| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
298
   |
Posted - 2011.10.07 14:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
2.)Get Supercaps out of lowsec. This may not seem like a FW fix, but supercap drops by non-participating Alliances are a huge faction warfare killer. Having Pandemic Legion in the thick of things pretty much ground regular fleetwork to a halt recently, as no one wants to organize any fleet large enough to attract a supercap gank. Supercaps need to be balanced anyways, but short of giving us new HEAVY bomber ships to fly, or another time-consuming counter to develop, the easiest way to foster normal fleets and shelve the whoGÇÖs-got-a-better-batphone escalation nonsense, is to banish titans and MomGÇÖs from lowsec. Dreads and carriers still need to be around, for POS support/takedown of course. Barring the banning of superGÇÖs from lowsec, enabling Alliances to actually fully join the militia would help to give each faction some much-needed muscle to counter these threats without annihilating their sec status in the process.
If people are flying around in small gangs instead of large fleets, then that's a good thing. Or rather it would be a good thing if there was something for small gangs to fight over all day long rather than just a couple of hours after downtime.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
330
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
Great feedback in this thread. I'm taking a few notes and getting a few ideas.
One thing we might be able to do very easily is remove the faction NPCs, letting you freely travel in other factions space. How would you guys feel about that change? I've always found it a bit sad that we've isolated FW in low-sec when it could be done on a much larger scale. I do not like this idea. The high-sec protection is one of the things that makes it possible to be in FW without committing fully to it. Removing this will just mean that corps will leave FW and re-join it when necessary. Don't. Also, we do not need *more* people camping trade hubs with 10 neutral reppers to make sure they don't lose their precious ship. Don't make FW an attraction to those people. Maybe if you fix that "tactic" first. Removing faction NPCs from plexes would make sense, though, but it requires something to balance out the "Army of Alts" simply capping plexes. E.g. add a minimum size of ships to cap a plex. You'd do us all an ENORMOUS favor already, though, if you simply removed the post-DT plex spawning. That alone is simply a turnoff and means I do not even have to bother looking at FW, because I happen to be at work when most important fights take place.
Getting shot at by the Minnie Navy when I go to Rens makes me a sad panda.
But let's face it I'm out to dismantle the Republic, so why wouldn't they shoot me? I'm quite sure that an Israeli soldier wouldn't be welcome guest in the Gaza strip, so I'm not surprised that the red carpet isn't rolled out for me when I go to Minniestan.
Likewise, the thought of the Imperial Navy standing down when a dirty Minmatar terrorist turns up in Sarum Prime makes my blood boil.
So all in all, there should be some sort of NPC response in high-sec space. But maybe there could be a limit to the number of NPCs spawned or a delay in how long it takes for them to respawn after dying, so that it's possible to get a fleet together and raid the enemy without too much interference.
NPCs in complexes? I don't really mind if they stay or go. But if they stay, then they need to be balanced against each other so that it's not easier to defeat or evade one race's NPCs than another's.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
330
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Rodj Blake wrote:Arkady Sadik wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
Great feedback in this thread. I'm taking a few notes and getting a few ideas.
One thing we might be able to do very easily is remove the faction NPCs, letting you freely travel in other factions space. How would you guys feel about that change? I've always found it a bit sad that we've isolated FW in low-sec when it could be done on a much larger scale. I do not like this idea. The high-sec protection is one of the things that makes it possible to be in FW without committing fully to it. Removing this will just mean that corps will leave FW and re-join it when necessary. Don't. Also, we do not need *more* people camping trade hubs with 10 neutral reppers to make sure they don't lose their precious ship. Don't make FW an attraction to those people. Maybe if you fix that "tactic" first. Removing faction NPCs from plexes would make sense, though, but it requires something to balance out the "Army of Alts" simply capping plexes. E.g. add a minimum size of ships to cap a plex. You'd do us all an ENORMOUS favor already, though, if you simply removed the post-DT plex spawning. That alone is simply a turnoff and means I do not even have to bother looking at FW, because I happen to be at work when most important fights take place. Getting shot at by the Minnie Navy when I go to Rens makes me a sad panda. But let's face it I'm out to dismantle the Republic, so why wouldn't they shoot me? I'm quite sure that an Israeli soldier wouldn't be welcome guest in the Gaza strip, so I'm not surprised that the red carpet isn't rolled out for me when I go to Minniestan. Likewise, the thought of the Imperial Navy standing down when a dirty Minmatar terrorist turns up in Sarum Prime makes my blood boil. So all in all, there should be some sort of NPC response in high-sec space. But maybe there could be a limit to the number of NPCs spawned or a delay in how long it takes for them to respawn after dying, so that it's possible to get a fleet together and raid the enemy without too much interference. NPCs in complexes? I don't really mind if they stay or go. But if they stay, then they need to be balanced against each other so that it's not easier to defeat or evade one race's NPCs than another's. 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.
Would this extend to NPCs being spawned if you have -5 faction standing?
Because most players that have been active in FW for any length of time fall into that camp.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
331
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Yeah. I think the central part here should be security status when it comes to NPCs interfering. I think the faction standings are a bit arbitrary outside of mission running and related activities.
Whoa, hold on a minute.
Security status is completely different to faction standing, and the NPCs spawned are different too.
If you make negative faction standings meaningless, you do away with a large chunk of what makes Eve great - namely the idea that actions have consequences.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
332
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rees Noturana wrote:I thought one of the points brought up recently was to make standings matter more, not less.
I agree to removing faction police and navies. If you have bad standings to an empire then let players enforce the law. Say I have -5 to Amarr and I enter their space then I should be flagged as shootable by everyone. Militia should also be automatically flagged as a war target for all to engage. Similar to the smuggling concept where players could be flagged for carrying contraband.
You could make the concept a bit more complicated in that only those with a positive standing to the empire gets kill rights.
I also agree that if you have bad standings to a corp or empire you should be restricted from docking or at least incur fines.
Or, how about allowing all those with a +5 from faction x to shoot all those with a -5 from the same faction no matter where they are?
That would be true faction warfare.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
332
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
Rees Noturana wrote:Rodj Blake wrote:Rees Noturana wrote:I thought one of the points brought up recently was to make standings matter more, not less.
I agree to removing faction police and navies. If you have bad standings to an empire then let players enforce the law. Say I have -5 to Amarr and I enter their space then I should be flagged as shootable by everyone. Militia should also be automatically flagged as a war target for all to engage. Similar to the smuggling concept where players could be flagged for carrying contraband.
You could make the concept a bit more complicated in that only those with a positive standing to the empire gets kill rights.
I also agree that if you have bad standings to a corp or empire you should be restricted from docking or at least incur fines. Or, how about allowing all those with a +5 from faction x to shoot all those with a -5 from the same faction no matter where they are? That would be true faction warfare. Regarding stations, yes, I agree that you're hated by a faction then you shouldn't be allowed to dock at their stations. But maybe there could be some benefit for high faction standings as well - maybe free repairs or lower sales taxes if you're in a friendly station. There are a lot of ways you could leverage standings, player enforcement and player run "incursions". Allowing for your idea would certainly tick off a lot of mission runners. Not an entirely bad thing but you'd get a lot of rage and tears that way. Actually, that would put my freighter pilot at risk too...
It would mean that just about anyone who's ever done a mission for the Gallente or Minmatar could shoot at me, but it's a risk that I'm prepared to take 
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
332
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:Removing faction navy will mean, that everything except pvp will have to be done with alt outside fw. So there will be no miners, no haulers, no tax avoiding missionrunners etc. left to play with.
That is a very good point
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
332
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:
Most everyone will agree that supers do more harm than good. Make it so that they are able to jump into systems to travel if need be, but all of their mods/drones deactivate.
Hopefully the incoming SC nerf will limit their usefulness without making this neccessary.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
335
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 07:28:00 -
[9] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Pater Peccavi wrote:I highly doubt removing the NPCs from hi sec will have the effect you want. Sure, it gets the mouth frothing to think, "Hey, these people are spending 95% of their time in hi sec doing carebear stuff! Let us hunt them down, their tears and loot will sustain us!". But that's not what would happen. Those players would leave FW, the experienced vets would move all their usual hi sec activities to alts (if they haven't already, since hi sec raids happen despite the NPCs) and things would settle down to pretty much the same **** as always after a couple weeks.
. I just noticed what we're discussing in this thread and this dude pretty much has it right. You need more reasons to PVP, not more places. Its the same affliction thats spread through 0.0.
I never thought that I'd agree with someone from PL, but this man is talking sense on this one issue.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
347
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:23:00 -
[10] - Quote
Axl Borlara wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I've got a quick question for all those that advocate blocking enemy militias from docking at a station based on sovereignty...
Lets say I go to bed one night, having a bunch of ships and modules docked up in a station. I wake up the next day, and find that overnight the Amarr have won back sovereignty for that system.
What happens to all my stuff?
Your stuff stays where you left it. You would be allowed to undock. You (and your militia) now have an incentive to take back occupation of the system.Meanwhile, go buy some ships elsewhere and carry on. The idea being it only affects militia owned stations. If you keep your stuff in a non-militia owned station this won't happen. It's no different than if your 'home' system gets taken over by WTs overnight and you can't get your stuff out because of them. Or if you had all your stuff in Amamake and woke up one day to find PL won't let you have it.
This
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
348
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 17:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
It shouldn't be hard to capture a system, but it shouldn't be easy either. It should be variable.
What I mean by this is that if a militia loses all of their systems then it should be ludicrously easy for them to get one back. As they get more and more systems reclaimed though, it becomes harder for them - until the final enemy system is almost impossible to capture.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
356
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:43:00 -
[12] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:
Your ideas are not quite unique ones , these same kind of ideas has proposed last 3 years.
Hopefully someone will come out with new fresh ideas.
There's nothing wrong with a lot of the ideas that people have been suggesting for the last three years apart from the fact that it's taken CCP three years to consider looking at them.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
387
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
Cearain wrote:
Keep in mind though, just because people may switch sides to the smaller faction now - when occupancy has no real effect on people's wallet - we shouldn't assume people will switch sides if occupancy starts to really matter.
Implementing my idea of making it progressively harder to capture systems should help with this.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
678
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 14:36:00 -
[14] - Quote
CSM wrote:Here's a list of player suggestions regarding FW
CCP wrote:
Thanks. We'll file the list alongside the plans for comets and system-wide asteroid fields. Meanwhile we'll do our own thing with FW and use the militias as guinea pigs controlled by whoever leads the biggest corp in them
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
690
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 13:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
Kade Jeekin wrote:Denial of assets is the only way to defeat an immortal enemy. For this reason I am for locking out of enemy factions from occupied and hisec stations. If you want meaning and consequence to system occupancy then this would be the most meaningful.
However, I am against the removal or downgrading of NPC navies, as doing so does remove a unique RP feature of FW combat.
I agree with the Minmatar psychopath.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
692
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 10:38:00 -
[16] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:
I for one am planning on going to Fan Fest 2012. (I am in Australia). So rest assured I will be there to ask the hard questions at the Faction Warfare round table...
You never know, CCP might even show up this time.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
| |
|