EVE Search - FW complexes and DT

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Game Development Forum

FW complexes and DT

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Topic
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.12 14:43:00 - [1] There seems to be a mechanic related to FW complexes and downtime that strongly favors the side that can get a strong fleet right after DT. This is not a good thing for FW balance. I do believe this is the case because I have witnessed systems having no plex at all for the whole day, only to find multiple major plexes in them after DT, and then again no plexes in them for the whole day. This has happened multiple times now, so it's quite likely that something related to plexes happens during DT (see below). This means that concentrated offenses and defenses are mainly possible and useful directly after DT. Which is a rather random mechanism, favoring certain time zones. Observations on the Mechanics I've seen the following myself: 1) Plexes spawn outside of DT (I found plexes in systems that I had checked thoroughly before) 2) Constellations can be "plex-free" (I have had a single constellation completely void of plexes; after some hours, plexes spawned again) 3) Existing plexes do not vanish during DT (I have sat in a plex through DT, and after DT, warped back in on the same plex; it was not on local anymore, the occupancy timer was back to 0, but it was in the exact same location as pre-DT) Assuming that the developer comment on SiSi during EA testing is correct, saying that plexes spawn constellation-based, this leaves me with the assumption that there is a delay after a plex has been taken before it respawns in the constellation. The simple explanation would be that that delay is cut to 0 during DT, so all plexes "waiting" to spawn, spawn immediately during DT. If this is the case, just retaining that timer during DT would solve the problem. Lacking an exact knowledge of the game mechanics behind FW plex spawning, it's difficult to propose a good fix for the observed behavior.
Lost Hamster Serenity and Hungarian Operational Team Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.10.12 15:49:00 - [2] Hmm... Have you submitted a bug report?
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.12 15:52:00 - [3] Originally by: Lost Hamster Hmm... Have you submitted a bug report? A petition came back with "this is working as intended", so I'd assume the bug report would get filtered for the same reason. It's difficult to say whether there is actually a bug or what is going at all, as the "intended mechanics" are not documented anywhere. :-/
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.20 10:23:00 - [4] Ok. I did file a bug report. We're not going crazy and imagining things. Quote: Hi! I spoke with the appropriate Dev for this and according to him this is currently a necessity that some complexes are relocated at DT. So this is by design, even if the Dev knows, that this is not perfect. - BH Lenider :-( Thanks for the work in investigating this and the honest answer. Guess we'll have to adapt.
Elsebeth Rhiannon Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.20 15:17:00 - [5] It being currently a necessity and it being known that it is not perfect gives a lot of hope. From outside of the militia, it looks like the Minmatar militia has been suffering this for some time, the Amarr having a strong presence after the DT and the Minmatar less so. Kinda sucky reason for losing the war, but at least it gives me those "I told you so" RP moments... Hope it'll get fixed at some point, though. Regardless of who loses and who wins by it, it's silly that game-enforced timezones affect your chances. (Timezones will always affect wars of course, every player organization has their peak and low hours and if yours and your enemy's coincide affects stuff a lot, but that's different than having it imposed by the game that you are better of if your peak hours correspond to a particular time.) -- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
T 2 Minmatar Tribal Core	Posted - 2008.10.20 16:04:00 - [6] IMHO this is something that needs to be fixed weather it is a bug or intended mechanism. It unbalances Factional Warfare heavily. ----------- Member of Tribal Core - fighting for Minmatar Militia. Death to Amarr; long live the Minmatar Nation.
John Blick	Posted - 2008.10.20 16:14:00 - [7] It's so frustrating from the Minmatar side because so much of the time is spent looking for the Amarr - any Amarr - and yet to hear reports of this exploit (sorry)... ARGH!
MirrorGod Heretic Army Heretic Nation	Posted - 2008.10.20 16:16:00 - [8] What bothers me about this whole deal, is that occupancy has absolutely nothing to do with who actually occupies a system. Systems can be captured by ninja-ceptor gangs, 2 ceptors is all it takes, 1 to speed tank any rats, 1 to sit on the button. It doesn't even result in a fight anymore, as many times it would, it's at the point where the plexing gang can disengage and run to another plex, effectively just wasting time. There's no reward, there's no reason to claim occupancy, it litteraly means nothing. In the bleaks/heimetar, the amarr faction don't even occupy low-sec. That is, a single corp would base out of Tzvi (armada), and another in kamela (slackers), whereas nearly every minmatar pilot bases out of amamake or a system 1 jump away, and nearly always a certain set of core systems finds a multitude of minmtar pilots in it. Amarr base out of high-sec. I won't say there's exceptions to this, there are many, but for the most part, I think it can be counted as true (there's very few amarr flashy's, minamtar has a decent share) The reason amarr are capturing systems left and right, (and making meaningless threads on IGS about each and every one) is a direct reflection of the fac that there are many more players willing to orbit plex's for 20 minutes in the amarr faction than the minmatar. It literally has nothing to do with the state of the war. What do I recommend? I'm really not sure, but this is system is broken, and quite frankly I find it rediculous that players can put up with running these plex's. Save Small Gang Warfare
Gaven Lok'ri Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.20 16:30:00 - [9] Edited by: Gaven Lok''ri on 20/10/2008 16:39:23 Edited by: Gaven Lok''ri on 20/10/2008 16:38:43 I fail to see how it unbalanced Faction Warfare between the factions. (I see it causing all sorts of other problems, mind you, see the bottom half of my post) You do realize that the reason we have an upper hand after downtime is that we have been making a conscious effort to have an upper hand then, not that we inherently have more people on at that time? I mean, I was on this morning for the Ezzara capture. I never play post downtime. It is not that Amarr just happen to have more people on right after DT, but that we consciously are choosing to try and be on right after downtime if at all possible. The reason the matari are losing right now is not because of this mechanic but because of a rather massive lack of organization. That this mechanic gives us a specific time that we know its vital to be organized during does make that difference more blatant, but it is not the reason the matari are losing systems. I would ask that we not muddle the issue by saying the only reason systems are being lost is because of this mechanic. It makes what should be a rational complaint seem like a whine. Because with all that said: The mechanic flat out sucks for those of us who do not have a timezone that is friendly to the hour after downtime. Its a horrible mechanic that needs to die. I doubt you will hear any complaining on the Amarrian side of things if this mechanic gets fixed so that capturing plexes at downtime is no longer the key for capturing systems in faction warfare. I detest the system. It and the speed tanking plexes issue both need to be dealt with ASAP. Not because they favor any one faction, all factions should be equally capable of organizing around the mechanics, but because they are either not fun (speed tanking) or entirely unfair to those of us on timezones where the post DT period is hard to get on. Edit: MirrorGod: You cannot take a system with speed tanking ceptors. (Thank everything holy for that, it would kill the FW game if it were true) You can contest it, but you cannot take it unless the opposition is completely asleep. The number of plexes needed to capture is too high and once it becomes obvious that you are targeting a specific system the enemy can basically stop speed tankers from being able to touch a plex with a single decent destroyer pilot. Speed tanking makes massive headaches for the defensive plexers, who have to decontest systems all over the region because of it, but it does not actually capture systems. It needs to go because it is a crappy mechanic, but it is not as powerful as you are making it out to be. When you see a system change hands, you are seeing the result of a week or two's worth of constant targeting of a system by basically everyone in the militia interested in more than kills. (And for that matter, most of the militia interested in kills as people have noticed that the concentrated gangs on a target system tend to result in interesting combat.) Deus Vult! PIE Website Public Channel: 'PIE Public'
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.20 16:53:00 - [10] Originally by: Gaven Lok'ri You do realize that the reason we have an upper hand after downtime is that we have been making a conscious effort to have an upper hand then, not that we inherently have more people on at that time? There have been attempts to get more people after DT in the minmatar militia for quite some time. It worked somewhat, and especially on weekends, the fleets can even be bigger (there were two such days I think?). It just doesn't work. The random distribution of pilots apparently favors the Amarr at that time somewhat. And this is the problem with the mechanic: It means the whole of FW "tactics" revolves around getting people active after DT. Not very exciting if you ask me. Quote: I would ask that we not muddle the issue by saying the only reason systems are being lost is because of this mechanic. It makes what should be a rational complaint seem like a whine. THAT I subscribe to. When I posted this URL to some Minmatar Militia people, I asked to keep the whining about "exploits" out. Well, can't control the people. :-) There are a number of other problems with FW. Speed tanking and taking plexes with a single frig (yes, single; it works, but two makes it easier), 60km between warp-in point and the contestation point, the whole bunker mechanic, etc. - but let's keep this thread to the DT issue. If someone starts a thread in the "Features and Ideas" forum, I'll contribute there. :-)

Gaven Lok'ri Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.20 17:01:00 - [11] Edited by: Gaven Lok''ri on 20/10/2008 17:01:47 How about we make this complaint by Veshta the one for the speed tanking thread: http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=893794 Deus Vult! PIE Website Public Channel: 'PIE Public'
Elsebeth Rhiannon Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.20 17:52:00 - [12] Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon on 20/10/2008 17:52:06 For the record, I realized I made myself sound like an idiot above, and would like to post the following clarification: I did not mean to imply the Amarr are currently winning because, and definitely not *only* because of the DT issue. My estimate is, and kill statistics support it, that they are and have for a longer time now been better organized than the Minmatar. They totally deserve their current victories - and it would be better for all if they could get it without anyone needing to think how much of it might be explained by the mechanics. I am absolutely not attributing any particular sovereignty change to this mechanic - I simply would not even have enough information to do it. That this was posted at the same time as Ezzara fell was because that's when the devs responded to Arkady, and I suspect that is a pure coincidence. The main thing here is, as Gaven says, that the mechanic flat out sucks. Regardless of whether their side is winning or not, it sucks about equally for those who *can* get up at / stay up until ungodly hours to fight at DT, as it does for those who *cannot* be there because it is dead in the middle of a work day or needed sleep, and it needs to be gotten rid of. -- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.20 18:42:00 - [13] Originally by: Elsebeth Rhiannon That this was posted at the same time as Ezzara fell was because that's when the devs responded to Arkady, and I suspect that is a pure coincidence Just to clarify: 1) The original post happened on the 12th of October, a good week after Arzad was lost, and a week before now. There had been rumors and vague ideas about DT somehow affecting complex spawning until then. But then the Minmatar Militia had done a lot of observations (sasawong still has some stats I think), and I posted what I had witnessed here to get some kind of response. Originally, I was quite expecting some dev to reply "uh, no, DT has no effect at all on plex spawning!" 2) When I had not received a reply here for a week, I reported it as a bug (bug ID 64015 for those who care). That happened yesterday at 12:48. It happened then mostly because I got reminded of this problem as I witnessed Ezzara again spawning unrestricted complexes after DT, after people had been turning the system upside down for quite some time before DT and hadn't found anything at all. 3) I received the reply today at 10:14, and posted that 9 minutes later at 10:23 here. Before DT. 4) After DT, Ezzara spawned once more a bunch of plexes and fell. I even congratulated some PIE (OOCly) for the victory. Could we now all please leave this silliness about "you win only because of exploits!!11" and "no, you just suck at being organized!111" etc. out of this forum? Thanks.

CCP Greyscale	Posted - 2008.10.20 19:03:00 - [14] Unfortunately yes, there is a DT-related mechanic in play here. I personally dislike it - it's always been a strong point of the exploration system in general that it doesn't care when you get online - but it had to be done to solve a larger problem in an acceptable manner, and it was better than the alternatives. In rough terms, what this mechanic is doing is reshuffling undiscovered sites that have been placed in an area of the distribution in which they can't actually spawn (eg Amarr dungeons that have ended up in a Minmatar-occupied system). Without this mechanic, the natural redistribution of sites will inevitably cause them to pile up in non-spawnable systems, which is highly undesirable, and the distributor isn't currently capable of elegantly handling the problem on its own. A downtime reshuffle was the best compromise we could find between server performance and optimal behaviour. Compromises are nasty things but occasionally they have to be made I can't give any comment on if/when it will be altered - it is considered "working but imperfect" by us here in design.

Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.20 19:16:00 - [15] Thank you for the reply, Greyscale! Originally by: CCP Greyscale Without this mechanic, the natural redistribution of sites will inevitably cause them to pile up in non-spawnable systems, which is highly undesirable, and the distributor isn't currently capable of elegantly handling the problem on its own. A downtime reshuffle was the best compromise we could find between server performance and optimal behaviour. Would it be possible to re-distribute those "badly allocated" plexes with higher likelyhood into system with lower VP values? This would retain the redistribution, but would reduce its usefulness as the main deciding factor on occupying specific systems.
Althus Treefingers Minmatar Valklear Guard	Posted - 2008.10.20 20:49:00 - [16] Wow. I'm actually surprised that the problem is as Greyscale describes. Obviously it must be more complicated than it seems, but based on his post, I'd think that a simple "if plex-to-be-spawned is Amarr and spawn-location-occupancy is Minmatar, then pick another system". Or just change the faction associated with the plex. Basically what I can't get is why it has to be fixed during DT and not with each spawn. There aren't that many plexes being capped at a given time. How hard could it be on the servers? --- Arkady: the only problem I see with forcing the spawns into lower VP systems is that systems about to go vulnerable might "dry up" because an increasing percentage of plexes are being pushed elsewhere. The current system seems to be fine (on average) of evenly spreading the plexes out spatially, but they're ending up concentrated temporally. --- That gives me another idea: rather than having the reshuffled plexes become valid all at once after DT, why not put a delay on some of them? (maybe randomized from 0 to 20 hrs or something)
Gaven Lok'ri Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.20 21:00:00 - [17] Quote: (eg Amarr dungeons that have ended up in a Minmatar-occupied system). I thought this might have something to do with it. I had wondered why it felt as if there was no time except downtime to manage to get Ezzara to spawn new plexes (it being the last Matari held system in devoid). What this means is that the situation is likely to be different when the Matari are on the defensive as there should be relatively common respawns in any contested systems in defensive constellations. If I understand the mechanic correctly, at least. This is opposed to Ezzara, where the only plexes that spawned at all were going to be those found in the immediate aftermath of downtime. Deus Vult! PIE Website Public Channel: 'PIE Public'
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2008.10.20 21:29:00 - [18] Originally by: Gaven Lok'ri Quote: (eg Amarr dungeons that have ended up in a Minmatar-occupied system). I thought this might have something to do with it. I had wondered why it felt as if there was no time except downtime to manage to get Ezzara to spawn new plexes (it being the last Matari held system in devoid). What this means is that the situation is likely to be different when the Matari are on the defensive as there should be relatively common respawns in any contested systems in defensive constellations. If I understand the mechanic correctly, at least. This is opposed to Ezzara, where the only plexes that spawned at all were going to be those found in the immediate aftermath of downtime. Ezzara is broken. The system cannot ever decide whether it is contested or uncontested. I even saw it as vulnerable at one time shortly after someone defended a matari plex. My guess is that it's due to The Myridian Strip(?). ____________________ Pimped out Raven to run level 4 missions quickly: 210 Mil ISK. Realizing your 120 Mil ISK Drake gets the job done faster: Priceless.
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.20 21:51:00 - [19] Originally by: Althus Treefingers Wow. I'm actually surprised that the problem is as Greyscale describes. Obviously it must be more complicated than it seems, but based on his post, I'd think that a simple "if plex-to-be-spawned is Amarr and spawn-location-occupancy is Minmatar, then pick another system". EVE operates in really tight constraints - the database cluster is under such heavy load during "normal" game time that such processes probably have to run with very, very limited resources. I have no clue how it works internally, but I think what happens is that the code does a SELECT on the systems of the current constellation, and picks a random one of those. Adding another constraint - like, who is occupying it, is it high-sec etc., means a new JOIN, which increases the DB load more. So probably a "no" for that. During DT, the DB cluster is not under load at all, so you can run all sorts of fancy stuff on it. Which is what the DT is used extensively for. Quote: Arkady: the only problem I see with forcing the spawns into lower VP systems is that systems about to go vulnerable might "dry up" because an increasing percentage of plexes are being pushed elsewhere. The current system seems to be fine (on average) of evenly spreading the plexes out spatially, but they're ending up concentrated temporally. My proposal would affect only the redistributed plexes at DT, not the normally distributed ones - effectively reducing only the effect of being able to push highly contested systems over to vulnerable by mainly camping the overproportionally available complexes after DT. There are other weird problems that I think (hope :-D) that CCP addressed - if there is only one Amarr-occupied system in a constellation, rest is Minmatar, and the Amarr plexes get redistributed at DT, does that mean that the system will have all Amarr plexes available in the constellation? But I guess we'll not get a comprehensive explanation of the way plexes really work. At least this DT issue is in the open now, and people can actually work with it, instead of always wondering whether they're imagining things.
Elsebeth Rhiannon Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.21 05:50:00 - [20] Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon on 21/10/2008 05:55:09 Originally by: CCP Greyscale it is considered "working but imperfect" by us here in design. Could we ask you to change that consideration? It is not "working but imperfect". It is broken. It is like allowing people to use the markets over all EVE instead of regionwise but only from 20-22 EVT, or forcing a chance of 50 percent on all POSes to come out of reinf at DT instead of after a player-determined time. For some of us it is not working, at all. Concrete example: I have always had this idea that at some point, if the war goes really bad for "my" side, I will take my character to the Militia, even ceding my current corporation if necessary (after five years a very drastic move), and "go to where it matters most". In meatspace, I work in a hospital. DT is in the middle of my working day. There is no way I can or would want to leave my RL post for internet spaceships (no offense; I love you guys but some things are still more important). There is no way for me to be a participant in where it matters most. Else -- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.

T 2 Minmatar Tribal Core	Posted - 2008.10.21 10:01:00 - [21] I totally understand that there had to be made some compromises with the game mechanics to get FW underway. But now that it is working as intended and it is clearly biased to those whose prime time for gaming is just after DT.. CCP needs to fix this - or advertise that FW is mainly for people who play right after DT. And I'd like for everyone to understand that this is not because of we are loosing - we would be loosing at this point whatever the gamemechanics - but this is to help the players have more fun - just like Vestas topic. FW is really good part of this game and I'd like to play it a lot. I'd love to be there for my faction when we need to defend bunkers etc. Current game mechanics do not allow that - bunkers go vunerable ALWAYS right after DT. At least until Amarr have gotten all the system Minmatar took from them. I really urge CCP to start to think about a fix with this. At least same kind of random timer to spawn the plexes for a quickfix. Currently it just makes people have not as much fun - it really does. Best Regards, T2 ----------- Member of Tribal Core - fighting for Minmatar Militia. Death to Amarr; long live the Minmatar Nation.
Dasalt Istgut	Posted - 2008.10.21 10:39:00 - [22] Originally by: Althus Treefingers Wow. I'm actually surprised that the problem is as Greyscale describes. Obviously it must be more complicated than it seems, but based on his post, I'd think that a simple "if plex-to-be-spawned is Amarr and spawn-location-occupancy is Minmatar, then pick another system". Or just change the faction associated with the plex. Yeah. I'd think you could just do something like what you describe. The information is too vague for me to understand the issue fully but it sounds like a bit of a "half-assed" implementation (I don't mean that in an insulting way, just that getting it done quickly won out over getting it done right which happens with my company as well sometimes).
Elsebeth Rhiannon Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.21 17:09:00 - [23] Probably this has been thought of already, but would it be terribly hard to simply add a random timer to the complexes that get moved, to make them spawn earliest at X, where X is between 0-23 hours from DT end? That would spread the moved complexes evenly about timezones, would it not? It would mean that some complexes were unspawnable for some time, but since they were that before the DT too (that's why they get moved, right?), would that be a terrible problem? -- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
Becq Starforged Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.10.21 17:15:00 - [24] I'm not sure I understand why this is a difficult problem to fix. Plexes should spawn at a random location within their range of possible location, and take on the characteristics of the occupier of that system. Then when a system is captured, all remaining complexes in that system should be despawned (and respawned as normal). I'd also put a delay in so that each captured complex respawns perhaps 2-4 hours hours after it is captured/despawned. This would still slightly favor the post-DT crowd (because all of the plexes scheduled for spawning sometime during DT would first become available just after DT) but not significantly. This bias could be removed completely by implementing a 'modulus 23' in the delay logic instead of 'modulus 24', basically ignoring DT for purposes of the respawn delay. So why is fixing it so troublesome, especially given the headaches it's causing to the many people affected by it? Espcially given that both sides agree that it needs to be fixed? -- Becq Starforged Ushra'Khan The Flame of Freedom Burns On!
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.10.21 17:53:00 - [25] Originally by: Becq Starforged I'm not sure I understand why this is a difficult problem to fix. From what I understand, it's basically a combination of the tight constraints on the code in EVE (DB access has to be highly optimized and limited) as well as code reuse. They basically use the same code as for other exploration, which redistributes plexes/sites after they were found (possibly with a delay, who knows). Exploration doesn't have "bad systems" like FW does, so that isn't in the code at all. Apparently, a code review told them that adding the functionality would either be too complex, or take more resources than they could allocate for it, so they had to find a different solution. Whenever they have something that can't be done on the live server because of those constraints, it's moved to a maintenance script during DT. I do believe them if they say "won't happen, sowwy" (and even if we don't believe them, I doubt that'll change things, to be honest :-)), so the solution has to be within the constraints given above. Hence my idea with putting the plexes preferably into less-contested systems at that point. This does not help with situations like we just had, where all plexes have to end up in the same system (or the same few). A random spawn delay would be very nice for this, but I don't know whether the code supports that. It does solve the problem of being able to just focus on a few systems of a constellation to get them into vulnerable within a week or so. Also, no idea whether the system supports a "location-dependent plex" that spawns as a specific faction depending on which system it's in. I somehow doubt it. But I would agree with Else: The current implementation is broken game mechanc that needs a fix. :-(
Roderak Pleem Minmatar Abandoned Land	Posted - 2008.10.21 20:16:00 - [26] I dont keep statistics on what I do or dont see.. so this can be taken with a grain of salt. DT is while I am sleeping, I dont wake up until 2-3 hours after downtime, then I work.. when do I get a chance to play? In the 3 to 8 hours before DT range. What do I observe? Let's say I go to metropolis to do some defensive plexing. I find a system that says contested. I scan, and I scan.. no plexes. Move to the next contested system (concentrating on a constellation) scan, and scan.. no plexes.. I've gone days (with 2-3 hours plex hunting per day) and found no plexes in contested systems. I've scanned entire constellations and not found a thing. This has gotten worse in recent weeks. Is it because a ton of people are plexing during the minimum 15-16 hours between DT and when I get a chance to play? I don't know. So my observation is, the closer to DT you get, the fewer FW complexes you can even locate, much less run. I've got to the point where I rarely hunt for FW plexes.. As a FW player trying to get into the mechanic, it sucks. Rod Regards, Rod
Maarrg Blood Minmatar Minmatar Special Ops. Group	Posted - 2008.10.22 04:47:00 - [27] This current status of fw and plexes leaves the main portion of the control of systems in the hands of a very small group. It also excludes the majority of fw players as they are not able to play right as dt ends. Therefore they miss the plexes that are in the major contested system. Not sure how you even see this as functional. Would be interested to see if gallente and caldari have the same issue.
Neu Bastian Minmatar Valklear Guard	Posted - 2008.10.29 11:46:00 - [28] A bit of necro, but, also a good idea is to limit the amount of plexes in a system at the same time and have a re-spawn delay(they might have one already I dunu). Many times I've come across a backwater system where plexes have been accumulating all day and all of the sudden there are 10 or more in a single system while none are found elsewhere. Also, this could help avoid the ezzara effect, that is, where all the plexes for a given faction only have a place to spawn in the region and thus, after DT, all available plexes are there. Quote: Neu Bastian Valklear Guard - CEO
Isobel Mitar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.11.03 17:02:00 - [29] Originally by: Elsebeth Rhiannon Originally by: CCP Greyscale it is considered "working but imperfect" by us here in design. Could we ask you to change that consideration? Echo. Please change this mechanic so it treats people across different timezones fairly?
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.11.12 17:58:00 - [30] Ok. Today, the Amarr recaptured Kourmonen (grats, btw :-)). That is, after two weeks where the Minmatar for a change mostly had the upper hand in both kills and victory points; after the Minmatar managed to capture quite a few complexes in the system just half a day earlier (after the QR DT). Just to put the effect of this game mechanic "compromise" into perspective. The future looks similar: While taking the next system will require true "superiority" in the whole day, as no plexes will be reshuffled during DT in the border constellations, whoever captures the next system will only be able to keep it if they have the upper hand after downtime. If the Amarr take the next system, whatever plexes are captured in their system during the day is easily defended right after DT. If the Minmatar take the next system, the Amarr can take it back by capturing plexes after DT, like in Ezzara and Kourmonen. If the Minmatar ever get a corporation that has a strong presence after DT, and can beat the Amarr presence then, the Amarr will face the same problem. Basically, while a presence outside of that short window after DT is useful, you won't win anything without it. Can we please have this fixed somehow? Thanks.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.