Aurora Security
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 19:11:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Furb Killer Yes occupancy should matter, but just doing this would add even more positive feedback, and negative feedback is needed. The more systems a militia has, the harder it should be to get new ones, not easier like now.
not sure what you are getting at here m8
occupancy as it stands means little, holding occupanacy and winning it back means even less. there are no real rewards.
the idea of providing areas that can and will generate player battles is great. the fact that minor plexes limit ships to frigs and destroyers is great as it allows even the newest players to particpate.
having lost occupancy in all our systems, i dont feel any ill effects when i enter those systems. in fact i carry on as usual and hunt my war targets. so you are correct that occupancy should matter, but without some mechanic like i mentioned in my early post occupancy wont matter in any real way. _________________________________________________ Aurora Security is recruiting
RECRUITMENT THREAD |
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 19:54:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Trebor DeCaldar Since I hear that the Occupancy means nothing everytime we turn around, how's this for a simple solution:
1) Create Sentries at the gates and stations that will change ownership to the Occupying force. These sentry guns will fire on enemy militia members.
And kill all the nice fights between smaller ships, or roughly equal small gangs, at gates. No thank you. FW exists to encourage PvP, especially in smaller ships, sentry guns *discourage* PvP.
Originally by: Trebor DeCaldar 2) Create roaming Navy NPC spawns in roid belts. These will change depending on Occupying force. These too will fire on enemy militia members.
And the point would be?
Originally by: Trebor DeCaldar This seems to be a much simplier solution than the station services I have heard about.
Because the solution doesn't solve any real problem. Your solutions wouldn't make FW better, they would make it worse in my opinion. ____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
Trebor DeCaldar
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 20:18:00 -
[6]
Funny, I get one guy tell me tanking sentries is nothing and the next tell me that it would ruin PvP.
The point is to make the occupancy actual have a tangible result. The sentries/navy spawns seem to be RP reasonable while not being as noob player game breaking as denying docking or station services.
|
Kessiaan
Minmatar MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 20:37:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Kessiaan on 03/06/2009 20:38:39 I go with the 'kill off small ship pvp'. Pirates tackle with HICs and fly mostly BC, CS, and BS because they have to tank the sentries.
FW is a sentry-free environment, for the most part, and because of that you see a lot of interceptors, AFs, and T1 cruisers and frigs. Nice cheap fun.
Also if you make being the enemy militia in lowsec just like being a pirate (since the sentries will shoot at you), what's the point in being in the militia in the first place?
I think if plexes are going to remain PvE oriented, the rewards should also be PvE-based. Exlusivee agents, increased LP gains in occupied systems, maybe a militia-specific station. That kind of stuff.
|
Droog 1
Black Rise Inbreds
|
Posted - 2009.06.03 20:48:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Trebor DeCaldar Since I hear that the Occupancy means nothing everytime we turn around, how's this for a simple solution:
1) Create Sentries at the gates and stations that will change ownership to the Occupying force. These sentry guns will fire on enemy militia members.
2) Create roaming Navy NPC spawns in roid belts. These will change depending on Occupying force. These too will fire on enemy militia members.
Sounds like enemy hisec to me and, as others have said, contributes nothing to the free war dec, casual PvP enviroment that is FW.
Originally by: Trebor DeCaldar
Now you won't have an "enemy" ship parked at a gate or station in "occupied territory" due to the sentry guns.
Which means less fights in territory you control and no fights at gates. (As stated by others)
Originally by: Trebor DeCaldar
This seems to be a much simplier solution than the station services I have heard about.
Your solution doesn't bring anything except less PvP. |
Hidden Snake
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 05:20:00 -
[9]
Well his solution will mean more fights for the plexes.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 05:38:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Pierre Dumonte
Originally by: Furb Killer Yes occupancy should matter, but just doing this would add even more positive feedback, and negative feedback is needed. The more systems a militia has, the harder it should be to get new ones, not easier like now.
not sure what you are getting at here m8
occupancy as it stands means little, holding occupanacy and winning it back means even less. there are no real rewards.
the idea of providing areas that can and will generate player battles is great. the fact that minor plexes limit ships to frigs and destroyers is great as it allows even the newest players to particpate.
having lost occupancy in all our systems, i dont feel any ill effects when i enter those systems. in fact i carry on as usual and hunt my war targets. so you are correct that occupancy should matter, but without some mechanic like i mentioned in my early post occupancy wont matter in any real way.
Look what happened when we lost systems. The more we lost, the faster we lost more systems. It is easier to take a system fior a militia when they allready took many other systems. It should be the other way arround.
|
|
Hidden Snake
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 06:00:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: Pierre Dumonte
Originally by: Furb Killer Yes occupancy should matter, but just doing this would add even more positive feedback, and negative feedback is needed. The more systems a militia has, the harder it should be to get new ones, not easier like now.
not sure what you are getting at here m8
occupancy as it stands means little, holding occupanacy and winning it back means even less. there are no real rewards.
the idea of providing areas that can and will generate player battles is great. the fact that minor plexes limit ships to frigs and destroyers is great as it allows even the newest players to particpate.
having lost occupancy in all our systems, i dont feel any ill effects when i enter those systems. in fact i carry on as usual and hunt my war targets. so you are correct that occupancy should matter, but without some mechanic like i mentioned in my early post occupancy wont matter in any real way.
Look what happened when we lost systems. The more we lost, the faster we lost more systems. It is easier to take a system fior a militia when they allready took many other systems. It should be the other way arround.
well that is bull**** becasue u started loosing system because you loose spirit for fight ... i am in fw since its dawn and i remember the time 3 months ago when frogs were still fighting for the plexes. then they just lost the strengh in their epeens and here comes the CALDARI!!! All your bases belong to us!!!
I am dreaming about option of high sec occupancy ;)
|
Neuronai
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 10:15:00 -
[12]
Why not have several Militia Stations around Empire that you can spend victory points at to get exclusive mods and ammo? I don't play FW nor know much about it but that might be a nice reward.
|
Ratchman
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 10:23:00 -
[13]
Actually, Furb is quite correct here, and for a simple reason. The more systems there are left to conquer, there more you have to divide your resources. The fewer there are, the more you can concentrate those resources into those few areas.
5000 people trying to conquer a handful of systems should take a much smaller space of time than 5000 people trying to conquer the whole of Black Rise.
As long as the number of pilots doesn't dwindle massively, the capturing process will accelerate over time.
|
Ratchman
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 10:40:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Hidden Snake well that is bull**** becasue u started loosing system because you loose spirit for fight ... i am in fw since its dawn and i remember the time 3 months ago when frogs were still fighting for the plexes. then they just lost the strengh in their epeens and here comes the CALDARI!!! All your bases belong to us!!!
I am dreaming about option of high sec occupancy ;)
It wasn't so much the Gallente losing their spirit, as there is as much whining in your own militia as their is in ours. I think people just realised the Caldari had too much of an unfair advantage, and it was simply futile. Nothing was actually lost by not participating, so why do so when you can't compete? Simple logic.
I think if the rules were changed so that it meant something, or highsec occupancy were possible, you'd probably find it much harder than previously.
|
Lord Zekk
Caldari 22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 11:47:00 -
[15]
FW is meant to be easy access PVP. Gate guns shooting at war targets mean less places for us to fight.
Note, I'm caldari and I won't get shot at in any system and I am against this.
Before CCP focuses on anything, I think the lag is the most important. But, it's always good to see people working on ideas to improve FW. ----------------------------------------
We are recruiting. Visit us at http://www.22ndbrdu.com |
Unfamed II
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 11:48:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Ratchman
Originally by: Hidden Snake well that is bull**** becasue u started loosing system because you loose spirit for fight ... i am in fw since its dawn and i remember the time 3 months ago when frogs were still fighting for the plexes. then they just lost the strengh in their epeens and here comes the CALDARI!!! All your bases belong to us!!!
I am dreaming about option of high sec occupancy ;)
It wasn't so much the Gallente losing their spirit, as there is as much whining in your own militia as their is in ours. I think people just realised the Caldari had too much of an unfair advantage, and it was simply futile. Nothing was actually lost by not participating, so why do so when you can't compete? Simple logic.
I think if the rules were changed so that it meant something, or highsec occupancy were possible, you'd probably find it much harder than previously.
Unfair advantage? What?
Originally by: Sandslinger of CA
So this wasn't a straightoff logoffski from our point of view, rather a tactical manoeuvre
|
Sun Clausewitz
|
Posted - 2009.06.04 13:09:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Hidden Snake Well his solution will mean more fights for the plexes.
Which is what the original idea for the plex was. That's why there are ship size restrictions so that the T1 frig crowd can get T1 frig fights without T2 BS's swatting them.
Move the fights from the gates and stations and put them in plexes where they belong.
Pick Three: Caldari/PVP/Solo/Success |
MiSu Yung
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 13:42:00 -
[18]
This would be a start... it'd erase the "Occupancy Means Nothing" argument.
|
jag
Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 13:52:00 -
[19]
LOL
lo sec is the FW battleground .
you have nearly twice the numbers of Gallente.
you now want the sentries and the navy to assist you with fighting the gallente ?
FFS either grow a pair
or
why not just go the whole hog and petition CCP to only allow 1 gallente pilot into a system at a time , but only if there are already 30 + squid in system ?
or ask ccp for a single player version of FW with save game feature ? |
Johanna Delacroix
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 17:30:00 -
[20]
Now, I have a problem with people suggesting to put something can come close to instapopping t1 frigates in FW systems.
I do not understand why those who want more small ship pvp want to put in place a system that will cause many small ships to blow up easily. No group of t1 frigates will be able to wait at a gate anymore, not even to wait for a straggler.
Over time many ships will be lost to this system and they will, the way the map currently is, all be from one side. This will not encourage that side to try and recapture the lost systems with small ships at all. To have a safety buffer they will have to use ships that can withstand sentry fire.
Please, how will this increase the number of t1 frigate fights?
|
|
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Buffalo Soldiers
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 17:40:00 -
[21]
Just change the in-game terminology to Occu-pants-y.
Problem solved.
-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then --
|
Sun Clausewitz
|
Posted - 2009.06.08 19:12:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Johanna Delacroix
Please, how will this increase the number of t1 frigate fights?
It will move the fighting to the plexes where they are supposed to be and get everyone away from gate camp blobs. |
Pytria Le'Danness
Placid Reborn
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 06:26:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Sun Clausewitz
It will move the fighting to the plexes where they are supposed to be and get everyone away from gate camp blobs.
Go to low sec one day and check how sentries work, maybe you'll get a clue then. Adding that kind of stuff is even more powerful than the current sentries - they do not shoot on pirates all the time, only when they aggress. And it will not force people into the complexes - if anything, it will encourage bigger blobs and bigger ships.
Adding some NPC firepower that shoots militia membera ALL THE TIME will only discourage people to stay in the militia - and those who stay will likely simply use alts to move their ships into the systems.
What is needed is something that encourages players to JOIN a militia, not make life more difficult for those who already are in it. There's currently about 10k pilots enrolled in FW, out of some 200k subscribers. That's a participation of around 5% if you assume that every subscriber only has one character on his account - the reality will probably more around 2-3%. And only CCP knows how many are really active if you count spy alts and those "Uh, my corp signedup but I only run missions in Motsu".
Corporation RP channel: "PlacidReborn" |
Kalpaks II
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 07:27:00 -
[24]
------------------------------------------
Give caldari choice to convert there cal standing to gal, i bet there are many who will do
------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |