Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3264
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 18:05:00 -
[61] - Quote
Success or failure of Faction Warfare iterations is impossible to measure without criteria. After reading your most recent post here, Poetic, what would you say your criteria is for Faction Warfare being "not broken" or even "successful" come springtime? (After we've had a couple months to see how the December changes will affect the warzone).
Anyone else is free to chime in with what they deem criteria for a successful outcome to all of this as well. Everyone's perception and interests are a bit different. Note that criteria for success does not include a specific mechanic being included or not included, success is that the changes (whichever get implemented) have a positive outcome.
Criteria could include: "PvP has gone up by a measurable percentage" or "FW is no longer the premier farmed income sources across the entire game" or "Warzones have seen observable movement across the spectrum" or "Even the underdog can earn enough isk for pew via the activiities available to him in FW"
Remember - specific payout percentages, plex mechanics, etc don't really constitute "criteria for success" as we all disagree on the details to a degree, and without data yet we don't know which mechanics (mine, yours, or CCP's) will cause FW to be a success. Anything is possible at this point. All we can do is set overarching goals for how this is supposed to look and feel when we're done with it, and see how the state of the feature measures up in the end.
This is something I learned from the talk with Fweddit last friday, that often times we're zeroing in on pitched battles over this mechanic or that mechanic, or our way vs CCP's way, even while admitting we don't all know how this will turn out. That's why I said its easier to discuss these things if we establish some common ground when it comes to a picture of what things will look like if the changes are successful. We aren't all going to get our way in terms of specific mechanics, but its always possible something we didn't like initially turns out to have a positive effect (or vice versa).
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate Drunk 'n' Disorderly
228
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 18:37:00 -
[62] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:remove FW missions, then FW is fixed ! At the very least de-couple them from the Tier multipliers. Missions do nothing for warzone control and therefore shouldn't receive the warzone control multiplier. Same with kills.
Missions are the only source of rewards if one side completely wins.
Instead of de-coupling them from tier multipliers, I think that only one fw mission should be able to be picked up at a time. That will
a) Make them a lot less attractive b) Still make them scale with the LP multiplier c) Make people travel more d) Give more incentive to defend a mission, instead of just moving on to the next one and waiting for the opposing member to get bored.
I'd prefer missions affect WZ control AND can be failed by a member of one of the opposing militias for a reward. |
Deen Wispa
Justified Chaos
348
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 19:10:00 -
[63] - Quote
Missions are needed to help people make isk to pew.
Hans- I don't think Poetic has any specific benchmarks . He just likes to ***** about you and Susan all the time while his corp keeps flip flopping back and forth between two militias. Gallente FW Blog http://iamsheriff.com/blog C'est La Eve :) |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1415
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 19:16:00 -
[64] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Same with kills. Hans does propose that kills receive all LP at the T5 multiplier, no matter what level of warzone control your faction is at. Which would be a good change.
Caldari Militia |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1415
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 19:19:00 -
[65] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Success or failure of Faction Warfare iterations is impossible to measure without criteria. After reading your most recent post here, Poetic, what would you say your criteria is for Faction Warfare being "not broken" or even "successful" come springtime? (After we've had a couple months to see how the December changes will affect the warzone).
I'd rather know what your criteria for success is. Thus we can measure your effectiveness as the faction warfare representative, your ability to judge and accept the changes CCP puts forth.
Caldari Militia |
Commander Ted
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc. Monkeys with Guns.
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 19:28:00 -
[66] - Quote
FW should be a pvp centric feature. It is currently not, in order to win FW you need to grind as much as you can. The most fun in FW is had when fleets fight for no reason accomplishing nothing but burning some of the isk you made grinding.
Killing players should net more loyalty points. Ships should have fixed values for how much LP they pay out when destroyed. The act of spending earned LP points should result in the gain of control or contest over a system, somehow. Killing rats and orbiting imaginary buttons should not be how you do faction warfare, if you like pve then go run missions, if you join faction warfare you should be in it to fight.
Having one side have a higher tier over the other is silly because it pressures members of the loosing side to jump ship with no penalty so they can make more iskies. Have rewards like tiers should be related to how well the individual player performs, or at least his or her corp. Certain rewards like battleships should only be available after the player has killed a certain ammount of ships or turned in enough LP. Such benefits should be wiped if a player joins an opposing faction.
Claiming more territory offers the advantages of having more places to dock and perhaps should allow the owning faction's corps to setup customs offices (could easily tie into dust).
Just my thoughts. Leave pve out of FW entirely, have rewards come from fighting in it. Let the players rat or run missions for extra isk if they want, if they can't kill anything solo or join a good fleet then they can do level 4's in hisec to compensate.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3264
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 19:33:00 -
[67] - Quote
Easy enough - PvP has increased, fights are easy to find, FW isn't a comical income source (meaning hundreds of millions of isk per hour with zero effort and zero isk), warzone control sees noticeable movement, and everyone can afford basic PvP ships from the various income activities available.
Would you agree these are reasonable criteria for evaluating FW's success? Anything you'd add / subtract?
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:00:00 -
[68] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Success or failure of Faction Warfare iterations is impossible to measure without criteria. After reading your most recent post here, Poetic, what would you say your criteria is for Faction Warfare being "not broken" or even "successful" come springtime? (After we've had a couple months to see how the December changes will affect the warzone).
Anyone else is free to chime in with what they deem criteria for a successful outcome to all of this as well. Everyone's perception and interests are a bit different. Note that criteria for success does not include a specific mechanic being included or not included, success is that the changes (whichever get implemented) have a positive outcome.
Criteria could include: "PvP has gone up by a measurable percentage" or "FW is no longer the premier farmed income sources across the entire game" or "Warzones have seen observable movement across the spectrum" or "Even the underdog can earn enough isk for pew via the activiities available to him in FW"
Remember - specific payout percentages, plex mechanics, etc don't really constitute "criteria for success" as we all disagree on the details to a degree, and without data yet we don't know which mechanics (mine, yours, or CCP's) will cause FW to be a success. Anything is possible at this point. All we can do is set overarching goals for how this is supposed to look and feel when we're done with it, and see how the state of the feature measures up in the end.
You know my views on this I have been posting them for years.
1) make winning faction war something that the gaming community would be proud of.
How? Well null sec has a lock on getting vast herds of sheep to win by blob. And lots of people in null sec are proud of that. So what else is there that the gaming community admires? Answer: skill at small gang pvp.
So make winning faction war about small gang pvp.
To do this we need to bridge that gap between how you win at faction war now (and yes by "win" I mean gain sovereignty for your faction) and the small gang pvp. The plexing needs to be about small scale pvp. Yet in all this time ccp really has yet to do a single thing to promote this. Somehow with all the concern that minmatar were being punished for winning this notion got put on the back burner.
2) Make it so that everyone won't just join the winning side.
You say: "Even the underdog can earn enough isk for pew via the activiities available to him in FW" But this is a bad restatement. How much is enough to pew?
Well it depends on how much your enemy has to pew right? I mean if you have enough to bring t1 frigates and they have enough isk to bring pirate frigates to each fight you won't have enough. If you have enough to bring battleships and they have enough to bring battleships with capital support you wont have enough to pew against them.
Plus this is eve who is going to want to join a side that makes half of what the other side makes. Do you think people who join faction war think they will do that forever and so as long as they have enough to do faction war right now it doesn't matter that one side will fatten their wallets if they later decide to do something else?
Retribution completely destroys this goal. At least inferno had some balances. It did not award defensive plexing. So the underdog would have a shot at making just as much isk as the winning side. That is completely gone now.
3) Make it fun to play
To do this you can:
A) give people short term goals that add to a longer term strategic goals. Inferno had that as well. The tier cashouts were something everyone could strive for. They involved strategy too. Well retribution eliminates that. Now we have just one big long grind.
Think of capping a plex like a eating a hotdog in a hotdog eating contest. In inferno if you ate 50 hotdogs you would get $1000. Now if you eat fifty hotdogs you will get 50 cents for each additional hot dog you eat. But guess what? After you eat fifty hotdogs everyone else, even those who haven't yet had any hotdogs, gets fifty cents for every hot dog they eat.
So not only is this an endless grind but you are violating the second main goal as well. You encourage everyone to just join the winning side.
B)Also again make it about frequent quality pvp. People like pvp its fun.
4) Make it unique. Don't just copy null sec mechanics.
EVE has never had anything that was intended to promote frequent quality small scale pvp. Faction war is the obvious choice.
5) Profit
How many new subscribers would Eve have if they actually took these goals to heart and did something beside assign large amounts of isk to whatever they want to have players flock to?
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3264
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:01:00 -
[69] - Quote
Deen Wispa wrote: Hans- I don't think Poetic has any specific benchmarks.
I'm sure he does, whether he's willing to share them or not. He's already stated that things "seem broken", so its a fair question to ask what he expects to see come February for things to to not seem broken. Poe's now a FW participant and member of our community, I can't very well represent his interests if he doesn't make it clear what those interests are.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:01:00 -
[70] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: This is something I learned from the talk with Fweddit last friday, that often times we're zeroing in on pitched battles over this mechanic or that mechanic, or our way vs CCP's way, even while admitting we don't all know how this will turn out. That's why I said its easier to discuss these things if we establish some common ground when it comes to a picture of what things will look like if the changes are successful. We aren't all going to get our way in terms of specific mechanics, but its always possible something we didn't like initially turns out to have a positive effect (or vice versa).
Hans there were people like me and others telling you this all along. You chose to ignore us.
Now after floundering around I predict people will start saying "well its impossible to accomplish these goals." When really you and ccp have just ignored people who are giving you sensible ideas. Instead you went with the cheap win of "lets get people into faction war by throwing massive amounts of isk at it" Well no null sec is upset enough that that was turned off. And now we see that CCP really did not do much to improve the actual core of the game. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:04:00 -
[71] - Quote
chatgris wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:remove FW missions, then FW is fixed ! At the very least de-couple them from the Tier multipliers. Missions do nothing for warzone control and therefore shouldn't receive the warzone control multiplier. Same with kills. Missions are the only source of rewards if one side completely wins. ....
I was going to say something similar. I would say if they are going to continue to make faction war so economically lopsided they should leave missions as they are with the tier modifiers. That way people who fight for the losing side can at least train alts to run missions for the enemy. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3264
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:07:00 -
[72] - Quote
Cearain wrote: You know my views on this I have been posting them for years.
Sure, but I appreciate you sharing them again. I think we can all agree these are good goals to strive for - and measurable too. For example, "making it so all the players don't join the winning side" can easily be assessed by observing whether or not new players are willing to join the losing side despite the increased rewards for belonging to the miltia with a greater degree of warzone control. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:08:00 -
[73] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Deen Wispa wrote: Hans- I don't think Poetic has any specific benchmarks. I'm sure he does, whether he's willing to share them or not. He's already stated that things "seem broken", so its a fair question to ask what he expects to see come February for things to to not seem broken. Poe's now a FW participant and member of our community, I can't very well represent his interests if he doesn't make it clear what those interests are.
Its broken because of the disconnect between the plexing/occupancy and the pvp. That is also why it is the same as it has always been. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:14:00 -
[74] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote: You know my views on this I have been posting them for years. Sure, but I appreciate you sharing them again. I think we can all agree these are good goals to strive for - and measurable too. For example, "making it so all the players don't join the winning side" can easily be assessed by observing whether or not new players are willing to join the losing side despite the increased rewards for belonging to the miltia with a greater degree of warzone control.
We could see this happen with inferno right? The numbers gap between amarr and minmatar grew like never before. Yet retribution only made this worse.
Retribution made it so the winners will stay winning by rewarding d-plexing with lp.
Retribution makes it so instead of people who fight to make the losing side the winning side get most of the gains its the people who join after one side is winning get the rewards. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3264
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:15:00 -
[75] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Hans there were people like me and others telling you this all along. You chose to ignore us.
Cearain, there are several fixes slated for Retribution that are direct suggestions from yourself that I've championed to CCP and are now being coded up, that directly affect plexing as a PvP activity. You and I have agreed on these changes for quite some time. To say that I've been ignoring you is dishonest, and unnecessary. Lets be realistic if we're going to continue discussing matters and not be so quick to reheat old rhetoric that is easily disproven. We don't see eye to eye on everything - but we have been partners in promoting the need for plexing visibility, timer rollbacks, and drastically reduced NPC's, and the total package of fixes to be released in December will reflect your hard work as well as my own. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Reticle
Sight Picture
70
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:32:00 -
[76] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Easy enough - PvP has increased, fights are easy to find, FW isn't a comical income source (meaning hundreds of millions of isk per hour with zero effort and zero isk), warzone control sees noticeable movement, and everyone can afford basic PvP ships from the various income activities available.
Would you agree these are reasonable criteria for evaluating FW's success? Anything you'd add / subtract?
Frankly, I've never understood the point of FW. At best it's a contrived excuse for combat and a way to get high sec combat without crappy wardec mechanics. Other than that, it only appears to offer comically large rewards (still) for making oneself available as a potential target. FW has become an overly complicated pew pew flagging device. I'd argue that it would be better for everyone involved in FW to be given a "I like to fight" button they can press and make themselves a totally legal target in high sec and low sec. I guess I'd be curious to know why CCP should be diverting so many resources to something like this, when they could be making the heart and soul of the game, sov mechanics, better. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:38:00 -
[77] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote: Hans there were people like me and others telling you this all along. You chose to ignore us. Cearain, there are several fixes slated for Retribution that are direct suggestions from yourself that I've championed to CCP and are now being coded up, that directly affect plexing as a PvP activity. You and I have agreed on these changes for quite some time. To say that I've been ignoring you is dishonest, and unnecessary. Lets be realistic if we're going to continue discussing matters and not be so quick to reheat old rhetoric that is easily disproven. We don't see eye to eye on everything - but we have been partners in promoting the need for plexing visibility, timer rollbacks, and drastically reduced NPC's, and the total package of fixes to be released in December will reflect your hard work as well as my own.
Fair enough.
You haven't completely ignored me on this but it has taken an extremely low priority. CCP is shuffling fw constatnly and none of these changes have been implemented.
Susan's notion that minmatar were being punished for winning too much so they need lp for defensive plexing has been addressed pronto.
Meanwhile the issues to make this more of a pvp game have taken a back seat and will be implemented in a weak form if ever. Just knowing what the timer is in local is not enough. The timer rollbacks should be based only when an enemy lands on grid not just anytime you leave.
And in any event now that you managed to make the war completely lopsided for the winning side its unclear what sort of an effect these changes will have. If the war was balanced then notifications and rollbacks will be great. But when you implement changes that completely lopside the war then notifications and rollbacks will actually hurt.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 20:42:00 -
[78] - Quote
Reticle wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Easy enough - PvP has increased, fights are easy to find, FW isn't a comical income source (meaning hundreds of millions of isk per hour with zero effort and zero isk), warzone control sees noticeable movement, and everyone can afford basic PvP ships from the various income activities available.
Would you agree these are reasonable criteria for evaluating FW's success? Anything you'd add / subtract?
Frankly, I've never understood the point of FW. At best it's a contrived excuse for combat and a way to get high sec combat without crappy wardec mechanics. Other than that, it only appears to offer comically large rewards (still) for making oneself available as a potential target. FW has become an overly complicated pew pew flagging device. I'd argue that it would be better for everyone involved in FW to be given a "I like to fight" button they can press and make themselves a totally legal target in high sec and low sec. I guess I'd be curious to know why CCP should be diverting so many resources to something like this, when they could be making the heart and soul of the game, sov mechanics, better.
Because allot of people don't go for the tween girl aggression dressed up as null sec politics. They like to fly around and fight in their ships. There should be mechanics that promote that. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
568
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:00:00 -
[79] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Same with kills. Hans does propose that kills receive all LP at the T5 multiplier, no matter what level of warzone control your faction is at. Which would be a good change. How does this not lead to abuse at Tier 5?
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3266
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:00:00 -
[80] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Fair enough.
You haven't completely ignored me on this but it has taken an extremely low priority. CCP is shuffling fw constatnly and none of these changes have been implemented.
Susan's notion that minmatar were being punished for winning too much so they need lp for defensive plexing has been addressed pronto.
Meanwhile the issues to make this more of a pvp game have taken a back seat and will be implemented in a weak form if ever. Just knowing what the timer is in local is not enough. The timer rollbacks should be based only when an enemy lands on grid not just anytime you leave.
You seem to think I have something to do with CCP's release schedule.
If I had my way we never would have seen payouts in the first place until the NPC overhaul and the other plex mechanics were addressed, but that ship sailed before I ever took office. The recent patch has everything to do with CCP finally waking up to the mess they created by throwing money at FW first instead of fixing the underlying issues, and releasing the code they had completed by this point. "Massaging the numbers" is exactly what it says - and obviously takes less time than altering core content structure and building custom new NPC AI. The realities of the production process here were what contributed to the order in which the Retribution changes rolled out, I've been quite clear about what I want to see in what order, and been outspoken about the fact that CCP was doing the right things in the wrong order from the beginning.
But by all means, continue to blame Susan for it all, everyone is entitled to their beliefs.
Anyways about this timer rollback - what do you mean exactly? Maybe I've missed something in our previous discussions, I'm hoping you can elaborate on "enemy lands on grid not just anytime you leave". If two players are both on the timer, why would it not just stop moving completely until one has defeated the other? There's still a month left, if there's a better way to tweak this I'm all ears. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
|
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1415
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:03:00 -
[81] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Easy enough - PvP has increased, fights are easy to find, FW isn't a comical income source (meaning hundreds of millions of isk per hour with zero effort and zero isk), warzone control sees noticeable movement, and everyone can afford basic PvP ships from the various income activities available.
Would you agree these are reasonable criteria for evaluating FW's success? Anything you'd add / subtract? No.
1. People don't hop between factions, without penalty, depending on who is winning and who is losing.
2. People join the losing side in equal numbers to the winning side, because the benefits aren't so weighted towards the winners.
3. People can earn a living in FW from PvP. They shouldn't be forced into doing PvE to earn a living from within FW.
Fights are always easy to find, and has little to no bearing on the ruleset. Most people are in FW to PvP, so they'll find fights no matter. CCP's new rules have had no real bearing on the number of fights anr/or their quality.
Caldari Militia |
Yuri Intaki
Nasranite Watch Liandri Covenant
97
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:03:00 -
[82] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:We don't see eye to eye on everything - but we have been partners in promoting the need for plexing visibility, timer rollbacks, and drastically reduced NPC's, and the total package of fixes to be released in December will reflect your hard work as well as my own.
FW will see success when CCP Devs responsible and you are sacked from their job/position as appropriate and whole tier system is removed but then again, CCP are eagerly waiting for december 4th and time when only two allied militias remain in existence for FW.
CCP decided to kick Caldari/Amarr in the groin because suddenly they decided "Oh dearie, farmville is bad, better make sure our favourite pet goats get the money and not the others" and most likely you encouraged them and leaked information about the changes coming ahead of schedule to your friends in militia.
Why I make this accusation? Because you leaked the plex timing bug to matars when I explained it how it works to you before I reported it to CCP. Suddenly my friends in Amarr reported massive abuse of said mechanism happening across that warzone.
You must also udnerstand this. Every Caldari militia player at the moment hates CCP's guts and you are most likely on top of their list for "morons who need to be tarred & feathered".
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
568
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:04:00 -
[83] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Because allot of people don't go for the tween girl aggression dressed up as null sec politics. They like to fly around and fight in their ships. There should be mechanics that promote that. LOL, scoreboard. I encourage our esteemed collegues to review the killboards for themselves. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3267
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:08:00 -
[84] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Same with kills. Hans does propose that kills receive all LP at the T5 multiplier, no matter what level of warzone control your faction is at. Which would be a good change. How does this not lead to abuse at Tier 5?
I don't understand how this would lead to abuse. I'm suggesting that CCP decide what their upper limit is on a % value payout in the form of LP (lets assume for now that this is what you get paid at Tier 5) and institute that LP payout for all PvP kills, all the time, regardless of whether you are winning or losing. Essentially exempt PvP payouts from scaling, and pretend that everyone's at Tier 5 for purposes of PvP payouts.
If target availabilty is the primary reason to join the losing militia, I see no reason to make pilots choose between that and better pay for the same thing. I want to encourage people to sign up for PvP. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
BolsterBomb
Frog Steamers
125
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:09:00 -
[85] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Same with kills. Hans does propose that kills receive all LP at the T5 multiplier, no matter what level of warzone control your faction is at. Which would be a good change. How does this not lead to abuse at Tier 5? I don't understand how this would lead to abuse. I'm suggesting that CCP decide what their upper limit is on a % value payout in the form of LP (lets assume for now that this is what you get paid at Tier 5) and institute that LP payout for all PvP kills, all the time, regardless of whether you are winning or losing. Essentially exempt PvP payouts from scaling, and pretend that everyone's at Tier 5 for purposes of PvP payouts. If target availabilty is the primary reason to join the losing militia, I see no reason to make pilots choose between that and better pay for the same thing. I want to encourage people to sign up for PvP.
See Goons "exploit" Brig General of The Caldari State
Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1415
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:11:00 -
[86] - Quote
BolsterBomb wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Same with kills. Hans does propose that kills receive all LP at the T5 multiplier, no matter what level of warzone control your faction is at. Which would be a good change. How does this not lead to abuse at Tier 5? I don't understand how this would lead to abuse. I'm suggesting that CCP decide what their upper limit is on a % value payout in the form of LP (lets assume for now that this is what you get paid at Tier 5) and institute that LP payout for all PvP kills, all the time, regardless of whether you are winning or losing. Essentially exempt PvP payouts from scaling, and pretend that everyone's at Tier 5 for purposes of PvP payouts. If target availabilty is the primary reason to join the losing militia, I see no reason to make pilots choose between that and better pay for the same thing. I want to encourage people to sign up for PvP. See Goons "exploit" The LP payout for PvP kills at T5 are already set at values that cannot be exploited. And that T5 payout is not even at the ceiling. It could go a tad higher without danger of any "goon 'spoits."
Caldari Militia |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3267
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:16:00 -
[87] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:And that T5 payout is not even at the ceiling. It could go a tad higher without danger of any "goon 'spoits."
Do you have a source for this? or math to demonstrate? Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:23:00 -
[88] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote: Fair enough.
You haven't completely ignored me on this but it has taken an extremely low priority. CCP is shuffling fw constatnly and none of these changes have been implemented.
Susan's notion that minmatar were being punished for winning too much so they need lp for defensive plexing has been addressed pronto.
Meanwhile the issues to make this more of a pvp game have taken a back seat and will be implemented in a weak form if ever. Just knowing what the timer is in local is not enough. The timer rollbacks should be based only when an enemy lands on grid not just anytime you leave. You seem to think I have something to do with CCP's release schedule. If I had my way we never would have seen payouts in the first place until the NPC overhaul and the other plex mechanics were addressed, but that ship sailed before I ever took office. The recent patch has everything to do with CCP finally waking up to the mess they created by throwing money at FW first instead of fixing the underlying issues, and releasing the code they had completed by this point. "Massaging the numbers" is exactly what it says - and obviously takes less time than altering core content structure and building custom new NPC AI. The realities of the production process here were what contributed to the order in which the Retribution changes rolled out, I've been quite clear about what I want to see in what order, and been outspoken about the fact that CCP was doing the right things in the wrong order from the beginning. But by all means, continue to blame Susan for it all, everyone is entitled to their beliefs. .
If they wanted to simply reduce the payouts they could have just said that tier 1 gets the old pay outs. tier 2 gets a 10% decrease in price. Tier 3 gets a 20% decrease tier 4 a 30% and tier 5 a 50%.
But instead you had them changing all sorts of things around which just made the whole deal worse. Including answering susans cries to give lp for d-plexing, and botching the payout system even though it never really got any substantial support on the forums.
Plenty of people, including myself, posted the problems with those changes and you ignored them.
I never asked for a new npc ai. In fact I said it would be a waste of time because fw should be pvp focused. I agree that the ui changes will make it more pvp focused but its completely unnecessary. The simple change I suggested is not slated to happen at all.
CCP will fail all of the goals I set forth.
If you do not alter what ccp does, and when they do them, then I do not know the point of the csm.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Anyways about this timer rollback - what do you mean exactly? Maybe I've missed something in our previous discussions, I'm hoping you can elaborate on "enemy lands on grid not just anytime you leave". If two players are both on the timer, why would it not just stop moving completely until one has defeated the other? There's still a month left, if there's a better way to tweak this I'm all ears.
I will ask susan to write this on her blog so you get it.
The timer should only roll back if an enemy is on grid with you or on grid with the accel gate.
Lets say I am in a plex and I fight someone. I kill him or chase him out but now I am in structure and the rats start shooting me again. Can I go the 5 jumps I need to go to repair? Or will I lose my time on the clock?
Lets say I am doing a plex and an enemy opens another one in the same system as me. Can I go fight him/ chase him out or will my own clock start rolling back? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1415
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:31:00 -
[89] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:And that T5 payout is not even at the ceiling. It could go a tad higher without danger of any "goon 'spoits."
Do you have a source for this? or math to demonstrate? You are the source. You mentioned this "fact" three or so times during the Hans Visits Fweddit discussion.
Caldari Militia |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
622
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 21:36:00 -
[90] - Quote
I think Han's point is that whatever the top percent is everyone should get that for pvp kills.
Deciding what the top percent is can be tricky. But even after the goons trick, ccp did not completely do away with lp for kills. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |