EVE Search - Faction Warfare: Moving Forward.....

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Faction Warfare: Moving Forward.....

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 49	Posted - 2011.10.09 15:39:00 - [1] - Quote I'd have to agree with Cearain (shoot me now! ) in that standings makes a ***-poor access criteria .. we don't want alliances to be able to get the best of several worlds, it is either/or so I say CCP's old idea of allowing them in provided they hold no space is still the most "fair" one. Would personally want even more and stricter requirements to prevent excessive blobbing but unsure of what those might be .. As for Incursion style mechanics; why, oh why is it always all or nothing with you Cearain We strip it of the useful stuff, add some specifically FW related and exchange it for the broken POS we have now, example; Ranks: - Ranks gained by missions are stripped immediately, if not possible then reset the whole shebang. - Points towards ranks are gained by plexing and shooting people in the face. - Scale rank points based on gang-size like is currently done with LP-for-Kills and Incursion payouts (rewards "keeping it small" and thus discourages blobbing). - Militia interface is revamped to contain actual useful data for the two sides (Min/Gal, Am/Cal). - Five tabs, one per militia plus one (see next), limited data available for enemy militia's but full for ally. Can have best killer, best plexer, biggest kill, various metrics etc. .. basically a combination of an e-peen contest and intel tool. - Voting tab, this is where the new ranks come into play. Once every week or fortnight the militia gets to vote for an offensive target , everyone starts with one vote as base but with higher rank comes more votes (still just one selection). - In between votes the tab is used for data concerning progress on the chosen target and the runner-up (secondary) as well as data on enemy primary target (but not secondary). - Assaults are constellation wide, using an Incursion type bar with rounded numerical value to show progress. - Plexes will have high likelihood of spawning in primary target, above average in secondary and below average everywhere else. - Plexes are a mix of not only sizes but goals. Hacking, Archaeology, straight up red-cross popping etc. are all represented, most of them should be designed to disallow solo capture (see below). - Hacking example* Goal can take the form of a mini-game contests where one side is trying to break into data nodes while the other tries to encrypt/secure them (think DeusEx:HR hacking minigame). By requiring twin nodes to be accessed at a time for it to work the solo-frig can be eradicated. - Time to complete for attacker should aim for roughly same as now while time for defender is shorter .. locking a door is considerably easier than breaking it down. - Missions remain as they are with hopefully an increase in difficulty. Getting paid 40-50M for five minutes work just shouldn't exist in Eve regardless of travel time or "risk". - All missions designed to include a kill-switch so that the opposing side can force it closed after a time if 'owner' decides to bolt. - Missions are more likely to spawn in targeted constellation (same frequency as plexes in secondary target, ie. above avg.). - Missions contribute 0.1% of their LP payout towards occupancy (or whatever makes a level 4 roughly equal to a medium plex). - Mission LP payout is scaled upwards with rank so that a max ranked character can get ~20% more than a farmer alt, plus the contribution towards occupancy is increased with rank so that a max rank lvl4 has the same value as the biggest major plex. Enough for now, brain needs to vent all this gas.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 49	Posted - 2011.10.09 20:55:00 - [2] - Quote They are welcome to come visit or even put down roots in the FW areas, but the problem with them joining up (for me at least) is that if they have all the benefits that null provide plus access to stupidly lucrative FW missions and the greatest wardec of all time .. there is no downside whatsoever which is contrary to Eve philosophy. New up and coming alliances are a shoe-in as they probably haven't got any space yet and FW has up until now been used quite a lot by corps for recruitment purposes, but I am fairly certain that all the RP alliances have space, if only for appearances and cranking out a cap once in a while ..
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 50	Posted - 2011.10.11 06:28:00 - [3] - Quote Cearain wrote: You donGÇÖt want FW to work for huge numbers from alliances but you also donGÇÖt want it to work for solo pilots either. Let me guess, you want it to work for the size groups your corp typically flies in and no one else. ... I am not that nefarious my dear, which is why I specifically said "most" should disallow solo'ing. We can see now what happens when everything can be done alone, nothing is done in gangs since it is 'a waste of time' .. everything from missions to plexes. Best case scenario for me would be: - For some plexes to be multi-tiered like exploration complexes with multiple entry gates even. Surely if the various pirate factions build vast complexes to protect their assets, the navies can do the same. - For all/majority of plexes to be spawned by player action, thus completely removing the DT shuffle, could be done by launching some h4xxor deep-space probe or something. Set a maximum possible to spawn in a constellation (separate off./def.) every 12 hours and add counters to militia interface to show "remaining" As for missions being designed with gangs in mind .. actually a good idea to have a few of these, not all mind you but some. If they were made about as hard as 5/10 complexes with similar ISK and possible drop potential the roaming gangs would have a reason to make a stop once in a while, especially if a size restriction was added to mitigate farming ... @Zvero: Ouch, your Amarr standing is still negative .. ungrateful bastards! Excellent idea to address that issue though.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 70	Posted - 2011.10.20 14:01:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Soundwave wrote: The idea would be that we move away from NPC enforcement and towards player enforcement. That's really how most things should work, but I definitely take the point from people who argue that this might pretty seriously hurt the causal players. Easy solution: - Remove ability to dock in ANY station in enemy high-sec. - Apply PvP timer (and keep it applied) when entering enemy high-sec (to mitigate log-offski), starts counting down normally once out of enemy high-sec. - Remove ability to benefit from ganglinks provided by a neutral (friendly militia's only) and/or make them on-grid. Since cloaks have been 'banned' from enemy high-sec since day 1, this should give you fast raids into border (0.5-0.7) systems and larger incursions (read: RR blobs!) into core systems (0.8+). Will take a week for the various militias to deploy probers in key systems with regular FW blobs wielding the hammers.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 71	Posted - 2011.10.20 16:57:00 - [5] - Quote Problem with making direct comparisons with null is "bystanders". It is easy enough to know whats what in null if you keep the blue list up to date (NBSI) whereas it is quite impossible to do the same in high-sec/low-sec .. especially since a lot of fight changing support can be given without ever leaving a NPC corp.. Joining FW as an individual without having to leave corp .. WTF!?! What the hell kind of non-committal WoW battlegrounds crap is that supposed to be? That is exactly what is wrong with large portions of Eve at present, you can "do ****" without ever committing anything .. war of any scale should NOT be something you can do in in the lunch break you have from your day-job. We need more (and harsher) consequences to waging wars not less, people should have to consider going to war as a last resort and not as the easiest solution to any problem .. something to so with a few hours to burn (lol-SC blobs ganking Sov structures) .. Stop trying to cater to kindergarten customers, they are not supposed to play internet-spaceships to begin with so you might as well stop it!
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 73	Posted - 2011.10.21 07:20:00 - [6] - Quote @Grath (Re: Supers); The PL Hercules must be a scrawny little thing if amassing 20B justifies using the word "Herculean" .. just sayin' Grath Telkin wrote: You need more reasons to PVP, not more places. That one line is true for all areas of Eve .. we need reasons to fight and new ways (ie. move away from blob content) to fight more than anything.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 73	Posted - 2011.10.21 14:13:00 - [7] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: Of course EvE isn't a level playing field, and I'm glad you agree that you ought to be able to build Super Caps where they can be used. Add "ones own sovereignty" as a requirement for the super immunity and it sorts itself out. Sure a "mercenary" blob like PL will be risking more than the average alliance since they will be in some other guys sov more often than not but they are on the other hand pretty damn good at what they do so wouldn't be majorly inconvenienced. Does of solve the supers in low-sec issue as crews like militia rabble fleets would no longer have to be able to spam HICs at a moments notice (thus making dropping LS a lot riskier) and should reduce the overall super-blob size that has been a big part of breaking null (read: clean their corner of sandbox and they'll bugger off from ours \o/).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 73	Posted - 2011.10.21 16:32:00 - [8] - Quote The reason why I advocate the poison pill concept is that I am tired of the stupidity that is bombers able to do lvl4's. Some (read: most) missions need a more diverse target group (ie. frigs/elite cruisers) to avoid this, but the pill alone would go a long way. If I am able to force a standings hit (which is what will happen if a mission is failed) on the cheap-ass alt whose only objective is to maximize income then it won't be long before he quits or ships up to fight for his ISK. Either way I and FW wins. Bonus: Let activating a poison pill give a person 5-10% of the "lost" LP with his own militia for services rendered to really put the pressure on the whores. As it stands, FW missions have close to zero risk involved while being one of the biggest revenue source in Eve (for individuals). Station a handful of bombers in select constellations and move around in an interceptor for risk-free ISK .. broken doesn't cover it if you ask me
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 73	Posted - 2011.10.21 16:55:00 - [9] - Quote Disrupting one of the whores does squat .. they have 5-10 missions active at any one time so merely go to the next in line and by the time they are ready to head back for more any disrupting enemies have moved on and they can close them like normal = zero impact. The pill doesn't have to be a collectible item, it could be destroying a reactor pipe that raises an emergency shield around target structure, a command node that is hacked to scatter the naval presence or even a dreaded timer to babysit for a few minutes .. ideally the pill can be mistakenly activated by the ***** himself (foot, meet gun!).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 73	Posted - 2011.10.21 17:08:00 - [10] - Quote I consider all insurgents alts of the tyrant Shakor! Yes, it will impact legitimate runners. But one must assume that they are accustomed to pew and can thus just as easily do the missions in a proper ship (I know the Vagabond is insanely effective for you lot .. better/faster than bombers). The impact for crews like AUTOZ will be next to nothing as you can just get into the habit of picking up a few missions each before going on a roam .. complete them instead of sitting on a gate/undock waiting for one of us silly Amarr .. you'll be surprised how effective small-gang FW missioning can be poppoppop
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 86	Posted - 2011.10.26 18:33:00 - [11] - Quote Keep in mind that you are well and truly screwed without something as simple as services .. have fun waging a war of attrition when all you can do is change ships, no fitting .. no repair .. no nothing. Only "problem" with that limited approach is the possibility of using alts to do the servicing, but holy hell that is going to drive some people to suicide me'thinks. In short: Docking rights don't need to be revoked as all the power lies in the services. For completeness, the 'rules' should apply not only to ALL stations in hostile space but to hostile stations everywhere (ie. Amarr will never be able to dock in NPC matar station no matter where it is).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 88	Posted - 2011.10.27 13:40:00 - [12] - Quote Zoe Alarhun wrote: Make Faction ships count as T2 in plexes. That means minor plex defended by Merlins won't get ambushed by drams constantly. (If i'm not completely mistaken about what ship can enter a minor plex). Is of no consequence since they are making destroyers as powerful as cruisers .. minor's and FW in general will not see a single frigate ever again if the destroyer changes go through 'as is' .. going to be pure dessie spam.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 88	Posted - 2011.10.28 07:44:00 - [13] - Quote Except that we will still have to spam HICs to keep them on field long enough .. gets worse as their numbers increase as the ridiculous ECM burst can essentially perma-jam an entire fleet once SC count goes double digit. Remove immunity when outside own sovereignty! Either that or hit them with draconian limits like the Titan's and their inability to DD in low-sec .. kill off remote burst in LS and we won't have to field 2-3 HICs per SC to insure they stay put.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 90	Posted - 2011.10.28 11:01:00 - [14] - Quote It won't be enough to let it apply to militia stations only .. I cannot off the top of my head think of any system where the only station is a militia station so it will have zero impact on anything. As for Amak .. PL are fat this is true, but are they fat enough to cover all 100 stations or however ridiculously many that silly system has?
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 95	Posted - 2011.10.29 20:59:00 - [15] - Quote In previous threads I have suggesting hamstringing mission whores by tying missions to PvP and plexing. 1. All FW mission payouts cut in half across the board. 2. Pilot kills someone or closes plex and is assigned X Virtual LP (think Incursion LP). 3. Pilot runs mission and receives the payout (50% of now) + up to 50% extra provided the amount is available in vLP. Gives you Lvl4's that are roughly equal to high-sec lvl4's in regards to income for the farmers while giving full (current) value to the active FW players to support their losses. Combine it with a redesign of plexes/missions to eliminate solo frigs and you are good to go .. can be gamed by killing alt for vLP (at ISK+time loss) and then running missions but I seriously doubt anyone will go that far unless vLP-for-Kills is set stupidly high.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 99	Posted - 2011.10.30 05:26:00 - [16] - Quote Demon View wrote: .... Never thought I would stoop this low, but you have got to be either kidding or the PL militia alt on duty today (no one except PL ever defends PL these days). What PL is doing is making a very case for those who: - Don't want alliances in FW at all as they specifically chose FW as an alternative to blob-land gameplay. - Don't want supers influencing low-sec at all (I fall in this group), since you can't produce them and have only half the tools they are balanced against to fight them they are simply broken the second they enter Empire. You are right though, they don't need supers because they have infinite ISK from gaming the system for years and they the mandatory blob that goes with being from null .. they bridged 40 Bhaals or something onto a handful of Amarr BCs last week if I recall .. so yeah, fat-asses don't need fat-ass mobiles to ruin the game for others (goons are using Thrashers against exhumers in high-sec! ) The flu analogy: Your solution seem to be to let the sick person run around in public to infect everyone convinced that natural immunization is the best way to go. Personally, I would kill the patient and anyone infected and take steps to insure that the disease never gets a foothold again (complete FW revamp).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 99	Posted - 2011.10.30 06:35:00 - [17] - Quote CONGRATULATIONS! You are officially the first person whom I deemed biased/stupid/ignorant enough to deserve a click on "ignore posts" PS: If you want to have a grown-up discussion then you need to stop using FOX News trademark "selective reasoning/quoting/reading"
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 103	Posted - 2011.11.01 12:43:00 - [18] - Quote Karl Planck wrote: Effort is actually low because you could just use the spawn mechanics that exploration sites use to get a constant number of plexes throughout the region with them just shifting Nope, not really. You see it IS based on exploration code but they had to tack on the horribly broken/annoying code (DT Shuffle code) to be able to restrict the spawning to not only specific systems but specific system states (read: occupancy). If there was an easy fix as some people assume there must be, then you can be damn sure it had been implemented already as this point has been brought up ten times more than any other issue these past three years. Optimal solution would be for mechanics that allowed player actions to dictate plex spawning. Example: Militia page changed to contain data relevant to the war instead of the idiocy it is now. 1. Enter system. 2. Jettison S/M/L Autonomous Signature Search Probe (ASS Probe .. me so funny!) .. notification of size and location sent to enemy militia's data page. 3. Activate ASS Probe, it warps off and 10-15s later a plex pops up on overview (basically shift from exploration code to mission code for spawning purposes) ASS Probes are player built with BPC's available from FW store.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 115	Posted - 2011.11.04 08:59:00 - [19] - Quote Read some of the old blogs that were release pre-/post Empyrean Age and you'll see that missions were intended to be the fuel for the mayhem in FW .. and not a bottomless wallet for anyone with an alt. Example Blog: War is a full time job The only way that will change is if we (read: everyone that is not me) give up the ridiculous notion that PvP and PvE must be kept completely separate at all costs. An example of how they can be tied together can be seen on page 20 (post #386).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 120	Posted - 2011.11.05 09:31:00 - [20] - Quote Came up with a radical solution to most of our problems as well as some unrelated to FW: *Restrict FW store access to active FW pilots (tie to VP/LP/Kills), decrease LP prices by 15-20% on everything and sell BPCs for tier3 battlecruisers EXCLUSIVELY* through FW store!** Insane prices for what is likely to be insanely powerful hulls = insane profits = huge encouragement to kill each other/wage the wars to access it. Alt farmers are effectively removed or can choose to leave their bombers to join the carnage and get some .. mains may even start popping up on the rosters. Active combat pilots in FW will spike like mad to get in on the action .. I expect many primary alts are moved from high-sec lvl4s to a militia. Carebears can rest assured that the ships that appear to be designed for suicide ganking specifically will be too expensive to use in that role. We would still need the plexing side of things to be fixed and for kill-switches to be added to missions of course, but if you want uniqueness then why not co-opt the new bling .. the rest of Eve has been more than happy to co-opt our neck of the woods!
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 120	Posted - 2011.11.05 13:48:00 - [21] - Quote Cearain, even you must realise that a notification will not solve everything .. it can-will at best be a small part of a comprehensive revamp of the whole she-bang. If it was added as a stand-alone fix you'd instantly put at least Amarr at a stupidly big disadvantage due to geography/layout of FW area. Amarr has 15 jumps from hub to furthest system going through 2-3 literal bottle-necks whereas Matar has at most 7 jumps with multiple routes available .. won't matter in the long run or in Eve terms as Amarr is obviously the one destined to soldier on when all others have been vanquished, but still. Johnny Punisher wrote: ...The bombers farming the missions don't affect how I play in any way and I think the missions are ok like they are right now.... Then you do not rely on said missions to keep the war going I take it? Since the bomber flood started, saturation of the market has cut 50-70% of the price for a majority of the items available to us .. that means we "legitimate" FW players have to run twice the amount of boring missions to keep doing what we do.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 121	Posted - 2011.11.05 16:54:00 - [22] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: All you want to do is to protect your own income on system that is open for all who have faction standing 0.5+... Not really no, the protectionism is nice and snug with you it seems .. you would stand to loose a substantial amount of income should such a thing be done .. having alts in all militia's is one thing but if the earning of ISK/LP from missions is tied directly to the action of the individual character there is no way of "gaming" the system. CCP already acknowledges that FW should be about the pew, not the missions and the one should feed the other, both in the actual FW promo material but also in the fact that a mission takes 5 minutes to complete solo in a PvP ship and it pops an overview beacon. The mere fact that it is being farmed as heavily as it is proves beyond doubt that it is not what was intended .. it is the single highest source of income for an individual anywhere in Eve .. that should belong in blob-land not Empire according to risk/reward system. So we can either reduce FW mission income to a pittance or make certain that the people it was meant for are the ones who benefit .. since the former effectively kills FW in its cradle the only real option is the latter. PS: Starting to see why Hans chose to stick you on his 'ignore posts' list .. you are really not contributing much of anything
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 121	Posted - 2011.11.05 18:27:00 - [23] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: How much you have plexing points? You sure you want to measure penises grasshopper? From useless Militia Pane: VP Total: 0.4M Kills Total: 1315 (2700 on killboard) Have never used an alt, have never speed-tanked or used "tricks" (read borderline exploits). Haven't really plexed the last year, only bother when there are fights to be had but one side always decide to blob
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 133	Posted - 2011.11.08 18:58:00 - [24] - Quote You are my alt in the minnie militia, I use you to kill me in cheapest high-value from market and cash in on insurance addendum. Same problem as increasing LP-for-Kills by enough to make a noticeable difference.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 141	Posted - 2011.11.12 12:48:00 - [25] - Quote Never experienced ECM abuse as a major problem while plexing to be honest, a lot worse in "open space" fights but that is the Eve norm I reckon. Flying ones racial ships does zero for RP, not even a little bit .. in PIE we use it as a way to complete the picture of slightly rabid imperialists/purists but in itself it has no impact on the RP. The lack of variation is mainly due to the really crappy balance post-projectile buff .. everything tilted towards auto/arty hulls in a big way .. doubly so in plexes where an artillery gang is impossible to defeat if they "hold" the plex as ships are volleyed as they arrive on the warp-in. A revision of the acceleration gate mechanic should be part of a plex revamp, to remove the single entry point that so heavily favours a defender. The brute force solution would be to have 4 gates instead of one, each coming out at different directions/ranges to timer whereas the refined approach would be to have something like the tournament system with pre-entry beacons so arrivals have control over their entry point (no idea how that can be done, just putting it out there)
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 145	Posted - 2011.11.16 21:08:00 - [26] - Quote Coercer doesn't need no stinking second mid, it kills so fast that it is not needed .. kind of like the arty/sebo trash. Destroyers will be light cruisers: Range and damage of cruisers with speed, tank and agility of heavy frigates with the ludicrous tracking thrown in for good measure. Just goes to show that FW is probably one of the most vulnerable parts of Eve as the 'balance' is upset by changes to just about any other part. On a side note: Unless something is changed in regards to missions, the alt swams are going to get a big bump with the idiot plans of adding cheap PI Tax Office BPCs to the FW stores.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 154	Posted - 2011.11.28 09:18:00 - [27] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ...Militia pilots have a great sense of sportsmanship (most of the time), and weGÇÖve all gotten to know our enemies and formed rivalries and grudges, which all makes for great fun... Quoted from above linked interview because its true Annoying part for me is that the CSM even though most if not all ran on platforms with FW high on their lists, now come forward and admit to knowing nothing about it at all and thinking that all it needs are a few tweaks here and there.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 163	Posted - 2011.11.30 12:27:00 - [28] - Quote Damassys Kadesh wrote: .... They merely increased the amount of plexes available so systems will be flipped in droves by the people who have alts/manpower to burn. With one simple change they have managed to make the plexing scene even more of a travesty in a way that favours the use of alts to an even greater degree .. although not if you happen to be Gallente or Amarr because the missile spam they face still requires gangs to clear/survive in most cases. Plexing activity increase is temporary. The system itself is still very much broken so the massive dis-/-advantages that were present before are still there .. just more cases now. In a few months they will be used to farm standings for the various freebies and alts will likely be recycled after payout of said freebies. One character .. ONE BLOODY CHARACTER can now make TWO systems vulnerable PER DAY (if unopposed and an insomniac). Compare that to the silly null monkeys who have up to two full days or more of buffer for just about everything .. governments/empires are not known for their efficiency but holy crap, taking it a bit to the extreme don't you think? Want to take bets on how/why they settled on this particular change? My money is on their beloved metrics, they probably had a spider count all the instances that the various things have been mentioned over the past three years and then went with it without actually giving it any thought.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 177	Posted - 2011.12.06 10:52:00 - [29] - Quote My analytical skilzzzzzz strikes again. Called it even before I had undocked into the brave new FW world. /me pats self on back (harder than it looks at my age!!!) CCP heard complaints about a dog-turd on the sidewalk, dumped a wheelbarrow full of cow-dung and dirt on top and renamed it a compost heap. Problem solved, right .. turd is gone right? They actually managed to make it even more pointless .. quite an achievement considering the state it was in before .. hahahahaha.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 178	Posted - 2011.12.06 15:25:00 - [30] - Quote Fidelium Mortis wrote: Plexing has definitely increased the number of small skirmish fights at least in the US TZ, I just hope it isn't a temporary increase... It will taper off in a few weeks and return to alts-online for most systems. The only place where I can see it maintaining a higher than before plexing activity is in central/key/pipe systems .. but then again the overall PvP activity will not be increased as it is already there, it will merely move into plexes and away from gates/stations. Yes Cearain, the 50+ plexes in rotation in the DT-shuffle are still around so it is still a matter of controlling the 2 hours post-DT .. only difference is that some of the VP damage done can theoretically be repaired before next DT. In reality it is playing out exactly as I feared, whomever has the alts/pilots to burn can flip systems at a ridiculous rate with no real counter available as manpower is everything .. They stuck a Wunderbaum into the turd to mask the stench, but it is still a turd.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 178	Posted - 2011.12.06 16:24:00 - [31] - Quote Cearain wrote: I am not sure I understand what you want. Did you not agree that pretty much all the plexes should not just spawn at downtime. Now that they have them spawn at other times you are saying it's worse? What do you think the spawn mechanics should be? That's the problem, a chunk still spawns at DT and can stack like stupid just like before. All they did was add a steady stream to the pile .. find a system with a DT stack of ten plexes and system goes vulnerable after camping it with a speedtanking alt for 6-7 hours once the automated spawning kicks in. Ideally I want plexes to spawn on command; suggested previously that bunker could be hacked and thus "provoke" a spawn or an anchored module be deployed (consumed when spawned). Automatically spawning plexes should be kept at a minimum, as in one at a time throughout the day with say 15 minutes from despawn to respawn. The concept I am currently working with is: - One random plex spawns automatically per system at DT. Closing it starts a 15-30minute timer before another spawns. Offence: - Deploy an Assault Pod (AP) with a breaching crew of guerilla fighters, marines or whatnot on a hostile bunker (under livestock on market I think) .. after a while a small series (3-5 of varying sizes) of plexes spawn and the AP is retrieved minus a percentage of the soldiers .. got to have casualties! - Limit number of AP that can be deployed onto the same bunker to say once every 1-2 hours .. should take 2-3 days or so to flip a system (dependant on defensive operations). Defence: - Deployment of AP shows up as an alert in revamped militia interface with number and size of plexes as well as location (obviously). - Closing a defensive plex takes but a few minutes on "button" (ie. NOT a full timer). Reason being that slamming a door shut is considerably easier than breaking the damn thing down, offensive operations now have to be organized and fit-for-fight to get anywhere. - Interfacing (hacking, webbing, pointing whatever) with bunker can spawn one addtional plex that has to be closed before it can be done again .. defensive operations can repair immense amounts of damage in a very short time if allowed meaning offence becomes a 23/7 affair. Combine with revision of NPCs (remove, balance, nerf, whatever) and the era of alt plexing comes to an end and 8 hours blobbing per day gets nothing. Add carrots/sticks for occupancy to taste. PS: Still keen on the border concept, just not relevant to spawn mechanics which you asked about
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 178	Posted - 2011.12.06 16:56:00 - [32] - Quote Oy! I made my snide post AFTER you made your Huola blurp!!! And they were told right off the bat, the second they mentioned they wanted to iterate on FW, that there is no "fix" and that anything they could cram into the diminutive window they had would do more harm than good .. look what happened. And no, the fault lies squarely on CCP's shoulders, not the players. Yes we have bitched and moaned for it to be resolved but I doubt anyone expected or wanted it to be done in a way that amplified the existing issues. As for encouraging them .. if they haven't gotten used to being slammed by now .... hehehehehe Anyhoo, taking comments on the concept described in post #663
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 197	Posted - 2011.12.22 16:18:00 - [33] - Quote You mean like a blog like they promised as a consolation prize for standing up the FW'ers at fanfest .. that kind of blog? - Just askin' Can't believe any of you still think they know what the hell is going on in FW land, they got rid of the writers ages ago and most of the involved devs are probably long gone as well. If they start "fixing" it now they'll break it even more than it is .. from scratch please, only way to be sure! But it does sound like January will be jam-packed with blogs on all the big ticket items, about bloody time we got some info on what they are planning (not just for FW but for null/worms as well).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 235	Posted - 2012.01.04 17:02:00 - [34] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Back to business though, now that we've confirmed that FW is front and center in CCP's development plans.... You mean front and and a little off to the side As for stopping with "The End is Nigh!" spam .. NEVER! They have been promising revisions since FW was first launched so pardon me for taking this round of promises with a wheelbarrow of salt Loving the glimmer of hope, just wish they think changes through instead of making pointless mechanics even more pointless as they did with the '3 plex every 30 minutes' which allows a system to drop in a single day. Good change but it should have been '1 (or maybe two) random size plex per 30 minutes' or better yet a player controlled spawn system. At least someone in Iceland is now presumably thinking about the how/what/where of FW which is more than we have had for three years .. so Yay!
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 235	Posted - 2012.01.04 17:55:00 - [35] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ...And of course, I'll still be the first one there to nip at their heels if they start dragging their feet again! Heels are long gone, you might be able to get a nibble at their knees though Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ... The pirates, the highsec producers of ships and goods that supply lowsec dwellers, they all need this as much as we do.... Especially when/if they get around to making null more or less self-sufficient .. who is high-sec going to sell the bulk of their stuff to then?
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 236	Posted - 2012.01.05 15:45:00 - [36] - Quote Cearain wrote: heres some more from a dev blog by CCP Ytterbium: "Some final words It is important to remember that all the above is not a "fix" for Factional Warfare. It is only the first step of many to put its implementation back into the original vision that was ours during the Empyrean Age release." So things are really looking up for faction war. Errrm, check the date and content of that blog. It is 30 months (2.5yrs) old, was the 'filler' patch that populated the LP store not much else and was as far as I know the last "major" work that was done on FW up until now. In short: It says diddly squat of what may be heading our way .. just sayin'
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 237	Posted - 2012.01.05 17:30:00 - [37] - Quote Corporate standings are an average of member standings, since most if not all characters (young and old) have done missions and ratting it becomes fairly easy for a corp to have 0.5 with at least one faction but more likely with all four. Problem is that standings are rather meaningless as they can be bought, sold and speculated in .. just ask career mission runners. It simply wont work on a large scale .. RKK's holiday in FW proved that standings are not a hindrance. Question is what alliances want in and why. The RP alliances (EM, CVA, SF, U'K et al.) obviously have a vested interest, but what about the generic alliances .. what/why would they want in? I am willing to bet that for the most part it is ONLY to get cheap'n'easy faction ships/mods and padding for killboards .. let that rabble in and FW dies under the weight of a thousand+ sheep. Othran I think it was brought a problem regarding using sov status as a barrier to light, easy enough for renter alliances or any alliance really to be 'space-less' while still having complete access to everything thanks to the deep blue sea of null. Setup an alt alliance to hold the actual sov and all mains can go blob FW to death or create the greatest mission-bomber swarm the world has ever known. A lot of us have already done our time as null-dwellers but chose to have fun instead (FWFTW!), don't take away the last refuge of fun to be found in Eve!
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 237	Posted - 2012.01.05 18:53:00 - [38] - Quote How does making the militia's into null-bears with NPC flags solve anything? You'll be entirely dependent on the same mechanics as any null slave/small alliance, that is you will need to appease/bend-over for the nearest bloc. Has merit when/if sovereignty is made less of a blobbing game though.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 237	Posted - 2012.01.05 20:30:00 - [39] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Attention everyone!! ... Damnit Shalee, what's with the ***** selections? Where is the "Fix first, then entry with with more restrictions or provisions"?
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 239	Posted - 2012.01.06 08:03:00 - [40] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ...The problem is, that there really aren't any "easy" fixes to Faction Warfare. Allowing Alliances in may be a straightforward thing to program, much more so than a plexing revamp, or mission NPC AI overhaul, or incursion style occupancy consequences... This is what worries me. It was one of the very first requests made, came up during the discussions prior to expansion deploying but it hasn't even been on the table 'for realz' until now .. when a new crew are in charge of the code. Smells like the old crew saw some of the implications and shelved it until measures could be put in while the new crew is trying to tick off boxes on their web-spider collated FW wishlist. If that fear/assumption is realised then FW is toast
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 240	Posted - 2012.01.06 13:11:00 - [41] - Quote Eggduck wrote: ...Hope its a fail on sisi. As it was pointed out to me when I voiced the same prayer .. SiSi is anaemic compared to TQ so all that can really be tested is an executors ability to push the join button.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 240	Posted - 2012.01.06 18:40:00 - [42] - Quote Gallactica wrote: Who says all the big 0.0 alliances will join?... Very unlikely, but all those that can when it launches probably will .. you see, it is 100% extra for them. Expect many others to setup splinter alliances or work standings up . They retain ALL the benefits of being null-monkeys, get access to stuff to shoot and a place to send the overflow from the workcamps when sanctums systems are full up. They gain everything else while we lose what is the only revenue source for most of us as well as the reason FW is still breathing .. small gang/solo casual PvP. We get some more carebears to shoot in high-sec, but is that why you are in a militia and is it enough to keep you occupied when you can't be arsed dealing with the umpteenth blob fight of the day/week .. because the blobs will probably be everyday, all day .. you cannot dump hundreds of active pilots into <50 systems (or 2-3 hub pipe systems) without bringing them about. Wonder why they have refused the last years call for clarity as to what they intend FW to be .. bet you they don't have a clue which is why they are flinging random ** at us to if it sticks, oblivious to the fact that no one particular likes having ** thrown in their faces. Bad pun: The whole thing stinks. PS: Yes I am rather miffed at the whole thing.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 240	Posted - 2012.01.06 21:12:00 - [43] - Quote Cearain wrote: [Hirana, I've already said Ithink its a bad idea to let alliances in but I'm starting to waiver. There is no need for them to put whole corps in now as missions are so ridiculously easy, but I am willing to bet that a majority of the mission alts we are drowning in are operated from the blue-sea .. hell, with the sorry state of null at present FW will probably be used as an overflow camp when the primary null-farms are filled to capacity. What good do you see coming out of regular gangs ballooning from the current 10-30 to 60-100 as population quintuples (low estimate). FW consists of a mere 170 systems with the HQ-pipes on either front being 5 systems long or less .. do you expect the tourists to spread out nice and even like .. do you expect them to play 'fair'? FW becomes a resort. Null are being offered a time-share with all the amenities to entertain and thrill, at no down payment to speak of .. in fact the time-share has faulty ATM that spits out money to anyone who pass by. There is no upside .. none that I can see at any rate. PS: Forums ate my post so above is condensed PPS/Edit: The "cant enter 1/2 of high-sec" argument is DOA. Everyone, their mother, her dog and its fleas has alts running errands in high-sec .. that was even the case 3 years ago when I was in null and I don't see why that has changed on iota.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 245	Posted - 2012.01.07 17:38:00 - [44] - Quote Deerin wrote: ...CCP has actually introduced a new contesting system to EVE: Incursions!!!... Heh, I latched onto that idea as well after it was launched. Haven't given it much thought for a while though but its a good idea to have a 'trigger level' before it really kicks off. Example: 1. Minnies attack Arzad (their secret Blue Oyster Bar is there I suspect, very keen on keeping it at least ), and take plexes enough to put it at 25% contested state. 2. Incursion type mechanic is triggered and plexes throughout constellation (6 systems total) now count towards Arzad VP. No VP can be gained outside Arzad as long as it remains under attack. At the same time an alert (flashing militia TAB!) is given to Amarr militia indicating system under attack and constellation in question (like Incursions). - Not happy with giving too much free intel to be honest, doing the rounds is pretty fast for Amarr at least so no reason to make people lazy. 3. Amarr pilots can now send available people to occupy plexes in constellation and confront Shakor's Death Squads as time allows (if SDS does not interdict them that is) .. due to entire constellation being involved the onus is on the attacker to keep the pressure on, as it should be. Too easy to defend limited plexes if opened by oneself (been around the plex circuit a few times so know this to be true ) 4a. If Amarr manages to outplex the Matari then Arzad is reset (0 VP). All VP gained by Matari in other systems prior to Incursion mechanic trigger remain in place, so a constellation could theoretically be under attack for a long time. 4b. If the Matari manage to make Arzad bunker vulnerable, VP feed from constellation is stopped and a random size plex will spawn in Arzad .. and it will keep spawning (as in always a plex available). Losing the plex (ie. forfeiting vulnerable status) knocks contested status back to 75% and restarts constellation feed. Will need to address the way plexes are captured and/or provide equal opportunity for all factions - NPC balance and/or removal. - Difficulty revision, married to above. Concerns the ability of single frigs being enough for some factions but not others. - Timer, Yay or Nay. - Offensive plexing = defensive ditto or skewed one way. Personally think defence should be less time consuming than offence, if a bad guy wants my stuff he should have to work for it, or locking a door is easier than breaking it down. - Compensation for plexing. Currently get 30M for majors in tags or there about, but requires :effort: to get .. if NPCs stay in one form or another then it could/should be increased. Else a re-numeration system tied to VP might be in order. Note: Since CCP/CSM seem intent on adding hundreds of active pilots to all sides (lol-Blob), the need to spread the fighting out is of utmost importance, doing it based on constellations/Incursions provides that. Now if only we could make CCP/CSM understand that the system need to be fixed before they empty the 18 wheeler sheep transport we'd be golden. PS: Have I mentioned how much I hate the forums ungodly post-eating addiction?
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 245	Posted - 2012.01.08 09:25:00 - [45] - Quote Cearain wrote: One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though. Would love it if it was possible to create intra-militia alliances, if only to have better control with 'SPAIZ!' and a central place to plan/scheme/strategise that is not 3rd party (ie. web forums). Cearain wrote: As long as they keep all 170 systems in play there is plenty of room, and blobbing won't be an issue... Wouldn't that only apply if the newcomers spread out and/or plex? Look at the militia's now .. majority never leaves the hub-pipes and plexers are still very much a minority. Afraid you are fooling yourself if you think that the addition of hundreds of active pilots will not cause blobs as long as all systems are in play. Perhaps if/when plexing in itself is revamped, but we are looking at a 4-5 month period between alliances are let in and the summer patch hits, that is a long time if it means daily and constant blobs/camps .. and I frankly have doubts as to what they can/will do with plexing in that time as it is essentially the backbone of the FW mechanic. But yeah, time will tell .. not getting my hopes up though
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 252	Posted - 2012.01.12 20:17:00 - [46] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ..Basically, we might have sent them back to the drawing board and postponed the blog if it was about Alliance involvement specifically But that's just pure speculation on my part. I haven't heard anything more recent than that... Certainly a theory, but if history is any guide then the more likely scenario is that they are just late as usual or deliberately ignoring us, also as usual
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 252	Posted - 2012.01.13 21:14:00 - [47] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ...this doesnt have to be the case if the AI is adjusted so that NPC's closely emulate players (though they'll never be as clever or devious). By bringing NPC hitpoints, behavior, and numbers more in line with what players will encounter from other players in a plex situation, for example, they could potentially be a filler used to fight against when players aren't around... Make them weak'ish Incursion NPCs with factional flavour and have them 'stand down' (ie. de-aggro/reset) when a friendly arrives. Hell, it would probably work if they were reset on friendly arrival with no other changes made. Question is if CCP are able or even willing to go so such length (read: :effort:), they seem to want FW to consist of a basket full of low hanging and rotten fruit Quote: At Factional Warfare's initial late release; it will contain something that will make factional warfare a system that will hopefully be played. But this is only the beginning, Factional Warfare will undergo no revision, with releases being skipped to periodically add clothing to barbies, as we study and observe and see how we can ruin it. Hahahahahahahahahaha.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 252	Posted - 2012.01.13 22:29:00 - [48] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: +1 for creative solution of the day, Hirana! I salute you for your originality. o7 Pfft, I originally proposed it as a solution 1.5-2 years ago when there was a lot of debate about NPC balance, just makes all kinds of sense to me at least. But thank you nonetheless
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 258	Posted - 2012.01.19 05:39:00 - [49] - Quote While I am not normally the person to do this, I will in these special circumstances: I told you so. From what has been communicated and done about FW the past three years, it has been pretty obvious that CCP has very little if any idea of what to do and where to go. In comes a homogeneous CSM whose primary interest is getting grazing privileges for their obesity struck sheep herds, a CSM that lives in a world very much unlike ours but has gotten into their heads that they are the centre of the universe and all other worlds should be fashioned to resemble their own. Makes little difference at this point as the damage has been done as far as I am concerned, the plexing change was for the worse as systems can be flipped in a single day making the already nonsensical aspect of FW even more so .. a feat in in its own right but not of the good sort. Doomsayers: 1, Hopeless Optimists: 0
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 260	Posted - 2012.01.19 18:17:00 - [50] - Quote They should share elements where possible/applicable, I myself have suggested we get rid of the automatic plex spawns entirely and replace it with a SBU type of thing that is "expended" as/when a plex is spawned .. But when people think null sov they invariably think EHP grinds and the associated blobs, CCP will need to pull an epic rabbit out of their asses to change that .. or rather they need to go back to the original design goals for Dominion, from before they axed all the stuff that required :effort: on their part. At this point, with the amount of faith I have in CCP's ability to so anything 'right', I fear that saying it is OK to mix'n'match the systems will lead to loads more grinds and much less fun all round in FW. No matter what, summer will be the "Do or Die" expansion for me, the Crutch patch was just that, a patch .. something that should have been part of the last 6-8 expansions as ongoing iterative work. If they fail FW again (which they probably will) and fail to provide a proper vision for how they'd like null to function sov wise I'll find something else to waste my time on.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 264	Posted - 2012.01.21 17:27:00 - [51] - Quote How many militia raids on urban centres/capitals have you heard of in the entirety of human history? The 0.9-1.0 raids should be nigh impossible to pull off .. harder than now if you ask me, unfortunately mechanics/AI are so poor that there are loopholes galore that allows even small teams unfettered access to anywhere. The lower security areas (0.5-0.8), ie. suburbs, farms/fields on the other hand could be made easier to access for disorganized gangs .. but blank removal of all NPC's .. I feel sorry for the immortal soul that is trapped within the confines of the useless meatsuit that came up with it. PS: Yeah, I am not much of a soundwave fan ..
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 267	Posted - 2012.01.24 17:37:00 - [52] - Quote Hmmm .. didn't they promise a blog where we would be able to see some of what they have planned beyond allowing blobs in? Start counting, they are already a week late .. hahahahahaha. Thinking of having a doctor remove my balls before the blue turns darker and gangrene sets in!
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront 271	Posted - 2012.01.27 15:19:00 - [53] - Quote Well, CCP has already proven that specific bonuses/penalties can be applied in space without sov. present in the Incursion system .. only question is what would be a good idea. Ideas floated so far as my hastily deteriorating memory has them: - Station guns fire on opposition. - Denial of docking rights. - Denial and/or cost increase of services. - Boosts to PI, Industry, mining etc. - Incursion type boosts to ship attributes. - Adjustment of system security rating. Will probably have to be a "soft" benefit to avoid the sheep effect where everyone joins a winning side, but then again that can be mitigated by making flipping harder as one progresses and vice versa.

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.