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

Check My IP Information

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)
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 14	Posted - 2011.10.20 19:26:00 - [1] - Quote Comments from a FW guy who participates in occupancy war, fights, and missions. Remember this: The BEST thing about FW is the free war dec. Opening up the free war dec to willing participants (joining FW) leads to great low sec fights without worrying about gate guns and your ability to re-enter high sec. The BEST thing about plexes is ship limited combat. Occupancy war is a side show and always will be. The average guy in FW has always been in it for the casual PvP. Low hanging fruit for this winter: ***Pirate Faction ships = T2 ships in plexes/missions. Doing this one thing will help out the newer player more than any other thing you implement this winter. And it will make plex fighting much more fun. Pirate faction ships are OP and reward old players with large bank accounts. Transparency in Stats: There is a measure of how contested a system is. It should be available to everybody not just those who know how to read their cache files. For those of you not "in the know", it takes 3000 vp to make a system vulnerable. The current numerical value should be available on Dotlan evemaps, and on the in-game map when occupancy is viewed. Also, we should see how much a given system has changed in vp totals over the last day and week. Occupancy War Modifications: Three easy mods for the short term. 1. Get rid of bunkers completely. They are boring. 2. Reduce occupancy requirement down to 1000 vp. If opposing side can get vp above 1000, then they occupy it. 3000 vp is too much and does not offer enough instant gratification most FW pilots are looking for. 3. Automatically subtract (or add) 100 vp to a system every day so that the baseline vp returns to zero if nothing happens in it. If you want to occupy a system, then you need to maintain it. Otherwise it will eventually return to the owning side. Losing faction standings for RR**: This issue has been around for forever. Fix it please! Other random thoughts: Forget the warmaster. The only way to deal with spies and asshats is through experience. Get super caps out of low sec but not for FW reasons, but because "if you can't build it in low sec, you shouldn't be able to deploy it in low sec" Hot dropping low sec with something the dwellers of low sec can't build themselves puts them at a fundamental disadvantage. FW Missions: FW missions are great no matter what any of these people say. What is needed for the griefers of low sec, however, is a poison pill in the missions so that pirates and griefers like me can grief the mission runners (like me as well). This will lead to larger gangs of mission runners out and about which will lead to more conflict and less stealth bomber alts ninja'ing missions. You could forget about the proposed incursion style mechanics and go with this. Guys would have to band together to make isk. Incursion-style - Why not? But it's not going to lead to more fights. Bigger/better blob wins. Opening up FW to rp alliances: Great idea that has taken way too long to implement. I would suggest opening up the number of factions to NPC 0.0 factions as well. That way an alliance like the ILF could attempt to take over Intaki (for example) by joining the Syndicate faction. Extend FW occupancy mechanics to NPC 0.0 as well. Send FW missions to both FW low sec and NPC 0.0 (oh noes! a nightmare for us implant-laden low sec carebears!). If you don't want to go to NPC 0.0, don't accept the mission. Alliances like Rote-Kappelle could join Syndicate faction so they don't have to face gate guns when they roam into low sec to take on the militia. Likewise rp Gallente colonists could attempt to colonize Syndicate (for another example, although I doubt this would happen, but who knows?)
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 14	Posted - 2011.10.20 20:28:00 - [2] - Quote Karl Planck wrote: You forgot one, fix the post dt plexing. Agreed, but I figured if it were low hanging fruit then it would have been plucked by now. We've been complaining about it since FW began. w.r.t Allowing enemies in high sec: 1. draketrain terrorized Gallente FW by tanking the NPCs and moving into Villore and Dodixie. They were experts in annoying high sec neutral RR docking games that most of us get bored with (read: aren't good at and don't want to bother with), and so the Gallente militia moved to low sec. Problem solved. Expect more of this type of behavior without the NPCs around. 2. High sec CONCORD space is open to all FW capsuleers right now. So if you want FW and RvB style play without worrying about tanking the navies or pirates trying to gank you, it's currently available there. Not many people play that sort of game, but you can do it if you want.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 15	Posted - 2011.10.20 23:55:00 - [3] - Quote If you can't build it in low sec, you shouldn't be able to field it in low sec. So let us build supers in low sec and remove this artificial constraint on being able to invade 0.0 space (You have to pay off null sec 0.0 Sov Blob to purchase equipment to push them out).
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 03:03:00 - [4] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: X Gallentius wrote: If you can't build it in low sec, you shouldn't be able to field it in low sec. Sorry no, there are capitals in high sec, so.... Amamake is our home until CCP make 0.0 worth living in, right now its simply not worth it, so we have chosen not to live there. Our super pilots are part of our alliance, they go where cyno's are allowed to be lit. So if you really want supercaps out of lowsec, cyno jam it all so and block regular caps too. But then nobody wants to go down that road do they? Which capital ships in high sec are you talking about - all those carriers and dreads ganking players who don't venture into low sec? I just want a level playing field. Null sec sov blobs control access to the only means of dislodging them. Let them be built in low sec or remove them from low sec altogether. Edit: Oh yeah one guy has a legacy dread in Amarr.....
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 13:36:00 - [5] - Quote sYnc Vir wrote: [list] Removal of all FW Missions. Turn the plexing system into the LP rewards. Currently a skilled up toon can get 30K LP for 1 mission that takes them about 90 seconds to complete. This is stupid. Turn Major plexes into 40K LP rewards for 30 minutes orbiting that timer and hopefully killing the wts. Scale down according. ... Currently FW has 3 kinds of people. PVP'ers, Mission Farming alts, People no longer playing but still listed. Remove the missions, and kick out any member of the militia that hasn't logged in for 3 months and is in the NPC corp. This will leave FW with 1 type of person, The PVP'er[/i] How about make missions work instead (see poison pill suggestion)? Nobody likes the plexing mechanic, so why force them into it to make isk? Your suggestion won't stop the alt farmers from making their isk. They'll simply run plexes 23/7 instead. Kicking inactives from militia would at least give us an accurate count on how many people are active in FW.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 13:46:00 - [6] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: I'm all about opening up where they can be built, but unfortunately EVE has never been about a level playing field 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.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 14:29:00 - [7] - Quote On a different note: FW item Requests: I want my militia to roll out onto the field completely pimped out in Faction Navy Gear! Improve some gear. 1. Make lower tier navy faction cruisers worth owning. (Exeqeror Navy Issue, etc..). 2. Increase speed of faction navy drones to their T2 counterparts. Add some gear. 3. Create a Faction Navy Destroyer and Battlecruiser (yes I'm dreaming). 4. Seed the FW LP store with cheap meta-4 mods (Fed navy equivalent of modal light neutron blasters for example) of all mods. You want T2=0.0, meta-level = low sec? This is how you do it! 5. Create Fed Navy Drone Link Augmentors, Drone Navigation Computers, etc... You know drones need some love. Make existing gear affordable enough so I can use it in combat. 6. Reduce the tag requirements of the current empire faction navy mods. I want to roll into a fight with Fed Navy Heavy Nuetron Blasters fitted with Fed Navy Mag Stabs!
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 14:39:00 - [8] - Quote Karl Planck wrote: Your presumption is slanted. Yes, most ppl on the cal/gal front don't care for plexes. The minnies are crazy about them and amarr does them here and there. However, you are neglecting WHY no one likes to do them. There is no point and they are imbalanced. FW missions are incredible similar to plexing, especially using the farm ships. Use alt or another player to draw fire, other player does damage -> use alt to draw fire, other player flips the plex. In all honesty though, FW really does need to be a place where isk is made via pvp, in some way shape or form. It would be one hell of a selling point. I disagree. My presumption is not slanted. IMO, people don't like to do plexes because orbiting a button is boring when there is no opposition. They'd rather go hunt for WTs with their free time. Missions are better n that respect because if nobody opposes you, you complete the task and are done. Put a poison pill into missions and you'll allow griefers to upset them. In any case, your reason to get rid of missions is "because of farmers", but we all know that they will simply farm plexes instead. So all you're doing is replacing a great mission running system (you actually have to travel many jumps with associated risk along the way) that needs one minor adjustment to make it great (ability to grief mission runner), for something that is relatively boring most of the time.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 16:05:00 - [9] - Quote Cearain wrote: The whole poison pill is a bad idea. Its too easy to grief mission runners. Mission runners have rats doing dps and ewar on them. Half the time all the griefer needs is a way to prevent them from warping off and they have a kill. Not to mention if the griefer brings ammo that is not what the rats shoot so the person isn't tanked for them. This is the case even if you are doing FW missions for amarr in a bc or a bs. I think you are trying to force pvp were it will not fit. PVE and PVP do not fit well together. CCP needs to learn this lesson and give us some mechanics for pvp. They then need to resist the urge to puke npcs all over it. The poison pill is a great idea, and here's why. The main thing a poison pill does is force a resolution to the conflict. Either you complete mission with no opposition, fight and win, fight and die, or leave in defeat. If you don't want to get griefed while running your 10 missions for the day, then call for backup, or run them with a PvP gang that can fight off whoever is trying to grief you (which will lead to nice gang fights in the end). It will be easier to grief mission running alts, but they'll have some defence: 1) They will wait to open up a mission until you are long gone, 2) They will ship up to Tengus or other OP ships that can easily cap a mission (This is good. More shinies roaming low sec is good) or 3) leave and go complete the 10 other missions he has to complete (which is what many people do already). The regular pvp crew will also have many counters: 1) they can wait to open the mission when you leave, 2) they can ship up to OP ships, or 3) they can have their gang waiting next door so when the griefer warps in on you, you can point him and then nail him, 4) they can fly a pvp-fit ship and not enter the mission (griefer lands on gate and dies), etc... BTW, I've lost over 50 HACs in missions because the fights in and near them are fun and challenging (yes I suck). But we've also used the missions as bait on occasion: open it up, get point on griefer at mission entrance, and call in support. I've even gotten some solo kills against griefers who have tried to kill me inside the mission because you don't need to go full PvE to complete them. Also, L1 through L3 missions can easily be solo'd by PvP ships (if you want ship limited combat). I've also had 80+ kills of mission running stealth bomber alts (mostly because they were surfing the web while completing their mission afk). I would like to force them into a more pvp-like posture if CCP were to give me the tools.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 16:18:00 - [10] - Quote Cutting the Net mission has a poison pill, for example. If I try to engage a mission runner and he bails, I go to the container, pick up the documents. He cannot complete his mission - I win. In every other mission, the mission runner bails, safes up, plays some other game for 20 minutes and then comes back and completes it after I have left. BTW, if CCP implements a poison pill feature, it would be nice if the poison pill could be returned to any station rather than having to go all the way back to the agent. The FW griefer also ought to be able to turn it in for a very minor LP reward (make the reward too big and it'll be exploited).

X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 16:53:00 - [11] - Quote I see your point on somebody speed tanking to the can. One way to resolve that concern is to not allow the can to be open if the mission runner is still on grid. Also, 20 minutes was an exaggeration. I usually hang out for five minutes and then get bored and leave (it's as bad as sitting on a plex timer). The mission runner oftentimes goes on to the next mission and then comes back to complete it or waits me out. (BTW, Cutting the Net is a breeze and can be done in a mwd ishkur (for Gallente). The only reason people don't run it is that the LP is really lower than regular missions, and you have to return the documents to your agent.)
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 17:13:00 - [12] - Quote Bring a tanking buddy who uses drones for dps. Have him assign drones to you. Call for support if you see somebody may try to grief you. Run missions in teams. Catch your opponent and kill him before you warp into the mission. etc... Is your cloaky tengu really in that much danger? BTW, if implemented your isk/LP will increase due to decreased supply in FW items.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 16	Posted - 2011.10.21 17:22:00 - [13] - Quote All L4 FW missions are designed so that they can be completed by a team of three guys in pvp ships pretty quickly. You are forced to go for more PvE-like fits if you run them solo (I can fit a point on my Ishtar and run FW missions solo). Is this a bad thing? Anyways, many ideas for improving FW have been discussed (for the Nth time in three years) and most of the issues have been addressed by several people. We'll see what CCP does with FW in due time.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 17	Posted - 2011.10.21 21:58:00 - [14] - Quote Attn CCP: Treating pirate faction ships as T2 ships for plex entrance requirements will do more for FW than anything else you implement because it will make T1 frigs and T1 cruisers (the ships newer players fly) viable in minor and medium plexes. Help ease the transition of younger players into FW!
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 22	Posted - 2011.10.23 13:53:00 - [15] - Quote It certainly appears Bengal Bob is correct, but just in case the Devs really are still reading this: The Lowest of the "Low Hanging Fruit" tasks that could ever be accomplished by the Dev Team for this winter. Plot FW Occupancy Heat Map as an absolute value rather than a relative value. i.e. Heat(j) = amount_contested(j)/amount_need_to_make_vulnerable, where "j" it the jth system under consideration. This way FW pilots would know how critical it is for them to fight over a system. If the "heat" is low, then they can do other stuff, but if the "heat" is high then they ought to turn their attention to that system. Currently the in game map plots a heat map to show which systems are contested and by how much they are contested relative to the most contested system. Something like Heat(j) = amount_contested(X(j))/max(amount_contested(X)), where X is the systems being interrogated. This makes it very difficult for somebody looking at the map to figure out whether or not they should spend their time helping out. tl;dr Replace max(amount_contested) with amount_needed_to_make_system_vulnerable. REPLACE ONE WORD IN YOUR CODE! Do it!
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 22	Posted - 2011.10.23 13:56:00 - [16] - Quote sYnc Vir wrote: Wait you don't like roaming and seeing dozens of SBs running mission? WTF and here I thought that was only me. Whats even funnier is the Null sec guys that clearly have alts in FW for the missions dropping their 2 cents in. Guess they dont wanna risk carrier site running, not when they can make 300m an hours in a SB. [/i] Luminaire General X Gallentius signing up for anti-stealth bomber mission running duty. Give me the tools (poison pills) to take them down CCP! (see: Roleplay, and player enforced limits to exploits)
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 22	Posted - 2011.10.23 18:08:00 - [17] - Quote Removal of FW NPC from high sec will lead to gay high sec RR docking games at mission and market hubs. \o/ All the veteran players will stay in low sec and not bother with them, younger players without alts will be griefed endlessly.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 24	Posted - 2011.10.25 19:39:00 - [18] - Quote Adding to a good post, and thanks Hans for a great thread. Karl Planck wrote: 1. Distribute plex spawn throughout the day. This should be easy to fix. I cannot see how using an existing mechanic to replace the current one should take any significant amount of resources. Everyone EVERYONE wants this (except maybe sasawong har har har) 2. Re-balance NPC's. Both missions and plexes. Once again, easy fix. Hell, give everyone missiles, it sure is one hell of a frig deterrent on the Gal/amarr side of things. 3. Pirate ships counting as T2 frigs as far as plexes go. Cmon, Pirate frigs are at the very least on par with T2, they shouldn't be in the minor plexes. On the same hand (which hasn't been emphasized), Pirate cruisers should also be restricted to majors for the same comparison with HAC's. 4. Absolute value heat map instead of relative value heat map, so we have an indication on how contested a system actually is.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.26 12:45:00 - [19] - Quote Yeah what Johnny said. You lose FACTION standings with the RR bug.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.26 18:52:00 - [20] - Quote The war is between four factions, not the four empires. It is perfectly logical to deny docking rights to members of the FDU from any State Protectorate station. However, since Lai Dai isn't at war with the FDU, then they shouldn't deny docking rights. At least from a backstory, RP, sense. ... Carry on.

X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.26 19:56:00 - [21] - Quote mkint wrote: Am I sure I understand this correctly? You're saying Gallente isn't at war with Caldari? Just that Gallente Militia is at war with Caldari Militia? Well... that's like saying "the US military was at war with the Japanese military." That might be true, but US still nuked the hell out of a civilian target, and still restricted the freedoms of US residents of Japanese descent. Or, the Germans still tried to stop the Allies from waltzing through (civilian) Germany. And if the modern US was ever invaded by ground forces from anywhere, I guarantee there would be thousands of civilians on the streets with their .22 rifles, and glock pistols. With the docking rights thing... it would make sense that non-militia "foreign" stations (i.e. stations belonging to one faction but in the space of a hostile faction) would be open to everyone, while all nationals (stations in the faction's space which they belong to) would be closed to hostile militias, and militia stations should ALWAYS be closed to hostile militias regardless of location. With a little world shaping to make sure it's balanced, controlling stations could add a lot to FW tactics. Especially if station access was based on occupancy. I get what you're saying. However, did you know that there are only Caldari allied stations in Black Rise? Your suggestion would mean that FDU pilots could not dock anywhere in the entire Black Rise region while State Protectorate pilots could dock in any number of stations in Placid - hell, over half the 11 stations in Vlillirier are "foreign". In any case, from the RP perspective it's FDU vs. State Protectorate to keep the empires from going to war with each other. Let those zealots in militia shoot each other to death - everybody else will carry on with their business.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.27 21:35:00 - [22] - Quote Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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. Tracking disruptors ftw.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.27 21:38:00 - [23] - Quote Morar Santee wrote: Frankly, this is a horrible idea. We already have FW players camping trade hubs of opposing factions, ganking mission runners and the like. I don't even think that's necessarily bad - there's an added challenge to it, and an element of surprise to those FW players who think they can just go around in high-sec unpunished. But why remove focus from the warzones, over which the Factions should be fighting? Is camping Rens / Amarr Prime with BS blobs really more entertaining or a gamestyle that needs to be encouraged? We've got plenty of station hugging with faction BSes and neutral RR already. Faction Warfare doesn't need to be yet another iteration of that. It's ********. I agree, but if they do it, implement the enemy station ban. Remove docking rights at enemy NPC faction stations and have the station guns fire on wts. That'll at least create somewhat of a safe zone for young pilots.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.28 05:58:00 - [24] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: And this will add amount of players plexing? No, it will cause that those who now plex stops and plex only when relly needed. Fact is that those who constantly do plexing sure knows how contested systems is, and you can alwyas test it by doing some plexing and see how spot size changes. Btw, it is too late to defend when systems goes too close to be vulnerable, atleast gallente need couple extra down times to defend it Plexing is not a full time job for 95% of militia. They can do it in spurts, but only two to four guys can do it as a full time job. Plexing effort increases a bit the closer a system is to being vulnerable. System will likely still flip, but more people will be willing to fight at or near even odds. Happens all the time.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.28 21:56:00 - [25] - Quote Bad Messenger makes a great point. Running plexes with alts leads to no fights (it's still a lame strategy/tactic), and always overwhelming your opponent in plexes leads to no fights (after the opponent figures out what's up). Props to you all. You achieved your goal of no fights for plexes. I'll add: No fights = boring time orbiting button for non-alts. And yeah, it was real easy to spot where PERVS were since they took over systems one constellation at a time. And BM would have his alt Don Goldspoon sit in the target system 23/7. It didn't lead to more fights.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.29 15:08:00 - [26] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: Yes, I do also feel that we broke the FW Edit: Anyway alts were not reason why pvp ended, it was consequence, no need to fight so alts are fine to do boring job. I agree. It's really tough to convince yourself to do a boring task (plexing) with your main character if it's both boring and you don't accomplish your goal.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.29 16:58:00 - [27] - Quote Real Rewards: The FW corp for each militia that scores the most kills and victory points gets to lead a team of FW pilots from their faction in the Alliance Tournament. Total Points = Corp FW Kills/Total FW Kills + Corp VP/Total VP. You want FW active? This'll get it active.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.30 14:16:00 - [28] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: It is not about pve it is about willing to do something that does not pay out right away, it is long process to capture systems and get good fights. I agree. Capturing a system takes a long time and a considerable amount of effort by many players to achieve. Probably a bit too much effort for the casual play that is marketed for FW. Only a few of us have the stamina to do the FW plex grind day in and day out (most of us can do it in spirts). However, there are plenty of us willing and able to go hunt down opposing plexers (when it matters) and run them out of plexes so the guys who do run plexes can complete them.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 26	Posted - 2011.10.30 14:17:00 - [29] - Quote meh, the forum mechanics are stupid, not me! Nerf the forums!
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 35	Posted - 2011.11.07 16:24:00 - [30] - Quote Johnny Punisher wrote: We have several ways how to make the farming much harder. We could make a mafia-style system where you have to earn your "missioning rights" with pvp, otherwise u get ganked/chased by major fw corps (might hurt standings in long run). We could use alts in opposing militia to chase farmers. We could make a deal with opposing militia to make big ops to chase farmers and leave pvp missioners alone etc etc... Might take alot of effort but its possible... edit: check what goons are doing to highsec ice-mining "farming" Give me a way of griefing carebear mission runners and I'll get rid of them for you. Put the "poison pill" into all missions CCP, please. There will be real risk that is PLAYER DRIVEN, faction mod prices will skyrocket, real pvpers will have to actually form gang and pvp when opposed. Farmers with alts will be disappointed.

X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 35	Posted - 2011.11.08 14:02:00 - [31] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: Yes, we did plex in Old Man Star (1 jump from Villore, gallente ex staging system.) several times, and we told gallente that we take plex in OMS and what ships we had and that they will have 30min time to form fleet and come to kick our ass, we even stopped timer and waited. No one ever came.[/quote] Listen to this guy. If one side has a clear superiority in a plex, the other side will likely not bother engaging. With PERVS, they had a reputation of fighting only to win, and therefore everybody thought they had something up their sleeve in any plex fight. Therefore, no fight. You can do anything you want with the plexing mechanic, incentivizing people to fight in plexes, whatever. If one side decides to not lose ships (only engages with a 95% chance of winning), then you're not going to get fights in plexes.

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.