| 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) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
Late Night Alliance
2812
   |
Posted - 2012.08.31 22:35:00 -
[271] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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 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.
The way I read this is that taking a system hurts your enemy more than simply trying to bleed them down. This actually is a really good thing - we want to encourage the militias to fight the all out war, and to not only take space but to hold it as well. Its essentially a ratchet for both sides - the underdog gains a LOT by taking a single system now. They not only win the opportunity to have an extra 6 points available to them to help their own WZC, but they have a very reasonable chance of holding on to those points once they obtain them. No one likes investing in upgrades knowing that they'll be gone tomorrow. Instead of strategically looking at the points and upgrade distribution, and deciding whether to offensive plex or defensive plex, and letting the numbers dictate activity, the most important thing a militia member can do is make sure he hold on to his territory - and that makes for good fights.
Combined with the fact that anyone can cash out at any time for full value of their LP, there is now a tangible incentive to put the effort into moving from tier 1 to tier 2, for example. One of the things that drives me nuts about the current system is that there is no reason to fight over taking space and holding it once you believe you can't achieve tier 4 or better. Unless you have a Nulli-type hero to come save you, apathy sets in once you land at the bottom. Now, when the chips are down, its actually worth the effort to push back, with rewards setting in for achievement immediately as you ratchet your way back up tier by tier.
The new scheme ensures that its always worthwhile to take a system, always worthwhile to make investments in it, and always worthwhile to defend it when threatened. This should drive conflict and end the silly meta-strategies of alts-flipping-systems, or holding systems at vulnerable, or letting systems get lost so they can be plexed back. The best thing a militia pilot can do to help himself is just to fight the war straight up.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
ale rico
Royal Order of Security Specialists
Late Night Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 23:31:00 -
[272] - Quote
What about docking rights based not only on militia status, but also on standings? I find the players that take advantage of the militia mechanic to get kills to be exploiters. |
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
197
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 00:15:00 -
[273] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:We would remove LP store price reduction in the new system, and only modify LP gained. As such, tier1 WZ would reduce all LP gains by 50%, tier2 would keep them on the same field as of now, tier3 would give a 100% LP gain bonus, tier4 150% and tier5 200% LP gain bonus. This would encourage factions to actually keep and maintain space to have the LP bonus rather than just push once in a while.
Are you aware that this will significantly nerf income for FW? The ISK cost advantage over high sec at high WZ control levels will be gone.
Not saying this is necessarily a good or a bad thing but, it will significantly devalue FW LP. |
Proddy Scun
Renfield Inc
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 00:18:00 -
[274] - Quote
Faction warfare fails because it does not reward APPROPRIATELY
DON'Ts
#1 Keep in mind that PVP and industrial-mining toons largely belong to two separate player camps with maybe 10-15% overlap. So low sec industrial and PI rewards tend to be pointless for the PVP individuals.
#2 DOUBLE JEOPARDY REWARDS -- even if you assume their corp has industrial-mining arm...a warzone is a terrible place for advanced industry both via story logic and by gank risk logic. Do you really think that every idle PVP ship in system is not out looking for haulers attemtping to grab stuff from Customs Stations or maybe blowing up PI stations for fun?
Sure fleets can fight over PI and other industrial-mining attempts...but then that cheap/advanatageous rate goes out the door in overhead -- does it not? Same for mining and for the most part industry products which will not be used on spot (msut be shipped elsewhere and subject to factional gank). And nothing should change the fact that warzone space is bad for general industry.
DOs
Ia. YES tie high sec empire faction taxes and industrial fees to war progress (rise and fall from standard rates). Heck there are even some NPC only goods like BPOs that could rise and fall. NOW high sec folk care and support ...even if not everyone races out to low sec to fight.
Ib. Maybe open a factional war effort service store where industrialists can donate or sell at lower prices exclusively to faction warfare folk. Similar to materials drives of WWII. Not more people initially maybe but better equipped ones. Lower prices might attract more players later though.
IIa. Do NOT lower industrial efficiency of high sec stations and raise those of low sec. Its illogical storywise for progressive settlement etc and its indirectly part of that DOUBLE JEOPARDY REWARD system. Instead ask yourself why hi sec belts and PI resources have not been more tied up by the NPC MEGACORPs and EMPIRE Governments.
IIb. Recommend Government reserve belts operate on a system simialr to old POS charter system with amount of charters linked to ship size and faction standing. Charters only purchasable with faction LP. NPC controlled belts would be accessible only via missions for that NPC corp (ship size restrictions, amount restrictions, split take with NPC corp, etc). In either case you effectively join NPC fleet when comlying with rules and otherwise get flagged for stealing to NPC guard fleet. And yes players might get PVP missions to help NPC fleets patrol belts looking for stealers.
IIc. Obviously schools would get certain exemptions for ships under certain size and maybe for a certain total number of missions per toon. On faction government side due to schools being part of government training and on NPC side due to recruitment efforts. But limited time and size offering.
The above would either force people into low sec -- OR divert a certain amount of player support to those wh are out there doing factional warfare.
The one thing I can see you would need to take care about is to not let things swing to far to one side in terms of penalties or advantages. Otherwise poepl might jsut all move to one faction to suck up the benefits and let other facions simply suffer collapse. Perhaps put a cap on the number of mining charters or ore available in given faction (maybe local rats start inflationary counterfeiting of charters and scoop up all the ore). |
Proddy Scun
Renfield Inc
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 00:31:00 -
[275] - Quote
Overall I suggest CCP take some clues from real real wars. How often do you read about all industry moving up into no man's land between solid frontlines?
Yeah Thought so. And its not likely to work in game either for same reasons. Its counterproductive compared to behind lines...no matter how bad things get. Even if at low point of faction warfare you open up break through raids on hi sec similar to **** V2 attacks. (Interesting thought but only if you want one empire side to collapse due to lack of palyers after a while.)
But yes you can set things up so industrial branch is motivated to supply and support anyone who will volunteer for faction warfare.
And some nice player discounted T2 ships and modules might get recruiting levels up. |
Ovali Garsk
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 00:39:00 -
[276] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
NEW SYSTEM UPGRADES
As mentioned quite a few times, current system upgrades are a bit lame, as not really providing needed bonuses, especially in systems with no stations. Iteration would include:
Level1:
Level2:
Level3:
Level4:
Level5:
* +25 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
* 50% market tax reduction
* 50% repair cost reduction
* 30% manufacturing time reduction
* 20% reduction to starbase fuel cost
* Able to anchor Cyno Jammer
Why not less time for manufacturing/research/etc. instead of more slots. Less time for a job is way more cool while having somewhat similar effects....
I suggest even more stuff:
(moderate) PI bonuses (now that is something that locals like and will def. plex for)
going crazy: bonuses to scan probe strength (both a slight boost to exploration but also to combat probing)
Also simply more, if you can think of stuff (keep the boosts moderate, but anything goes)
Otherwise, love you guys.
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
Scorpion Road Industry
Devil Divided By Zero
44
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 01:10:00 -
[277] - Quote
A Cyno jammer? In lowsec? Really?
Looks like you are not even considering that anyone would want to live and move through lowsec other than Militia members or 0.0 alliances. I thought the whole point of the FW changes was to populate lowsec and provide some form of interesting gameplay for different types of players. But militia controlled cyno jammers in lowsec? It's just ********.
- You haven't thought about corps that step into lowsec and place their staging area in some system there to train for a "big step" to 0.0. I've been involved in a couple of operations like that a couple of years ago. I know corps that are doing the same thing today.
- You haven't thought about W-Space corps that have lowsec exits and need to move their stuff around. Killing off a large portion of lowsec entries is not going to help.
- You haven't thought about pirate corps ambushing 0.0 convoys or straglers of capitals. Having them concentrated in non-FW lowsec area only certainly won't help.
- You haven't thought about pirate hotdrops. That's fun too.
- You haven't thought about baits for pirate hotdrops. That's even more fun.
I'm not talking about something I haven't done myself. I've done all these things and enjoyed it (except from the boring hauling part to or from w-space... that couldn't be defined as fun).
My suggestion: ditch the damn thing.
@CSM: 
CCP Ytterbium: Yarrblblbgrlblbgrlblblblbblbgrlblblbgrblblyarrrrdrooooooolonthekeyboardlikealunatic   |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
540
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 01:34:00 -
[278] - Quote
The cyno takes 10 minutes to spool up. It lasts for an hour. And then it self destructs. And it can only be lit in fully upgraded FW systems. It is a 'Do Not Disturb' sign for FW cap fights. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
Late Night Alliance
2815
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 01:40:00 -
[279] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:A Cyno jammer? In lowsec? Really? Looks like you are not even considering that anyone would want to live and move through lowsec other than Militia members or 0.0 alliances. I thought the whole point of the FW changes was to populate lowsec and provide some form of interesting gameplay for different types of players. But militia controlled cyno jammers in lowsec? It's just ********. - You haven't thought about corps that step into lowsec and place their staging area in some system there to train for a "big step" to 0.0. I've been involved in a couple of operations like that a couple of years ago. I know corps that are doing the same thing today. - You haven't thought about W-Space corps that have lowsec exits and need to move their stuff around. Killing off a large portion of lowsec entries is not going to help. - You haven't thought about pirate corps ambushing 0.0 convoys or straglers of capitals. Having them concentrated in non-FW lowsec area only certainly won't help. - You haven't thought about pirate hotdrops. That's fun too. - You haven't thought about baits for pirate hotdrops. That's even more fun. I'm not talking about something I haven't done myself. I've done all these things and enjoyed it (except from the boring hauling part to or from w-space... that couldn't be defined as fun). edit: Oh, and could you, please look at the map for a moment? Are you sure that you won't isolate areas one from another with a certain setup of Militia cyno jammers? (Isolate like it's impossible to get to a certain area with a capital ship or to get from, say, a part of Gallente lowsec to a part of Amarr lowsec). There are players that are not interested in FW and are not in 0.0 alliances that own capital ships, you know. My suggestion: ditch the damn thing. @CSM:
Yes, we did think about it. 
I suggest you take a step back, take a deep breath, and reread the details of the cyno-jammer. Note the duration, cool-down, conditions of deployment, hitpoints, etc. Than we can talk about why you think its going to prevent anyone besides the militias from doing anything in low-sec.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
73
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 01:42:00 -
[280] - Quote
I may be alone but I do not have a problem with the current war zone control swing and cash out events. It requires a lot of plexing (more pvp potential) and a level of coordination to achieve. There are issues with massive lp generation through speed tanking plexes but this is better resolved via the plex changes proposed in the other thread.
Better system upgrades are good and it is the quality of local upgrades that will drive lp investment into the hubs for people's home systems above the lower levels that will be easier to maintain war zone control.
Interestingly I think the capture changes may encourage factions not to defensive plex to much. Systems close to vulnerable state will only pay out so much when offensively plexed. This would be the best time to invest lp to raise the upgrade level as there will only be a limited number of offensive plexes to be run before no rewards are given. Rewards for defensive plexing at this level are higher and combined with reduced lp bleed could be fed back into the hub.
In fact the defensive plex rewards at this level are higher than the lp bleed amounts.
There is the danger the enemy plex and bash an upgraded system and this could force tough fights.-á
My biggest fear is the gallente war zone drops back to a stagnant level with low level of war zone control and poor rewards.-á
Sadly although we can test mechanics on sisi the outcome will not be certain until it is live.
Please don't make me run missions for cash again.
|
Dan Carter Murray
105
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 02:00:00 -
[281] - Quote
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?
null isn't important.
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
Scorpion Road Industry
Devil Divided By Zero
44
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 02:01:00 -
[282] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Yes, we did think about it. I suggest you take a step back, take a deep breath, and reread the details of the cyno-jammer. Note the duration, cool-down, conditions of deployment, hitpoints, etc. Than we can talk about why you think its going to prevent anyone besides the militias from doing anything in low-sec.
Ok, I've read every detail. You have a good point. A timer combined with a moderate cost of 100-ish million is a very good solution for the problems I've listed. Thanks and sorry.
CCP Ytterbium: Yarrblblbgrlblbgrlblblblbblbgrlblblbgrblblyarrrrdrooooooolonthekeyboardlikealunatic |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
595
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 03:19:00 -
[283] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:I may be alone but I do not have a problem with the current war zone control swing and cash out events.
Here I was thinking I was alone. What exactly is the problem with the current tier system cashouts?
Militias strive for a goal (tier 5 cashout) that should take about 2 or 3 months to achieve (yes its achieved faster now with frigate alt armies but ideally it should take about 2-3 months.) and then cashout on victory day. Even the amarr have 50% of the systems over 50% contested. The new system by reversing lp payout and pricing and giving lp for defensive plexing destroys this.
One of many advantages to the current system is after a militia achieves tier 5 there is some incentive to join the side that is at tier 1 because there is no lp for defensive plexing and one side just cashed out. Join the side at tier 1 and you can earn lp for that faction by doing your plexing and then get in on their cash out.
The new system completely reverses this. Now when you pile on the winning side you will just get more lp. Those who worked to get the militia to tier 5 get no extra benefit. And the new comers will be getting lp for defensive plexing.
I anticipate the overall war will somewhat remain balanced just with everyone either in caldari or minmatar. But gallente and amarr might as well just disappear. That is unless there is a mechanic that has not beeen announced.
This new tier system will likely be much simpler though. No real strategies involved. No big pushes to flip several systems. No planning how to accomplish that or thwart your enemy from doing that. Just pick minmatar or caldari and do an endless number of plexing.
Guys the problem was that plexing is best done in pve ships (and based on everythign I read that will still be the problem after winer.) the tier system was fine.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Perkin Warbeck
Amarrian Space Poodles
24eme Legion Etrangere
36
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 05:05:00 -
[284] - Quote
[quote=CCP Ytterbium]WINTER ITERATIONS
* Defensive plexing gives LP: as title says, but with a twist. LP amount is based on contested system % to avoid farming. Thus, a system that is 50% contested would only give 50% of the total LP amount available. Maximum cap would be set to 75% to encourage players to still be in the offensive.
Haven't had time to read subsequent posts but wouldn't this increase farming?
How would you avoid the following scenario
Minmatar main toon offensive plexes a system up to 75%+ in quiet backwater system
Amarr alt of main then defensive plexes back down 10% or so
Repeat with main toon etc
I don't think plexing should really be rewarded at all (or at least nerfed to a few hundred LP) but I think this would be a disaster without safeguards. |
Wa'roun
Quantum Cats Syndicate
34
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 05:43:00 -
[285] - Quote
If you are going to add a null sec item to level 5 systems, how about go all the way and any level 5 system can have bomb use and interdictors and/or heavy interdictor spheres. Maybe bubbles? If a system gets downgraded then bubbles would be automatically removed. If you fire off a bomb just as the system goes to 4, you either do no damage or lose sec status for every single person you hit plus gate / station guns if fired near them. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
76
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 06:36:00 -
[286] - Quote
Ok so I am a little curious over some of the finer details.
Say if I were in the Minmatar Militia and ran Major at level five then I would get 75k lp?
Is the LP bleed from the hub based on the modified or unmodified amount so it would be 10% of 75k or 25k?
Does this mean that if I join the TLF and they are at level 5 warzone control and run a caldari major then it is three times as effective at removing lp from the hub than being in the Gallente militia at tier 2.
If I defensive plex a major at level 5 warzone control with a high vulnerability do I get 56.25k lp? (75% of 75k) compared to the 12.5k lp they may have got for offensively completing a major at Tier 1?
If this is the case then assuming I put that LP into the hub pay a 75% tax then that is still 14k lp compared to the 1.25k lp (tier 1) reduction from the hub for them offensively plexing. Is this correct?
Have I got any of the above correct, I just did a 10hour night shift my thinking may be off.
ISK cost in LP stores.
Currently there is also an ISK reduction in the LP stores with the warzone level. Will any ISK prices be adjusted; do you expect any impact on newer items added to the LP store such as datacores? Was their price set with the possible reduction in mind that is now being lost?
|
Bad Messenger
Nasranite Watch
235
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 08:11:00 -
[287] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:Ok so I am a little curious over some of the finer details.
Say if I were in the Minmatar Militia and ran Major at level five then I would get 75k lp?
Is the LP bleed from the hub based on the modified or unmodified amount so it would be 10% of 75k or 25k?
Does this mean that if I join the TLF and they are at level 5 warzone control and run a caldari major then it is three times as effective at removing lp from the hub than being in the Gallente militia at tier 2.
If I defensive plex a major at level 5 warzone control with a high vulnerability do I get 56.25k lp? (75% of 75k) compared to the 12.5k lp they may have got for offensively completing a major at Tier 1?
If this is the case then assuming I put that LP into the hub pay a 75% tax then that is still 14k lp compared to the 1.25k lp (tier 1) reduction from the hub for them offensively plexing. Is this correct?
Have I got any of the above correct, I just did a 10hour night shift my thinking may be off.
ISK cost in LP stores.
Currently there is also an ISK reduction in the LP stores with the warzone level. Will any ISK prices be adjusted; do you expect any impact on newer items added to the LP store such as datacores? Was their price set with the possible reduction in mind that is now being lost?
these are really good questions, and if all these really happens who want to be on tier1 side anymore?
On current system it is almost same on which side you are because you can trust that you can cash out your lp on some point with good rewards, so you have a long term goal. but with new system you do not have any goal, you lose lp just on that moment you get it and you your future actions can not boost it on any way.
Driving force of current FW , reduced lp prices at tier 5, will be gone, there is no point to really take any systems anymore if you are on tier1. Back to grinding missions ! |
TorDog
22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 10:19:00 -
[288] - Quote
>* Defensive plexing gives LP: as title says, but with a twist. LP amount is based on contested system % to avoid farming. Thus, >a system that is 50% contested would only give 50% of the total LP amount available. Maximum cap would be set to 75% to >encourage players to still be in the offensive.
IMO this will not stop farming but only make it occur at 75% contested.
It also does not make sense that individuals or corps that choose to try and keep a system stable are penalized. What you are in effect doing is removing the increased time you just added for a system to become vulnerable as I picture all fw systems sitting between 75% and 100% contested so that lp is maximized. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
597
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 10:40:00 -
[289] - Quote
Rewarding defensive plexing with lp based on contested level just rewards the defendign side for not fighting the offensive plexer before he captures a plex. They get more lp if they wait until he leaves and then plex the system after it contested higher.
All this because the minmatar thought they were getting punished for winning too many systems? All I can say is "poor minmatar" inferno has been so hard on you.
You do get rewarded for holding systems. The reward is the ability to hit tier 5. If you lose over 20% of the systems you can't hit tier 5.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
space chikun
Fweddit
I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 11:05:00 -
[290] - Quote
Karah Serrigan wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:WINTER ITERATIONS
We would remove LP store price reduction in the new system, and only modify LP gained. As such, tier1 WZ would reduce all LP gains by 50%, tier2 would keep them on the same field as of now, tier3 would give a 100% LP gain bonus, tier4 150% and tier5 200% LP gain bonus. This would encourage factions to actually keep and maintain space to have the LP bonus rather than just push once in a while.
] Imo this, combined with the increased cost for upgrading, will just make upgrading obsolete at all. In a balanced war, like the one between caldari and gallente, where systems flip every day or two, its not worth upgrading a system to gain some more LP. Repair cost, tower fuel cost and market tax reduction are a complete nonfactor. The industry bonuses are very nice obviously, but again, theres just no way someone would spend 300k lp for a system which gets flipped in 2 days anyway.
You do realize that this will change the way people do things, right? This is a mechanical change, not CCP suggesting we do things differently.
This means you cannot reasonably apply the way things are "currently done" to what's being suggested here. It's like saying because someone painted a stick blue it's no longer useful as a stick. |
David Campbell
Colonial Marines EVE Division
Villore Accords
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 11:13:00 -
[291] - Quote
space chikun wrote:Karah Serrigan wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:WINTER ITERATIONS
We would remove LP store price reduction in the new system, and only modify LP gained. As such, tier1 WZ would reduce all LP gains by 50%, tier2 would keep them on the same field as of now, tier3 would give a 100% LP gain bonus, tier4 150% and tier5 200% LP gain bonus. This would encourage factions to actually keep and maintain space to have the LP bonus rather than just push once in a while.
] Imo this, combined with the increased cost for upgrading, will just make upgrading obsolete at all. In a balanced war, like the one between caldari and gallente, where systems flip every day or two, its not worth upgrading a system to gain some more LP. Repair cost, tower fuel cost and market tax reduction are a complete nonfactor. The industry bonuses are very nice obviously, but again, theres just no way someone would spend 300k lp for a system which gets flipped in 2 days anyway. You do realize that this will change the way people do things, right? This is a mechanical change, not CCP suggesting we do things differently. This means you cannot reasonably apply the way things are "currently done" to what's being suggested here. It's like saying because someone painted a stick blue it's no longer useful as a stick.
What he said. No more AFK speed-tanking alts combined with LP payouts for defensive plex will probably mean that we won't see systems changing hands as often as we do now. I'm ready to bet on it. |
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
266
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 11:30:00 -
[292] - Quote
The entire motivation for defensive LP is "Man, it sucks to win so hard." Right? It's a King complaining that his crown is a little bit heavy?
Why should it be surprising that a feature motivated only by that would have so many perverse consequences? Defense is already buffed in this expansion by the halting of the 'push for the cashout' mechanism at work at present. |
marketjacker
Percussive Diplomacy
PERCUSSIVE PIZZA TIME DIPLOMACY
37
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 11:50:00 -
[293] - Quote
Hidden Snake wrote:ok ... finaly some better news ... Amar are still ****** up, but why not ....
cynojammer .... hmmm .... I like it, but it will be funny .... please make them cheap so even small corps can fight without being hotdroped on everyoccasion .... and make it tough
Learn English. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
597
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 12:00:00 -
[294] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:....
Q: LET'S GET BETTER NOTIFICATION/INTEL TOOLS WITH SYSTEM UPGRADES MR. HOLMES!
A: Interesting argument Dr. Watson. More water Sir? We definitely agree having better notification tools should be part of the whole package, but it should maybe be independent of Factional Warfare and something you need in all cases. After all, Starbase, corporation, war declaration notifications also need love too, let's not be selfish here. Such revamp is in the pipeline, even not for immediate release. Better intel tools for system upgrades however is definitely something we are thinking about.
I'm not so sure a one size fits all approach is best.
The thing is allot of people in eve like the idea of hunting for hours for targets. For me I want more pvp faster. I would like 4 to 7 decent pvp fights an hour. Notifying us of when plexes are attacked can provide that.
For those who want to "hunt" for hours to gank a pver there would still be all the current option in wormholes low/null sec missions etc.
But for those who want frequent quality pvp eve currently offers nothing.
CCP Ytterbium wrote:.... Q: HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT ENCOURAGING BORDER FIGHTS BEFORE CLAIMING SOVEREIGNTY IN A CENTRAL SYSTEM?A: Yes, we have quite a lot actually. It's a good idea, as it spreads fights along an outer rim of system while giving a geographical meaning to a war effort. However, implementation is very time and resource consuming, which is why we don't have it actually planned for winter. [/list] Hope that helps a bit 
In the amarr minmatar zone it seems the opposite is the problem. Outside of 1 jump from kourm there is nothing. I think mechanics should spread people out a bit not do the opposite.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
174
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 17:04:00 -
[295] - Quote
Questions:
1. Do starbase fuel discounts apply to all starbases in system?
- For example if a war target has a tower in a friendly upgraded system do they get a discount? - Strikes me as rather unintuitive that they would benefit from some fuel discount from the opposing militia.
2. Do stations without manufacturing or research still get no benefit from the slot upgrades?
- Note there's only a very small percentage of systems in FW currently that have research slots so this upgrade is a bit useless without it adding slots to 'barren' stations.
3. Have you considered off the wall ideas like Mining bonuses for system upgrade or adding unique content (kind of like COSMOS) to make these upgraded systems "special" in some way and promote more lowsec traffic?
- It strikes me that these upgrades are bare minimum effort and they are rather uninspired - I mean an LP bonus - how dull.
My opinion is that these changes (and the others regarding NPCs) is that on the whole they are a rather drastic "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" proposal. Rather than amending the designs you went with in Inferno and keeping some of the good parts - like some of the dynamism of the warzone you're adding yet more time sinks in "inefficient upgrading" for still rather shoddy upgrades (Cynojammer will have very limited use, POS fuel discount? - all uninspired) and making it even more a war about who has the most alts to run (now defensive) buttons.
From what I have read the warzone will become a dull never changing landscape with farmers simply switching to defensive plexing and less people attempting to offensive plex because it is still boring orbiting a button, just now it is now 10x less effective, and it is more risky.
Hans, if you've helped CCP along this road you will be culpable too. Current FW is broken yes, but not stale. The proposed changes as they stand do not improve the latest broken system (which is flawed but interesting), they instead introduce yet another broken system that will actually be more akin to the old boring broken one than soething new and exciting. It is a shame. |
McReaction
The Tenori Tigers
Zombie Ninja Space Bears
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 19:02:00 -
[296] - Quote
Hello gentlemen!
Thought I might just add a perspective - I haven't looked through every other thread so this might have previously been stated....
I am gonna refer to Ytterbium's stated changes and give my view on them.
Note:
Some changes are "spot-on" while others are perhaps a little off....
-Inferno patch FW changes are definately improvements -> EVE DEVS! It's not flawed, it just needs to be reworked ;)
"We would remove LP store price reduction in the new system"
Don't! It is currently the main encouragement to invest LP into the hubs, if anything should be changed about this, reduce the actual discounts by(example) 50%
Example: Firetail at Tier 5 is 2.500 LP - changing it to 5.000 LP cost at Tier 5
This, combined with the new FW complex changes -> "Capture beacon location being moved within 10km of the beacon"
and increased I-hub donation requirement,
will result in a more balanced system, encouraging pvp, and yet make it harder reaching the Tier 5 LP stores which also rewards less.
A thought that I haven't seen posted(please point it out if it has been!)
INCREASE LP gained from destroying an enemy I-hub as it encourages flipping the system earlier, and not wait for a wave of system flips as it is now, followed by "The Tier 5 push" |
Doctorkaba
The Tenori Tigers
Zombie Ninja Space Bears
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 19:38:00 -
[297] - Quote
McReaction wrote:Hello gentlemen!
"We would remove LP store price reduction in the new system"
Don't! It is currently the main encouragement to invest LP into the hubs, if anything should be changed about this, reduce the actual discounts by(example) 50%
I agree with what your saying reaction except for this. With the current reduction of LP stores it really requires constant flipping back and forth, killing the faction who's tier is lower. With the new system there isn't a reduction in prices, so that LP is worth the same in both cases, it might take longer getting your LP, but its still worth it.
Either way, CCP i love you for the new changes. I haven't seen one bad thing yet :fanboysigh:
Want some pvp help? Like to fly small and fast frigates? Then join the in game channel Tenori_Tigers! We specialize in small group frigate fights and love to help out newer players. We are also part of Faction Warfare so join our chat if you are interested in that also! |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
347
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 20:50:00 -
[298] - Quote
If you can't have direct benefits for members of the controling militias in the system, how about LP store items like boosters. The boosters will only work in FW systems, will give a benefit depending on the current system, and fade if you leave the system. If you're in an opposing system, it would work like the 0 upgrade booster. I'll leave the actual numbers of the effects to more qualified people, but the idea does seem to solve the problem of giving rewards to the actual FW members.
|
SubStandard Rin
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 20:55:00 -
[299] - Quote
Quote:Some ideas, not necessarily in any order:
- Bring back the cyno jammer, if polished enough to be shot down by neutral third parties. Fanfest taught us it is a very tricky move, so we want to hear from all interested parties here
- Move station deny docking from being automatic when a system is captured to something that only happens when the enemy upgrade a system to level X
- Provide science, manufacturing time reduction bonuses to further encourage industry in low-security space
I have a few worries here.
1# Cynojammers in Lowsec means it will interfere with Nullsec lifeline to Highsec how do you intend to solve this?
Hit point reduction is not a valid answer since thats a "patch" not a fix of the problem. my suggestion is allow Cynojammers only in 1 system for each militia at a time that way they can use it offensive and defend there stronghold but not lock down every system. After all no one want a Nullsec alliances raping your system every week for there logistics do you? not to mention the irritation it will cause for the power blocks.
2# science / manufacturing etc bonuses well this is in my book tied to the POS issue. get the [censored word] POS rewamp up and then you could (if done right) remove almost 90% of the Manufacturing/science slots in the Stations.
Right now building stuff in lowsec is not worth the risk the only thing my corp mates are building is Dreads/Carriers for Corp.
- Rising the cost for building/research is high sec isn't going to make a difference it will only affect the module price in the end.
- Lowering the Highsec refinement yield will only raise the prices of modules due to the risk involved in moving large quantities of ore to lowsec no one will take the risk. It will not happen due to Freighers are as slow as a snail trying to run a marathon and just aligning in lowsec will be perilous. lowering it to low and Poses will do the Refinement in highsec.
- Lowering the cost for building / researching in lowsec is such a small part of a tecII item that its not worth the fuz.
for example 10x Hobgoblin II regent cost 2.8M , research cost 0.5- 1M, building cost 100k so from a 4M total cost 100k is the cost to build it. thats 0.25% of the total value ... neglectable
- lowering the build/ research time, can be dooable but consider POS when you get to this. it will affect alot of stuff in highsec if you do this. moving a carebear alt to a lowsec station with research and do all the invention/research therre the risk is almost zero if you move the BPC back in a interceptor. It will not populate the lowsec more then the alt doing his invents there.
3# if you want to improve new player flying to lowsec remove learning implants. sorry but they are the biggest roadblock for any new player to fly to lowsec. a Rifter for 1-2M or implants for 50M i know where the cost/danger lies. when i was new i wasn't afraid of losing a few frigates but losing my learning implants would have meant a serious blow to my character.
4# accept that 70% of eves population is playing in highsec oout of my 6characters on 3 accounts only one is playing in nullsec the rest of my characters are support characters in highsec paying for my lifestyle in nullsec. I susspect more players are like me Highsec pays for the lowsec/nullsec cost of living. nerfing highsec will then hit the same players who play in nullsec or lowsec.
TLDR
* Cyno is dangerous for Nullsec powerblocks they will not tolerate them as it cuts there lifeline
* don't touch highsec science it will not improve lowsec
* remove learning implants as they are serving as a highsec roadblock to going to lowsec.
* Accept that 70% of eves population is playing in highsec, let them do that.
|
Joe Viturbo
The Tenori Tigers
Zombie Ninja Space Bears
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.01 21:11:00 -
[300] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:Questions:
[...My opinion of these changes (and the others regarding NPCs) is that on the whole they are a rather drastic "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" proposal. Rather than amending the designs you went with in Inferno and keeping some of the good parts - like some of the dynamism of the warzone, you're adding yet more time sinks via "inefficient upgrading" for still rather shoddy upgrades (Cynojammer will have very limited use, POS fuel discount? - all uninspired) and making it even more a war about who has the most alts to run (now defensive) buttons.
From what I have read the warzone will become a dull never changing landscape with farmers simply switching to defensive plexing and less people attempting to offensive plex because it is still boring orbiting a button, just now it is now 10x less effective and more risky.
Hans, if you've helped CCP along this road you will be culpable too. Current FW is broken yes, but not stale. Why not just fix the broken parts with the current system like worthwhile system upgrades for ALL FW systems, not just a hotch potch few systems; Stop farmers by making people kill all spawns, make the LP store require a wide variety of tags for all items etc etc.
The proposed changes as they stand do not improve the latest broken system (which is flawed but interesting), they instead introduce yet another broken system that will actually be more akin to the old boring broken one than something new and exciting. These proposals are a step backward in making FW more 'fun', adding only more grind, and that is a shame.
^^^ This!
I agree this is looking more and more like "throwing the baby out with the bathwater".
FW certainly has issues with afk gunless plexing, ihub vulnerability exploiting and defensive plexing boredom but dont drastically change everything because of a those few yet critical issues!
Please dont make lowsec a giant and slow grind as that will drive down the population faster than you can say button orbit.
Please do look at mitigating the effect of farmers and fixing the broken bits.
The last few months has seen a great many enjoyable fights, on boths sides I'd wager, and I for one have been having a blast.
My 2 cents |
| |
|
| 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 |