Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 22:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
Now that weGÇÖve received official word that Faction Warfare is confirmed to be part of a pending list of hypothetical fixes due out for Winter Expansion, and will most definitely maybe get some possible attention, its time for those of us involved in the scene to buckle down and help the DevGÇÖs.
Leaving things up in the air will likely result in ideas being discussed that are far-reaching and expansive, leading to the likelihood that Faction Warfare and lowsec in general will be delegated to a future overhaul expansion, rather than having some simple, GÇ£quickGÇ¥ fixes implemented this Winter.
LetGÇÖs distill some of the most talked about changes into a simple list, so that the DevGÇÖs can tackle Faction WarfareGÇÖs GÇ£low-hanging fruitGÇ¥ and actually get some stuff accomplished. Complicated = not going to happen this winter. Simple = might get done alongside all the other ambitious changes discussed in ZuluGÇÖs list.
HereGÇÖs what IGÇÖve seen from the myriad Faction Warfare threads, as well as from experience as part of the scene for the last two years.
1.)Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare. This was disallowed initially because while Faction Warfare was designed to be PvP lite, this no longer accurately describes the scene. Alliances participate whether we want them to or not, and usually in the form of hot-dropping uncounterable Supercap fleets. The reason for this popular fix idea is two-fold GÇô first, it gets more people involved, fighting the slow number stagnation seen over the years. Roleplay alliances such as CVA and UshraGÇÖkhan deserve a chance to fight for their Empires alongside the militias, and current mechanics stifle this. Secondly, Alliances provide much needed central leadership that FW corps have failed to organize themselves. Contrary to CCPGÇÖs perspective and popular stereotype, FW is a pretty poor place to learn PvP. The reality is that large nullsec fleet battles are actually more noob-friendly. Anyone can get in an abaddon and listen to primary calls, but it takes a seasoned vet to survive small-gang PvP, where every pilot needs to think for themselves. The kind of initiative and creativity it takes to find fights in the current scene is discouraging for new players GÇô they want instant action, and orders given to them. Alliances are better suited for this. Simply allowing alliances into FW takes care of this issue. It gives each faction access to nullsec resources (CVA could ACTUALLY extend the Amarr Empire into Providence, not just pretend toGǪ), and established alliance structure and organization.
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.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 22:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
3.) Give sovereignty consequences. The suggestions for these are numerous, and well documented in other threads discussing Faction Warfare, some of which have existed for a year or more. One simple fix would be to enable station guns to fire on the opposing faction, as if they were GCC. This would give GÇ£homefield advantageGÇ¥ some actual advantage, meaning a safe, station-game free place to base ops out of. The militias have their de facto home systems and stations anyways, we should give them a little more bite and push the fighting off station. Taking over another factionGÇÖs home system should hurt. Incursion-style system wide effects would be fantastic, but may be too ambitious for this expansion. Station guns being hostile is a quick fix that would give meaning to holding territory and kill some of the more boring fights and undock ganks.
4.)Make plexing a PvP exercise, not a PvE exercise. Faction Warfare missions indeed put players at risk for PvP, and anyone out running them knows they draw attention and fights. It may be amongst a limited palette of ships, but it works. Overhauling this means overhauling all the missions, so this is not a likely fix for this expansion. However, changing the button mechanics for Plex taking, and getting rid of GÇ£kill these npcs than waitGÇ¥ current mechanic, would kill solo pve plexing as a way to gain rank, lp and sovereignty. Again, there are other threads documenting ideas for this in more detail, but a combination of changing respawn timers, implementing an alert system for FW participants (I personally want a big flashy siren in my CQ, or a TV bulletin !) To get them out into their ships when a plex is invaded, is a much needed implementation to bring back these now-forgotten pvp grounds.
Any other ideas from Faction Warfare participants (lets keep outsider speculation and sarcasm to a minimum) would be very welcome here, but the overall theme should be DOABLE fixes requiring minimal programming time, rather than the complete overhaul lowsec and FW really deserve, but probably wonGÇÖt be covered in this expansion given the other meaty items on ZuluGÇÖs list.
By keeping our list of desired fixes simple, we stand a much better chance at getting some love this winter. Thanks to everyone in this great community for their ongoing contributions over the years despite CCP neglect GÇô our time has finally come, lets seize the moment!
|
Dehlandrae
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 22:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
On the topic of Alliances, why not also allow Militia and non-Militia corps to enter into Alliances with one another?
Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed. |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 22:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
No no no. . .
Sorry m8, I think you are starting from wrong end. FW needs a little more fundamental mechanic changes before any of those changes (especially the supercap/alliances bit - that is the least of the problems.)
Lets start with not having single rifters tanking an entire Amarr plex - especially if you want FW to actually have meaning. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 22:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dehlandrae wrote:On the topic of Alliances, why not also allow Militia and non-Militia corps to enter into Alliances with one another? Creating a Military-Industrial Complex of a sort.
Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed.
Both great suggestions. However you slice it, there are many ways to allow more player participation that won't interfere with the spirit of FW. I agree - the militia is indeed about citizen-soldiers. Those that are willing to take up arms for their race REGARDLESS of what their day job is. Allowing individuals, Alliances, to participate, or to expand the ability of the Republic itself to be run AS a player Alliance (cutting the strings so to speak) all address one of the issues that limits Faction Warfare participation.
If FW is all about pickup and play PvP, that relies on numbers. There are a number of artificial boundaries like this that arbitrarily shut out interested players, and the scene is established enough now to handle broader participation levels safely. FW pilots can fly anything anyone else can, and the veterans know how to defend themselves and lead others in doing the same.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 23:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Ruah Piskonit wrote: Lets start with not having single rifters tanking an entire Amarr plex - especially if you want FW to actually have meaning.
I guess we'll have to disagree on the true "meaning" of Faction Warfare.
Don't get me wrong, plex mechanics are a big issue. They are boring, broken, and have nothing to do with PvE. But there is a fundamental difference between Faction Warfare mechanics, and Faction Warfare as a scene in the Eve Universe.
For those that have enjoyed Faction Warfare enough to stick around for a while, most can testify it has nothing to do with the mechanics. Its the characters, storylines, the overall mentality, the good sportmanship, and the fun of a perma-wardec in a static location, without things that hamper gang warfare such as bombs and bubbles.
To those that don't stick around long enough, the perception is often that "Faction Warfare is dead" or they just see FW as a broken mechanic (like defender missiles) that needs "fixing" to be worth bothering with. They don't see the people, the fights, the kills, the gang action they complain doesnt exist in the game. I'm certain there are pilots that have blown off FW as being not even worth trying, despite being bored and searching for the kind of gameplay the FW scene offers, if not the mechanics.
Blogs like these document the many ways pilots enjoy Faction Warfare and the fun that is had pvp-ing everyday. There is an established scene despite broken mechanics, that is completely player-driven. If the Faction Warfare pilots can enjoy themselves and come up with fun fights in the absence of any mechanics tinkering, than part of sustaining the scene is simply allowing more player involvement overall.
Ultimately though, fixing FW will involve both increasing the number of players that can participate, and giving the factions more fun, rewarding, meaningful reasons to fight with in the first place. |
Tyraeil Starblade
Eleutherian Guard
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 23:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
I agree with everything you said, except for this:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 1.) Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare.
FW doesn't need to be made into a blobfest like null sec. Getting into a fleet and pressing F1 is the last thing I want via massive blobs. That's exaclty how you learn to NOT PvP effectively. Getting frigates blown up is. How do you learn about manually piloting, spatial awareness, and various other fundamental PvP tricks if you're just part of some massive blob. How boring and useless.
Leave alliances out in null where they belong. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 23:40:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tyraeil Starblade wrote:I agree with everything you said, except for this: Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 1.) Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare.
FW doesn't need to be made into a blobfest like null sec. Getting into a fleet and pressing F1 is the last thing I want via massive blobs. That's exaclty how you learn to NOT PvP effectively. Getting frigates blown up is. How do you learn about manually piloting, spatial awareness, and various other fundamental PvP tricks if you're just part of some massive blob. How boring and useless. Leave alliances out in null where they belong.
If the mechanics are fixed, and plexing is interesting and useful again, this won't happen. Alliances such as UK and CVA would still have to ship down to enter the appropriate plex to fight alongside their militia brothers. Alliances are very much a part of Faction Warfare scene (again, differentiating from FW mechanics) regardless of whether CCP allows them mechanical entry, so the goal should be to make the local warfare mechanics discourage massive blobs, not simply barring Alliances from entering the militia or allowing alliance corps to enter the militia.
If you've ever fought against the Amarr, you'd know that blobs by no means require an Alliance to exist :) I think the "how" of FW fighting is a seperate issue than the "who". |
Dirk Smacker
Kaalakiota Expeditionary Force
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 00:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
Bah, the board ate my reply. I'll try this again:
Quote:1.) Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare. Yikes. That would draw sov alliances away from endgame while negating the corps that just want to be in FW.
They need to have a non-sov alliance classification so FW can join forces and be more effective. Maybe limit the number of corps in one and give it a new name like "conglomerates".
Quote:4.) Make plexing a PvP exercise, not a PvE exercise I like what you put below that, especially the blinking alarm. However, to improve the PvP in plexing, you need to make the PvE more involved. It should require a gang or higher to take one, and they should resemble the new incursion system. The system should also be set up so a corp can plan on bringing a fleet of 10-20 and taking a system in a reasonable amount of time. Right now, taking a system is so out of our control, few bother.
With a system like that, you would increase the amount of gangs and fleets active throughout the day. As anyone in FW will tell you, nothing gets a fleet up faster than a war target fleet roaming around. If you knew exactly where one was and have a time limit to respond, it would increase the urgency to fight them.
And make the bunker a functional space fort, not a space box.
There's other tweaks I would like. An occupancy meter and LP store consequences for controlling systems come to mind. But I'll stop there for brevity's sake. |
Dehlandrae
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 00:20:00 -
[10] - Quote
I remember reading or discussing with former corpmates in the past the idea of giving 4 CCP employees control over one of the Militias each in a Commander-In-Chief type capacity. From there, the Militia Rank system could be used to establish a chain of command of a sorts. CIC would hand down broad objectives (i.e. Minmatar CIC sez "establish a forward operating position in Devoid") to the highest ranking members of their Militia who would then hand down directives to their subordinates which could amount to anchoring POSes/SBUs (or maybe something in-between that is only available to the Militia) in Ezzara. The next tier below could be tasked with various duties like going on patrols into Devoid, camping all the gates into Ezzara or running supply lines into Ezzara from Rens.
Having a framework like this could serve as a stepping stone for allowing the Republic to be run as a Player Alliance. Yeah, CCP would have a hand in it, though only to nudge it in one direction or another, allowing players to command the bulk of the responsibility for seizing systems from those slaving Amarr dogs, er, I mean, their enemy Militias. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 00:37:00 -
[11] - Quote
Dirk Smacker wrote: Yikes. That would draw sov alliances away from endgame while negating the corps that just want to be in FW.
For many of us, faction warfare IS the endgame. The old mentality of high, low, and nullsec as being beginner, intermediate, advanced PvP needs to be thrown out the window. While that may have been the original intention, it doesn't reflect the norm nowadays.
For many players, if you're wanting to get a start in PvP, an alliance is actually a better choice. Alliances have dedicated educational teams, classes, and very large fleets with easily defined, easily instructed roles. They also have the benefit of mandatory call-to-arms, and concrete objectives to point hungry noobs at.
In Faction Warfare, every man needs to be able to fight for himself, and know how to find their own fights as well. As it stands right now, jumping in a ship and roaming about, throwing an "x" into militia chat, is a quick way to get yourself really bored, or really killed. The faction warfare corps are self-contained, competitive entities, who fight for killboard glory but aren't truly networked like an Alliance, as there is zero economic incentive to work together and get over the trust issue. Faction sovereignty changes and their consequences could fix that.
A good faction warfare pilot needs to be skilled in small gang warfare, which gets pretty cutthroat and relies on a certain experience and skillpoint level for everyone in the gang. The actions of one pilot make or break the team.
Lack of plexing motivation means gangs are on their own for finding each other - this also bores the hell out of new players. Newbies want to be told want to do, not taught how to go find fights for themselves (which is what the militias do now, just like pirate corps do)
All these things are why I continue to reject the notion that FW is "gateway PvP" for players to dabble with on their way to "endgame" nullsec PvP. While that was the original intention, the reality couldn't be further from the truth. CCP should heavily consider this point when further developing FW, in my opinion.
|
Jimmy Nickson
The Lucky Star
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 13:53:00 -
[12] - 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.
This would conflict with null alliance warfare of supercaps sadly and highly doubt it would be put into game. Supercaps when traveling from north to south, east to west can't just jump from starting system to end system, and restricting them to null would be confining them to enemy space filled with supercap fleets and cyno jammers causing a ability not to reinforce forces or retreat to the otherside of the map like an ordanary fleet would be able to do but in smaller scale. Perhaps not allowing Fighterbombers to be luanched in lowest? and for titan's I dunno....
The Consquenses part to sov I agree with and encourage such playing station games can get rather anoying and often is the only pvp I see half the time and its a tarp!!!
The plex mechanic's as you have said needs an overhual is pretty much every fw player who's done it would say, the plex's are often abled to be solo'd, and imbalanced between factions, even though I know I can solo a major plex in a gila or tengu against minmatar I know the minmatar have a fair easyer time being able to do it solo in a vigil, Same thing with gallente and caldari. I don't know how you would change the plex'ing system to make it more pvp orientated, though I do know NPC's can be usful against the enemy when flying, an example I could use a little while ago is a griffin with caldari NPC's perma jamming a vagabond whilst the griffin pin'd the vagabond down slowly draging it to death. Perhaps NPC's could be usful like that in the pvp terms but not that overpowered... The idea of the Alert system Jagerblitzen has stated is a very common thought aswell I completely agree with it, if somone is going to do a plex I want to know about it so I can go after him or get somone to come after me.
Other mechanic's of fw that is bad are like RR in fleets around friendlies who are GCC causing faction loss etc.. I know FC's in past have been very complaintive of this and it can be very anoying when your standing is important for your income (missions) or allowing you to even stay in the milita.
Contesting systems perhaps putting a bar up like the incursions layout saying how much a system is speicificaly contested would be good also, often people just seeing a bubble on a map is rather like seeing your progress having little effect its so small and there is no numbers; puting a progress bar would likely cause more motivation to defend or attack towards the later part of contestment and thus more pvp encouraged as we have more reason to fight rather than just run away!
Fire ze missiles! |
Jandin Kobera
Young British Arsonists
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 14:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
A small fix which would greatly affect small gang pvp in FW would be to even out plex spawns over the course of the day. As it stands, 90% of plexing is done and finished within an hour or so of the server coming online. If these were instead to spawn constantly during the course of the day, they would create a large supply of arenas for small gang warfare to take place in. |
Shaalira D'arc
Quantum Cats Syndicate
212
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 14:07:00 -
[14] - Quote
I've heard one interesting proposal that strikes a good compromise in the 'alliances in FW' issue:
Quote:Alliances can join FW. However, militia alliances cannot hold sov in nullsec.
That should permit militia members to benefit from alliance mechanics, while still drawing a big red line between FW and nullsec blobs.
In any case, I don't think CCP lacks for feedback or suggestions on FW at this point. They've had years of bug reports, petitions, and forum threads about all of its shortcomings. In fact, you had entire roundtables of veteran players speaking their minds at the last fanfest (whose opinions were apparently recorded by a lower-echelon CCP employee). If CCP comes out right now and asks 'soo.... what do we need to do to fix FW?' then that only confirms that they haven't been listening at all. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
57
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 14:18:00 -
[15] - Quote
Hans nice post.
I think Hirana's idea that if alliances want to join they can't also hold sov is a good one.
As far as station guns firing I think this should only be for the militia specific stations. That is 24th imperial crusade stations will fire on minmatar but not carthum conglomorate. That way faction war militias can base out of a station without so many station games but the winning side doesn't get too strong. There was a time when caldari had all the systems. Gallente had few pilots in fw. If they also had the all the station guns hitting them that would have been pretty bad.
I'm not sure what can be done with supercaps but I don't really do allot of the larger fleet stuff so I can't really speak to that. They can't enter plexes so I really don't care how many there are.
Here is a list of 22 ideas that were discussed regarding faction war plexing and a short pro and con of each:
http://eve-search.com/thread/1564233
I think some of those ideas would be pretty nice. Including the one about sensor strength in the plexes getting a large boost for that faction when inside their plex. So if I am in a minmatar plex with a minmatar ship I would be almost impossible to jam.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
298
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 14:33:00 -
[16] - 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. |
Bengal Bob
Royal Order of Security Specialists
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 14:50:00 -
[17] - Quote
Distribute plex spawns throughout the day. Have the same NPC spawn for every factions plexes - easy fix and balances them out remove ECM from NPC, this is just silly. Increase the number of different levels of plexes. Faction ships are overpowered against T1 ships, and the newer players no longer plex as they are insta popped by older players in Drams, Daredevils, Cynabals, Vigilants that also have a neutral booster in system.
eg: T1 Frigate Minor plex Minor plex as existing T1 Cruiser Plex Medium as existing T1 Major plex Major as existing
Make it a requirement that no NPC are on grid for the plex counter to continue, this will stop speed tankers.
I like the station gun idea, hopefully this will not include gate guns, although I suspect it might be hard to reprogram them as different guns. I wouldn't go for any further advantages, as this will only lead to people blobbing up. It still needs to be viable for solo pilots to go out and roam happily.
Cut the LP for missions, they pay out way too much and most militia members are now there for the missions only. Increase LP for kills.
Fix faction standing loss, so Logi alts can also be in the militia without having to worry about standings
Do I need to say supercaps?
Add some militia bling to the LOL shop for the RP guys - maybe they can plex for Aurum?
Look at the distribution of space, the choke points between systems and access to high sec. Change as necessary to encourage free flowing movement.
The poor Amarr are bottled up in just a few systems bordering high sec and can't leave without a huge blob. Add some gates so they can experience low sec.
The Minmatar have to deal with whoever the campers of the week are in Amamake. Sadly, the use of neutral alts in all surrounding systems, means the gate campers run as soon as a fleet moves towards them - leaving them uncounterable. Add more high sec gates so our noobs don't get popped. Couple in Auga, couple in Dal, couple in Arzad will almost match the Amarr access to high sec.
Whatever you decide to do, ask for feedback afterwards, and then continue to make improvements - not after another 18 months please. You can expect a flood of people coming back to see if FW is fun again, don't fail to keep it moving forward again.
Also, fix FW and I will redo my portrait so you don't have to keep looking at my shaven testicle. |
Dirk Smacker
Kaalakiota Expeditionary Force
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 15:30:00 -
[18] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Dirk Smacker wrote: Yikes. That would draw sov alliances away from endgame while negating the corps that just want to be in FW.
For many of us, faction warfare IS the endgame. It is the endgame PvP for a lot of the people who stay in FW. However, it can not be the best endgame option for the game of EVE at large. The game needs to be set up for players to be drawn out there.
We all agree FW shouldn't be a repellant. However, it just shouldn't be as strong of a magnet as nul sec for the typical EVE player. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 15:31:00 -
[19] - Quote
Great post but I can't possibly agree with everything.
Bengal Bob wrote:Distribute plex spawns throughout the day. Have the same NPC spawn for every factions plexes - easy fix and balances them out remove ECM from NPC, this is just silly..
Do this in the missions! Make all missions like the amarr missions where the rats have painters and missiles so you can't solo them in a sb.
Screw npcs in plexes do away with them, or at least make it so we don't have to fit a pve tank. With a notification system we can have players fighting for plexes instead of npcs. But if you can't stand scrapping the npcs all togehter here is an idea that I think would work:
1) every 3-6 minutes an alarm will spawn. How often depends on the size of the plex. I think a minor plex would have this thing spawn at 3 minutes and 6 minutes. That alarm will be able to tank different amounts of damage but not do any damage. An alarm in a minor plex would tank say 50 dps. An alarm in a medium plex would tank 120 dps, major closed plex 300 dps and major open 500 dps.
2) If you kill that alarm in under 90 seconds, or there is a player ship friendly to the faction in the plex, no npcs will come. If you don't kill it and you are against that faction then npcs will spawn. The rats in the larger plexes will be fit with lots of target painters and missiles so smaller ships can't speed tank them.
Bengal Bob wrote: Also, fix FW and I will redo my portrait so you don't have to keep looking at my shaven testicle.
Does this explain why hirana wants them to postpone fixing fw? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Count NULL
Bad Balance
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 15:46:00 -
[20] - Quote
Make it possible to kick out known spies. While not most pressing issue, there is nothing more annoying than to have a roaming fleet to be followed by a spy: who is in your militia, who you can't kill without loosing standing for yourself and your corp. Make it possible for general militia to vote them out without possibility to comeback for 3 month. This will go a long way towards making militia channels useful for anything else besides trolling. As it stands right now newbies are being kept in dark about all the action going on closed channels. Being able to kick people out of militia is just as important as letting them in.
Second thought: Add an other faction BS to LP store. It's stupid when everyone has to grind missions just to flood market with same item (i.e. Navy Domies ) as it gives best Isk/LP ratio. If you want to have more people in FW then you have to make sure that LP items market doesn't collapse, as it will force people to grind even more missions (or what ever else you replace them with) to support their PVP. |
|
Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 15:51:00 -
[21] - Quote
FW should be a never ending conuest match of battlefield in space.
yes ban supercaps we dont need alliances so much in FW, keep it loosy organized.
conquer stations = lockout of enemy fw, set taxes for neuts, the one who did the most trying to take the stations gets the ownership
upgradable systems, FW police shoul come help defend FW players that are aggressed by pirates, this means FW plays can focus more on enemies then pirates.
No pve at all.. no plexes no missions, enemies can drop tags ( max 5 tags per day) dependong on how many enemies they have killing in the last week the better the tag. so the more u kill, the more valuable your death will be worth, ye sthis can be abused, try to base it off ship hulls too.
my ideas + less yartarrds killing FW memebers + trade wil become more viable in lowsec, +more PVP between the factions + more people in lowsec = pirates can see more targets +conquest in space = win
-pirate tears ( maybe) - FW players who farm plexes all day will Q_Q |
Takamori Maruyama
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 15:55:00 -
[22] - Quote
Event battles? So we can mass a damn amount of players and make an epic battle. The Codex Astartes guides us....*someone poke and whisper something* Oh wrong scenario...WHERE IS MY GIANT AQUARIUM?! |
Seriphyn Inhonores
Eleutherian Guard
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 16:30:00 -
[23] - Quote
Supercap-blobbing alliances can stay the **** out of my FW tyvm |
Lugalzagezi666
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 17:40:00 -
[24] - Quote
At least its not only me who thinks that "allow alliances" + "give sovereignity consequences" would result in destroying one of the last small scale pvp enviroments in eve and changed it in perpetual blobage.
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
52
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 18:22:00 -
[25] - Quote
high sec needs to be vunerable too in fw
for example if minmatar militia attacks and amarrian constellation with 3x low sec and 3x high sec systems in it and manages to capture all the low secs systems then the 3 remaining high sec systems should drop to 0.4 sec systems and thus become vunerable to attack
if the minmatar militia is successful in capturing all 6 systems in the constellation then 3 will flip to 0.5 sec & 3 will remain low sec but under minmatar's sov. if the adjoining constellations also gets captured by the minmatar militia then the first stating at 0.1 sec and rising over time provided the system remains held by the minmatar militia & eventually the constellation becomes completely high sec (all systems increases over time upto a max of 0.7 sec) 1.0 to 0.8 sec systems will remain invulnerable to attack so new rookies will always have a safe place to start off their eve training.
if all a region's vunerable systems (0.7 or below) is captured by minmatar militia then all the constellations bordering another minmatar controlled region become high sec and all constellations bordering any non minmatar controlled regions will have 50% of the systems low sec and 50% high sec unless those constellations are being contested. |
Count NULL
Bad Balance
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 20:03:00 -
[26] - Quote
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:At least its not only me who thinks that "allow alliances" + "give sovereignity consequences" would result in destroying one of the last small scale pvp enviroments in eve and changed it in perpetual blobage.
No you're not the alone.
Allowing alliance into FW will do several things:
1) Large alliances will start to farm FW missions or any other means of getting LP, destroying LP item market for the rest of us. Most people in FW rely on missions to support their PvP. Take away this income from people and watch FW die.
2) Destroy small corp warfare: How can a 20 man corp compete with nulsec alliance, that can drop caps on you at any time. Well someone might then say that it will force people to join or form alliances of their own. However a lot of active people in FW right now are in it precisely because we don't want to deal with all of the alliance drama. We fell absolutely fine being a loosely associated bunch of gun-ho lunatics connected only by our desire to kill stuff and talking smack on TS. There is a reason why FW alliances do not last. FW as it is right now is a Wild West of EVE. It's harsh and inhospitable, it's largely empty but if you're willing to stick around and learn few tricks it gives one an ultimate freedom of not giving a **** about politics, dramas and attitudes of basement dwellers who somehow manged to get to position of power in an alliance.
3) It will lead to bigger blobs: Even right now if someone decides to put their carriers into combat the risk of getting hot dropped is very high. Combined with fact that you cant really get rich in FW it leads to largely low-scale action, where fighting is not just about who can get larger blob out ( though sometimes it is), but about how well you know the area and your opponent. Large alliances will bring nothing, but blobs of players in expensive ships (not a bad thing on its own), chasing around newbies in rifters. No thank you. I feel fine, when we have to deal with their roaming blobs right now, but i don't want to deal with them every-time I undock.
|
Count NULL
Bad Balance
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 20:08:00 -
[27] - Quote
One more thing: I don't think we'll get anything out of CCP besides some cosmetic changes anyway, given how much they put on plate for winter expansion. So I would not hold my breath for any major changes. maybe they'll address some well know and annoying bugs, or give us some live events , but I'll be really surprised if we see anything more than that in coming expansion. |
Agonising Ecstacy
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 20:18:00 -
[28] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:..... 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. ...
Nooooo!!!! Eve works because you can never guarantee your the biggest guy on the block. It's precisely BECAUSE the beloved Legion will hot drop the living **** out of your half baked cap fleet, that keeps FW as PVP-Lite. Remove the threat of 'too juicy a target' getting stamped on by the big boys and all you do is make FW another blob race. Who can field the most caps. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 20:19:00 -
[29] - Quote
Count NULL wrote:Lugalzagezi666 wrote:At least its not only me who thinks that "allow alliances" + "give sovereignity consequences" would result in destroying one of the last small scale pvp enviroments in eve and changed it in perpetual blobage. No you're not the alone. Allowing alliance into FW will do several things: 1) Large alliances will start to farm FW missions or any other means of getting LP, destroying LP item market for the rest of us. Most people in FW rely on missions to support their PvP. Take away this income from people and watch FW die. 2) Destroy small corp warfare: How can a 20 man corp compete with nulsec alliance, that can drop caps on you at any time. Well someone might then say that it will force people to join or form alliances of their own. However a lot of active people in FW right now are in it precisely because we don't want to deal with all of the alliance drama. We fell absolutely fine being a loosely associated bunch of gun-ho lunatics connected only by our desire to kill stuff and talking smack on TS. There is a reason why FW alliances do not last. FW as it is right now is a Wild West of EVE. It's harsh and inhospitable, it's largely empty but if you're willing to stick around and learn few tricks it gives one an ultimate freedom of not giving a **** about politics, dramas and attitudes of basement dwellers who somehow manged to get to position of power in an alliance. 3) It will lead to bigger blobs: Even right now if someone decides to put their carriers into combat the risk of getting hot dropped is very high. Combined with fact that you cant really get rich in FW it leads to largely low-scale action, where fighting is not just about who can get larger blob out ( though sometimes it is), but about how well you know the area and your opponent. Large alliances will bring nothing, but blobs of players in expensive ships (not a bad thing on its own), chasing around newbies in rifters. No thank you. I feel fine, when we have to deal with their roaming blobs right now, but i don't want to deal with them every-time I undock.
I think you make some good points here. I remember when one of bobs corps joined minmatar. It was allot of station camping and not much fun.
Though I also think its a shame that certain player alliances that have traditionally been aligned with a faction can't participate.
What if they made it this way:
1) Only corps can join fw not whole alliances
2) If your corp is in an alliance, you can only join if your alliance does not hold sov.
This way certain alliances could have a few corps in the faction war. Do you still think lots of large alliances would join fw in order to farm the missions?
Also keep in mind that if there are enough plexes throughout the fw regions it is hard to blob them. They are restricted by ship size.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Thgil Goldcore
PIE Inc.
123
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 20:23:00 -
[30] - Quote
Perhaps to spawn more PVP fights in FW a simple change in rewards is in order. Make it far more profitable and rewarding to blow up hostile ships than just getting something tasty on the killboards. This very simple change of adding a larger isk reward to blowing hostiles up would encourage players to actually fight each other.
PROs -gets people to focus more on PVP, since its an income source. -Money gets people modivated to organize. -More fights = better! -Encourages people to join milita's to make PVP a job!
CONs -'noob farming' may become more legitimized
|
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 20:31:00 -
[31] - Quote
Thgil Goldcore wrote:Perhaps to spawn more PVP fights in FW a simple change in rewards is in order. Make it far more profitable and rewarding to blow up hostile ships than just getting something tasty on the killboards. This very simple change of adding a larger isk reward to blowing hostiles up would encourage players to actually fight each other.
PROs -gets people to focus more on PVP, since its an income source. -Money gets people modivated to organize. -More fights = better! -Encourages people to join milita's to make PVP a job!
CONs -'noob farming' may become more legitimized
What If I had my alts join the opposing militia, buy a bunch of t1 ships, insured them and then I blew them up? This will always be a sort of cap to the pvp rewards, and this means the rewards will never be all that great. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Thgil Goldcore
PIE Inc.
123
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 21:05:00 -
[32] - Quote
Scaling rewards can always work nicely... IE scale the rewards with the effectivness of the person you killed, IE they are worth more pending on their kill/loss rates. An alt who dies alot wouldn't be worth jack ****, a person with 2000 kills on their belt would be.
But you are right, there is still room for exploitation. Still, some rewards > none |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 21:23:00 -
[33] - Quote
Thgil Goldcore wrote:Scaling rewards can always work nicely... IE scale the rewards with the effectivness of the person you killed, IE they are worth more pending on their kill/loss rates. An alt who dies alot wouldn't be worth jack ****, a person with 2000 kills on their belt would be.
But you are right, there is still room for exploitation. Still, some rewards > none
I agree with this. Plus the original lp rewards for pvp kills happened before the insurance nerf. So there probably is some room to up the lp rewards. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
85
|
Posted - 2011.10.08 11:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
WOW!! Great responses guys, I love all the good discussion. The more good ideas get worked out here, the easier job the developers have sorting out the best fixes to do in the limited time before winter expansion. I'll get back to some specific ideas here once I get a chance to read them all, but thanks everyone for the good turn out so far..... This thread was a bit slow to start but I look away for 24 hours and now there's more posts than I can read in one sitting :) Keep it up!
|
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.08 16:41:00 -
[35] - Quote
3rd attempt at posting today..... :|
Alliances in FW
As a member of an RP-PVP alliance, being locked out of the games incarnation of the 'RP conflict' kinda sucks. This severely hurt the existing RP scene when FW launched as it negatively impacted many of the games existing RP entities. CCP's view was that we could just disband our alliances and share a chat channel because its 'basically the same thing'. I disagreed then, I disagree now.
A long time ago I proposed a system where faction standings could be used to allow alliances into FW but still pose a bar against larger entities walking in to steam roll or just plain grief the whole thing. If an average of all member pilots/corps faction standings were taken and a suitable threshold set then it be used to filter out the motivated alliances from idle griefers. It also scales up, the larger your alliance is then the harder it will be to achieve and keep that threshold. As new corps join an alliance they will need to have compatible standings else the alliance loses its FW status. I think such a system would restrict access to alliances focused on FW, RP-motivated alliances and effectively exclude larger groups entirely.
I think that alliances are good for forming social structures and identity, that has value. It is why we did not disband the Ushra'Khan 4 years back. We valued the history and social bonds too much.
Finally, I think that FW could provide a good breeding ground for alliances to emerge from that can mature before stepping out into null sec on their own. Battle hardened, close knit young alliances stepping out to carve their names into nul sec? Sounds like part of the shake up null sec needs tbh.
Make Occupancy Matter
Who is winning the war should matter. The fact it doesn't has always annoyed me and de-motivates anyone from going after the plexes or whatever system might be developed to replace them. EVE is a game about consequences, cause and effect. FW has none.
I would like to see occupancy of systems have repercussions, such as docking restrictions or access to station services being revoked. Or the sentry guns thing. But more than that, I want to see the outcomes of FW have an impact beyond FW. Faction standings should mean more in this game than which agents will give you a job. If my Amarr standings suck and I go wandering through the war zone, I should not be welcomed into their stations. Therefore, it should be in my interest to support the Minmatar to take that system if I want to use it for my own ends. Null sec alliances should not have free reign, and the militias should be a ;part of the wider world than just a limited section of low sec.
FW expansion
I think that consideration should be given to expanding the war zones throughout low sec. Particularly if it does become more popular.
Incursion-style Mechanics
This is likely too much content for the winter expansion, but I'd like to see the Incursion mechanics leveraged to create more dynamic FW content. The empires could launch offensives spawning special encounter sites intended to provoke more focused fights. To keep it in keeping with the backstory of the Militia Act, these might be faction navy 'NPC capsuleers' or groups such as the Minmatar Elders or Caldari Dragonaurs (Tibus Heth's lot) instigating the attacks outside of the empire governments. These randomly occurring 'offensives' might include encounter sites for both sides allowing for an influence tug of war to resolve system occupancy.
Transparency & Stats
There is a website hosted by the ISD (volunteers) that tracks FW stats. It monitors system captures and corp kill/victory points. This is stuff that should be presented in game and on EVEgate. The status of contested systems is currently shown as blobs on the starmap. None of this is currently very clear, accessible or engaging. An overhaul of how FW information is presented would improve the connection players feel to the war effort I think. http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
140
|
Posted - 2011.10.08 17:07:00 -
[36] - Quote
Ugleb wrote: Make Occupancy Matter
Who is winning the war should matter. The fact it doesn't has always annoyed me and de-motivates anyone from going after the plexes or whatever system might be developed to replace them. EVE is a game about consequences, cause and effect. FW has none.
I would like to see occupancy of systems have repercussions, such as docking restrictions or access to station services being revoked. Or the sentry guns thing. But more than that, I want to see the outcomes of FW have an impact beyond FW. Faction standings should mean more in this game than which agents will give you a job. If my Amarr standings suck and I go wandering through the war zone, I should not be welcomed into their stations. Therefore, it should be in my interest to support the Minmatar to take that system if I want to use it for my own ends. Null sec alliances should not have free reign, and the militias should be a ;part of the wider world than just a limited section of low sec.
FW expansion
I think that consideration should be given to expanding the war zones throughout low sec. Particularly if it does become more popular.
Incursion-style Mechanics
This is likely too much content for the winter expansion, but I'd like to see the Incursion mechanics leveraged to create more dynamic FW content. The empires could launch offensives spawning special encounter sites intended to provoke more focused fights. To keep it in keeping with the backstory of the Militia Act, these might be faction navy 'NPC capsuleers' or groups such as the Minmatar Elders or Caldari Dragonaurs (Tibus Heth's lot) instigating the attacks outside of the empire governments. These randomly occurring 'offensives' might include encounter sites for both sides allowing for an influence tug of war to resolve system occupancy.
This is something I completly agree with.
Herping yourDerp wrote:FW should be a never ending conuest match of battlefield in space.
No pve at all.. no plexes no missions, enemies can drop tags ( max 5 tags per day) dependong on how many enemies they have killing in the last week the better the tag. so the more u kill, the more valuable your death will be worth, ye sthis can be abused, try to base it off ship hulls too.
my ideas + less yartarrds killing FW memebers + trade wil become more viable in lowsec, +more PVP between the factions + more people in lowsec = pirates can see more targets +conquest in space = win
-pirate tears ( maybe) - FW players who farm plexes all day will Q_Q
This also.
In fact I think I posted these ideas, like other did at least 5 times before. I am sure other talked about this before me as well it is nice to see everyone can see this as a possible solution.
I like to restate that players should be the one planning assaults in group and the empires shoud respond by supporting the players. Offcoursre special events etc can/could/should be organised and triggered when things go to the other way around.
I also like an idea that was floated around where you can see on the FW starmap who is attack which systems (miltia wise not corp wise) to have an idea of the enemy and to make up your mind about their plans. Some kind of larger tactics and planning could be read into that and combined with occupancy based benefits we should have something of a functioning front line and a real war going with the support of the empires.
- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.09 13:07:00 -
[37] - Quote
Faction standing to allow alliances in to fw:
I'm not sure this would be any sort of significant barrier. At least not unless they make changes to how easy it is to get faction standings. Its really pretty easy to boost your standings in a faction. You could just tell pilots that want to join your alliance they have to join the npc militia corp (or some other militia corp and run some plexes.) Most times you can then boost your faction standing in a week or so.
Incursion style mechanics:
I think using existing mechanics is really self limitting on what FW can become. We already have incursions in low sec. Therefor to the extent that mechanic is going to draw people into eve - its already happening.
If they just repackage that gameplay mechanic and call it fw they are not going to make fw something that draws new people in to eve.
I think they should try to make fw something that will increase the number of subscribers by 100k. Repackaging existing gameplay mechanics will not do that.
I think if they want to really draw people into eve they need to make a mechanic that showcases frequent small scale pvp. Thats the thing that eve currently does not have. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.09 15:39:00 -
[38] - 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. |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.09 19:30:00 -
[39] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Faction standing to allow alliances in to fw:
I'm not sure this would be any sort of significant barrier. At least not unless they make changes to how easy it is to get faction standings. Its really pretty easy to boost your standings in a faction. You could just tell pilots that want to join your alliance they have to join the npc militia corp (or some other militia corp and run some plexes.) Most times you can then boost your faction standing in a week or so.
Dunno about you, but I can't see alliances persuading hundreds of people to all go standing grind for weeks on multiple characters. Telling every recruit to go grind standings up then come back is a good way to lose yourself recruits too.
If the minimum standings requirement is set high enough then it will become a non-trivial barrier for any larger entity to achieve. And what do they gain from all the effort at the end of the day anyway? Does it help them conquer Delve? http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.09 20:10:00 -
[40] - Quote
I think the people going "OMG LET ALLIANCES IN AND ALL PVP WILL DIE IN FW QQ" are getting this out of perspective. Allowing alliances to join FW (RP alliances, up and coming small alliances) would benefit from this, because obviously CCP should implement if an alliance should fight under the flag of an empire then they cannot hold sov.
If people are so concerned with nullsec entities tieing you up and giving you a steamer on your chest, guess what, you're in FW its already happened, and will happen to you on several occasions. Nothing stops PL from camping tama or hotdropping anything in sight. Nothing stops a bored rooks and kings T3 gang from bridging into the middle of your fight. Get over it, because it's going to happen whether they're in faction war or not. |
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.09 20:55:00 -
[41] - 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 ..
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 17:01:00 -
[42] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:- 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. .
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.
The militia should be available to solo pvpers. Solo pvpers are often solo because they canGÇÖt commit to blocks of time to be available in a fleet. This also means that these same pvpers will not work out well for null sec. EVE is loses/never had this playerbase and I would be willing to bet itGÇÖs a huge hit to their subscription base.
Moreover due to concerns over spies some fcs want you to get some solo kills before you can join their fleets.
As far as mini games with hacking IGÇÖm not really sure what that would be. But, why not have the ship versus ship pvp combat be the minigame!? Small scale pvp is one thing CCP did extraordinarily well. Small scale pvp is engaging challenging requires strategy tactics and thinking on your feet. Yet CCP for some reason never yet properly implemented a mechanic to bring this about. Why not have fw plexing be that mechanic?
Since the plexes are ship size restricted I really donGÇÖt see too much of an issue with large groups joining fw. ItGÇÖs not like most blobs will send their tackle into a minor plex. Fleet tackle typically arenGÇÖt set up well for small scale pvp. I can sit in very crowded systems alone in a plex for hours sometimes. I often think they are like safe spots. Hell I think eve would be a better place if there were 30 frigates barging into a minor plex on me GÇô even if I wouldnGÇÖt stay to fight 30 v 1.
Really as long as there are enough plexes spawning throughout all 8 regions of fw then its very unlikely anyone will be able to blob their way to a win. If I am wrong and huge numbers start showing up in faction war, ccp could open up the pirate factions and set up their alliances such that they could help even things out. That problem is allot better than always going into a plex and sitting there for hours with no one else but the npcs.
Hirana Yoshida wrote: - 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". ,,,,.
At least for amarr this is an exaggeration. Many people who complain about missions are those who already farmed them like crazy have tons of isk and donGÇÖt want to run them anymore. But they donGÇÖt want other people to get the isk they got. I donGÇÖt think it applies to you but itGÇÖs just an observation I have made.
FW missions arenGÇÖt all that great and I think they are fairly competitive with other sources of income.
Yes all the factions should be evened out and the rats should all have painters so they canGÇÖt be soloed in a sb. I think the amarr missions are pretty balanced.
The problem is not that fw pays so well the problem is that it pays decent but there are very few opportunities to blow up that isk in a fun way. ThatGÇÖs why everyone is flying these crazy expensive ships. If we had constant quality small scale pvp in plexes instead of just ganks on gates people would actually be using that isk to replace lost ships.
But whatever I think CCP actually designed a nice mission mechanic for low sec, when they did the fw missions. But if everyone apparently hates them I guess they can change them. The amount of lp you get after the agent changes is pretty crazy.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
87
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 19:13:00 -
[43] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
Yeah, there's gotta be some solution to balancing this out. I agree with those in this thread that have brought up the issue of holding nullsec space vs farming FW missions. My motivation in bringing up Alliance participation in the discussion stems from alliances like CVA and UK that logically should have a role to play in the Faction Wars, but I agree that double dipping in lucrative sources of income isn't balanced or fair. I think forcing Alliances to choose between fighting for a faction, or holding space of their own, is a fair assumption. What would really reinforce this is the ability for say, the Amarr militia to push Amarr space into providence or similar. I think alliances that want the fun of fighting for a faction should be able to do so, as long as they can really push some territory boundaries around. As for the blob issue, I think thats been covered. Nullsec blobs come hit us anyways, fix the plexing /mission mechanics and you can lock out most of them from interfering with the small gang atmosphere.
The Faction Warfare missions, in my opinion, should remain lucrative. I dont have a problem with faction war pilots flying shiny stuff, in my opinion its only fitting that the militias be flying fleet issue ships, one of the great by-products of the recent agent changes.
The missions should remain lucrative (or else no one will run them), but I also agree with Cearain that the challenge needs to be stepped up. The AI is pitiful, and with all the other AI changes in the game, there seems to be some simple tweaking to the mission system to encourage GROUP tackling of missions, not solo work.
Full disclaimer - I am a total stealth bomber mission *****. Thats right, I said it. I'm not really giving anything away, the amarr know me and have blown up dozens of my bombers during moments of distraction or complacency. Now, I am not the richest player in eve, I blow up most of the isk I make this way in PvP combat, so I don't see the income level as imbalanced. FW entry requirements should discourage non-pvp farmers, not simply nerfing the missions. We militia pilots NEED this income to support our fleet ships, if we aren't going to have nullsec resources readily available to us.
My reason for pointing out the bomber issue is that my reasons for running them in a bomber are solely because of the isk ratio. I can simply push more isk/hour out of running them in a bomber, than by running them in a group. My corp buddies have had success using missions to bait PvP engagements, by running them in cruiser gangs. They don't make quite as much isk. but they get a lot more fights (and more meaningful fights) this way. In my opinion, the best way out is to make the missions REQUIRE a small gang to obtain the most isk/hour from them. Make the rewards payout encourage gang work, and you'll restore Faction Warfare missions back to their original status.
There you have it - a mission bomber saying "go ahead, take away my ability to bomb all the missions". Just make us able to earn the same income / hour with a gang, and we'll be good.
Great discussion overall guys, keep it up!
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:05:00 -
[44] - Quote
Hans I do the same thing as you. I do use the missions for isk. I can't do them solo in an sb I have to use a speed tanker and sb or a bc. But I yeah I spend the isk to make sure I have pvp ships ready and waiting.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: The missions should remain lucrative (or else no one will run them), but I also agree with Cearain that the challenge needs to be stepped up. The AI is pitiful, and with all the other AI changes in the game, there seems to be some simple tweaking to the mission system to encourage GROUP tackling of missions, not solo work. ..
Why all the animosity toward solo players?
Faction war is a good fit for people who don't have the time to spend developing personal relationships in game and/or dealing with the null sec politics.
Are you just trying to drive solo players out of fw or out of eve as a whole?
I really don't understand. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
87
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 20:12:00 -
[45] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Hans I do the same thing as you. I do use the missions for isk. I can't do them solo in an sb I have to use a speed tanker and sb or a bc. But I yeah I spend the isk to make sure I have pvp ships ready and waiting. Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: The missions should remain lucrative (or else no one will run them), but I also agree with Cearain that the challenge needs to be stepped up. The AI is pitiful, and with all the other AI changes in the game, there seems to be some simple tweaking to the mission system to encourage GROUP tackling of missions, not solo work. ..
Why all the animosity toward solo players? Faction war is a good fit for people who don't have the time to spend developing personal relationships in game and/or dealing with the null sec politics. Are you just trying to drive solo players out of fw or out of eve as a whole? I really don't understand.
No animosity at all. I enjoy solo missions sometimes, its a nice leisurely break for times that I'm feeling anti-social. I'm just saying that for the betterment of faction warfare in general, I think more engagements would be had in and around the missioning (which is how they were designed - with them being picked up and completed in lowsec, with plenty of distance in between) if the missions encouraged group play. Some simply AI tweaks could fix that. Maybe not to the point of making solo missioning impossible, but maybe a little less efficient than if you grabbed your buddies to help.
As it stands, if you want to make money in FW missions its mainly a solo endeavor. I'm just saying lets make it a win-win by making missions lucrative AND social.
|
Zverofaust
Ascetic Virtues
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 22:30:00 -
[46] - Quote
Alliances in FW are stupid. Not needed, will not fix nor change anything.
There's only one change needed and that is in reward. Reward for PVPing, reward for PVEing/plexing/sov.
First, LP reward for PVP needs to go up. A LOT. I should be able to make a decent living killing people, dependent perhaps on militia rank. Consider the PVP-oriented FW person a "mercenary" of sorts, a hired professional soldier. We need to make money some way, right? I should be able to sustain quite a bit of income from being a good PVPer (if I were).
Second, militia as a whole needs incentive to plex and capture systems. The first step would be to replace the Bunker with an actual Fortress-style station that can only be docked in by the owner of said station. Turning a system would involve sieging the station rather than some boring, static bunker. Give incredible deals for manufacturing and research and **** for members of the owning militia to promote industrialist members to use them as production and market bases. Give them station guns that will attack enemy militias and pirates. Essentially turn them into the lowsec equivalent of nullsec outposts (with guns). A safe-haven for members of each militia to live, base out of, form fleets and whatever.
Third, hire and/or assign a GM to oversee FW. Call him a "WarMaster" whatever I don't care. But task him with managing inter-militia crap since we can't, like investigating and booting spies and harassing wardecs and whatnot. His entire job would be to oversee FW, sit in all the Militia channels, and be a ******* GM.
Fourth, provide a way to more easily fix or at least neutralize standings gains/losses wrought via FW. For example I know people who left FW a year ago and still can't get into 1/2 of empire space because their standings are so ****** beyond repair. The aspect of a few months of fun ruining half the rest of the game for you forever isn't appealing at all. Provide a way for people leaving FW to get a "pardon", resetting their empire standings to 0.0 (whether positive or neutral before), and put a limit on this like a 6 month cooldown timer before being allowed to join another militia or militia corp. Also a requirement of having been in said militia for some number of months to get this "pardon" in the first place (otherwise people would just use it every once in awhile by hopping into militia for 24 hours then leaving). At the same time increase the rate at which killing your faction's enemies increases your own standings. I used to be in Minmatar militia before I joined Amarr, and that was almost 2 years ago -- to this day I still have negative Amarr Empire standings (-3 IIRC) even though my 24th IC standings are +10. I had to grind up a bunch of ****** Amarr Navy corp missions just to get my standings up to something acceptable to do the Angel arc. This is ****, I've literally killed and lost billions upon billions of ISk worth of **** for the Amarr Empire and they still pretty much hate me? Yeah no thanks.
|
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:18:00 -
[47] - Quote
Nicely laid out post, Hans (The OP).
Some points: - Supercaps out of losec: I think this is a unnecessary, for the simple reason that supercaps in losec are a sign of stagnation in nullsec. When nullsec is improved, the Supers and Titans, aka PL, will have something to do again and will probably leave of their own accord. - Plexes: The best quickfix to plexes possible within the time CCP has, is to simply change plex spawn times. Longterm, they need to be redone to make them more balanced, but that won't happen by christmas. - Make sov mean something: Empire faction station guns firing on enemies when the system is occupied is an interesting idea, but I think that the Incursion style of idea, i.e. having *credible* enemy faction NPCs spawn on gates and stations when the system is occupied by the enemy militia is possibly better. - The idea of increase LP payout to the occupying faction when a system is occupied is too easy to abuse (make an enemy FW alt, make free iskies by continuously popping your own insured cheap alts). A better idea is to increase insurance payouts to occupying faction losses, i.e. they get isk for losses, but not 100%. - Allowing alliances into militia: why not. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 23:21:00 -
[48] - Quote
Zverofaust wrote:... Fourth, provide a way to more easily fix or at least neutralize standings gains/losses wrought via FW. For example I know people who left FW a year ago and still can't get into 1/2 of empire space because their standings are so ****** beyond repair. The aspect of a few months of fun ruining half the rest of the game for you forever isn't appealing at all. Provide a way for people leaving FW to get a "pardon", resetting their empire standings to 0.0 (whether positive or neutral before), and put a limit on this like a 6 month cooldown timer before being allowed to join another militia or militia corp. Also a requirement of having been in said militia for some number of months to get this "pardon" in the first place (otherwise people would just use it every once in awhile by hopping into militia for 24 hours then leaving). At the same time increase the rate at which killing your faction's enemies increases your own standings. I used to be in Minmatar militia before I joined Amarr, and that was almost 2 years ago -- to this day I still have negative Amarr Empire standings (-3 IIRC) even though my 24th IC standings are +10. I had to grind up a bunch of ****** Amarr Navy corp missions just to get my standings up to something acceptable to do the Angel arc. This is ****, I've literally killed and lost billions upon billions of ISk worth of **** for the Amarr Empire and they still pretty much hate me? Yeah no thanks.
I like this. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
50
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 06:28:00 -
[49] - 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.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
97
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 07:44:00 -
[50] - Quote
Zverofaust wrote:
Third, hire and/or assign a GM to oversee FW. Call him a "WarMaster" whatever I don't care. But task him with managing inter-militia crap since we can't, like investigating and booting spies and harassing wardecs and whatnot. His entire job would be to oversee FW, sit in all the Militia channels, and be a ******* GM.
Fourth, provide a way to more easily fix or at least neutralize standings gains/losses wrought via FW. For example I know people who left FW a year ago and still can't get into 1/2 of empire space because their standings are so ****** beyond repair. The aspect of a few months of fun ruining half the rest of the game for you forever isn't appealing at all. Provide a way for people leaving FW to get a "pardon", resetting their empire standings to 0.0 (whether positive or neutral before), and put a limit on this like a 6 month cooldown timer before being allowed to join another militia or militia corp. Also a requirement of having been in said militia for some number of months to get this "pardon" in the first place (otherwise people would just use it every once in awhile by hopping into militia for 24 hours then leaving). At the same time increase the rate at which killing your faction's enemies increases your own standings. I used to be in Minmatar militia before I joined Amarr, and that was almost 2 years ago -- to this day I still have negative Amarr Empire standings (-3 IIRC) even though my 24th IC standings are +10. I had to grind up a bunch of ****** Amarr Navy corp missions just to get my standings up to something acceptable to do the Angel arc. This is ****, I've literally killed and lost billions upon billions of ISk worth of **** for the Amarr Empire and they still pretty much hate me? Yeah no thanks.
As for the warmaster - I dont see any reason to involve CCP. Having a game master mediate in Faction Warfare politics would be seen by most players in the game as meddling in its most extreme fashion - look at the controversy over the few times a CCP employee has used their position to influence in-game activity. Also, I think its a bit of an insult to the players themselves. I think there are certainly candidates within all the militias who have the leadership to take charge of the racial militia itself. Not all Faction Warfare pilots are bloodthirsty asshats, just the majority of them :) I think if we need a war leader, give us war leader mechanics. Admittedly, I don't know how Aliiances vote their leaders, but I'm sure there's an Alliance director with privileges akin to a corp CEO.
I think some simple but limited mechanics that could be used to allow players on all sides to vote in (and out!) an elected war master, which may even symbolically inspire more cooperation between militia corporations. I can only speak for the Minmatar, but we play out sadly too much like our lore stereotype - a bunch of bickering tribes with our own competitive drive, forfeiting greater accomplishment in favor of counting kills. But hell, counting kills is all we have now until CCP tweaks the mechanics to offer players something else to aim for. And at least we have good fun with our ongoing rivalry against each other for glory and trophy kills.
In general, I think the militia could be offered some Alliance-like structures in terms of organizations, including legitimizing elements like allowing them as a competitor in Alliance Tournaments (without having to forsake our corporations to do so) . The dividing factor, of course, being that Factions would not be able to hold or access nullsec sov (this has been more or less been unofficially agreed upon), but could still operate within their slice of lowsec space AS an alliance, in a general sense. Seperate but equal? But I can see how some might see this as unneccesary complication.
As to your statements on standings, Zvero, you are absolutely spot on. Standings mean a LOT to players - they are both a symbol of your activity, who you stand for, and they have profound gameplay implications. This is very very important for CCP developers to understand - standings are sacred to us as pilots. They are our egos, our ids, they define us, where we go, what we can do, and what we actually do.
Currently, enlisting and engaging in Faction Warfare permanently tanks one standings. Many of us have branded ourselves with one faction, and are willing to deal with the life-long consequences of that. But this is not something to be handed out lightly, there should be opportunity for players to join, experiment, and leave, without a permanent scar. Without an easy standings repair option, this is simply a huge barrier to players, and even new players could be potentially deterred if they are told "there is no going back"....many may put off FW till they figure the game out first - instead of using Faction Warfare as a friendly training ground for young PvP enthusiasts. |
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 13:48:00 -
[51] - Quote
It seems we can agree on very little that is concrete.
We all claim to want plexing to involve quality small scale pvp. Not blobs or supercaps.
But we disagree on how to do that. Some say remove the npcs others say increase them and make them more powerful with the incursion AI. Some say lets make people use hacking skills. Others don't see why they would do that.
We all agree that post downtime shouldn't be the key time the occupancy war.
We all seem to want occupancy to have some effect but disagree on what effect.
We seem to disagree on alliances.
In the end I think the best we can hope for is to tell ccp - we want plexing to involve quality small scale pvp, we want it throughout the day not just at certain times and we want occupancy to mean "something." Make it happen.
I don't think this is anything they haven't hearing since 2008.
We seem to want to avoid having faction standings killed forever too. I guess I would agree with this but, then again if you were just in a war against a group of people I can see why it would take some time to gain their trust.
Zero: Doesn't running plexes for amarr boost your standings with them pretty fast?
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Uppsy Daisy
Deteis Industries
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 16:31:00 -
[52] - Quote
Bengal Bob wrote:Distribute plex spawns throughout the day. Have the same NPC spawn for every factions plexes - easy fix and balances them out remove ECM from NPC, this is just silly. Increase the number of different levels of plexes. Faction ships are overpowered against T1 ships, and the newer players no longer plex as they are insta popped by older players in Drams, Daredevils, Cynabals, Vigilants that also have a neutral booster in system.
eg: T1 Frigate Minor plex Minor plex as existing T1 Cruiser Plex Medium as existing T1 Major plex Major as existing
Make it a requirement that no NPC are on grid for the plex counter to continue, this will stop speed tankers.
I like the station gun idea, hopefully this will not include gate guns, although I suspect it might be hard to reprogram them as different guns. I wouldn't go for any further advantages, as this will only lead to people blobbing up. It still needs to be viable for solo pilots to go out and roam happily.
Cut the LP for missions, they pay out way too much and most militia members are now there for the missions only. Increase LP for kills.
Fix faction standing loss, so Logi alts can also be in the militia without having to worry about standings
Do I need to say supercaps?
Add some militia bling to the LOL shop for the RP guys - maybe they can plex for Aurum?
Look at the distribution of space, the choke points between systems and access to high sec. Change as necessary to encourage free flowing movement.
The poor Amarr are bottled up in just a few systems bordering high sec and can't leave without a huge blob. Add some gates so they can experience low sec.
The Minmatar have to deal with whoever the campers of the week are in Amamake. Sadly, the use of neutral alts in all surrounding systems, means the gate campers run as soon as a fleet moves towards them - leaving them uncounterable. Add more high sec gates so our noobs don't get popped. Couple in Auga, couple in Dal, couple in Arzad will almost match the Amarr access to high sec.
Whatever you decide to do, ask for feedback afterwards, and then continue to make improvements - not after another 18 months please. You can expect a flood of people coming back to see if FW is fun again, don't fail to keep it moving forward again.
Also, fix FW and I will redo my portrait so you don't have to keep looking at my shaven testicle.
I have to just go back and quote this. Some SIMPLE changes that would make FW so much better.
Great post from a FW vet!
|
Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 08:14:00 -
[53] - Quote
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but...
PIRATE Faction Ships should count as TECH TWO, not TECH ONE, in regards to the Combat Plex Acceleration Gate Restrictions.
This is a serious damper for newer players as they really have no chance of competing with a Cynabal/Dramiel/Daredevil/Vigilant/Etc in these kinds of plexes when they are limited to tech one ships.
I feel this would significantly improve the quality of small scale plex fights without overhauling the entire plexing mechanic (which is a whole different issue that also needs to be looked at).
I can't imagine this being a long and costly fix to develop, either. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 08:35:00 -
[54] - Quote
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. |
|
DeBingJos
T.R.I.A.D
110
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 08:50:00 -
[55] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys 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'm not in favor of such a change. Currently Highsec is relativly safe when you are in fw. Removing faction police would also remove a safe haven that new fw pilots need when they don't want to pvp or need to replace some losses.
Fix FW ! |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 08:51:00 -
[56] - Quote
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 would be 100 percent FOR moving FW into ALL sec of space. Right now it is far too easy to fly the banner of your militia and actually not participate. Making the battle be over any sec system would make things huge REALLY quickly. (Tho obviously you need to keep the front line concept otherwise everyone will just make staight for jita battles and Tidi jita.)
In my opinion the basic militia corp needs to be removed. It needs to be an alliance for players to join only due to the HUGE number of spies. The noobs are just automatically going for the base corp and after being ignored just move on instead of actually getting to experience FW. Make it bring up the corp finder for those involved in that faction.
|
DeBingJos
T.R.I.A.D
110
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 08:54:00 -
[57] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I would be 100 percent FOR moving FW into ALL sec of space. Right now it is far too easy to fly the banner of your militia and actually not participate. Making the battle be over any sec system would make things huge REALLY quickly. (Tho obviously you need to keep the front line concept otherwise everyone will just make staight for jita battles and Tidi jita.) No, I don't want this.(See my post a few replies up.
In my opinion the basic militia corp needs to be removed. It needs to be an alliance for players to join only due to the HUGE number of spies. The noobs are just automatically going for the base corp and after being ignored just move on instead of actually getting to experience FW. Make it bring up the corp finder for those involved in that faction. Yes, this is a great idea!
Fix FW ! |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
118
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:05:00 -
[58] - Quote
Well I quit due to FW changes so I feel the need to jump in here.
1: Real reasons to take over systems. Think the eve online board game. Where having more systems gives you some kinda of tactial advantage. Wether that be a... LP reward per day to active players, based on number of systems controlled. Only letting the owners of each system dock in said systems space stations. FW players get 0.0 levels of PI income if all systems connected to the said system are under that factions control. Would make taking out PI structures a small gang objective. Behind enemy lines. fog of war within 1 system lifted for real time battlefield recon on war targets, and fleet sizes. free repairs every 1 hour in controlled systems. Again, like the eve online board game, you must control all surrounding systems to gain bonuses.
2.Don't remove NPCs from high sec, make them killable with a sizable fleet. a fleet of say 10 cruisers can go in, and take out the local faction police, and it stays that way for a bit. maybe... 20 minutes. Gives the defenders a bonus as they can come to local faction police's assistance. In general Fw should be about PvP WITH npcs on your side. Wether that be NPC ships, or NPC stations. They should be rewarding our efforts.
3. Events where NPCs can be found fighting each other. This would be fun becuase you would just wrap to a gate to find a minmatar cargo runner with escort under attack by ammar raiders. You can join in and defend the cargo vessal while it slowly tried to burn to the gate, or you can help shoot it down. No site to pop, no mission to activate. Just real time events in space, that you can skip on by, or take part in.
Obviously you would be triggering the event to create by warping to the gate. But by making it random, and based on current FW sov, it would make the war feel alive!
4.Real time tactical map. There should be a map, with built in fleet finder, that shows all enemy ships in or around your systems, and fleet size. And what they are doing. a fog of war you could say. Being able to see and defend your area will give reasons to fight over territory.
5.Only border systems should be contestable. Bring the fight to the front lines. It should be 5 times easier to contest a system that is surrounded by both sides. And harder to contest systems that are deep within either sides space. You just have to add more gates so there is no super choke point. By bring the pvp into focus in 8-12 systems, People would be able to find a good large scale fight if they wanted one. again don't get rid of the size requirments for the FW sites. Let people form up frigates fleets, and give them frigate only sites to PvP in. which we allready have now, but by having less of them you might get people to fight each other.
6.Behind enemy lines objectives Or with all this front line action, gives players a reason to dive deep into enemy space. Make PI targets juicy no reinforcement timers, there should be a downside to getting 0.0 income in low sec Instead of destroying a PI structure you would just shut it down for 24-48 hours maybe?. Especially with the "real time" recon map.
Other targets could be included in each system. Like radar sites, that if taken out, disrupt the real time recon map. creating systems that go back to needed scouts to see whats going on. This would let small fleets wreck havoc on enemy intell without having to get a fleet of 50 people.
Also include other structures in fully controlled systems. The idea being the faction your fighting for is building them as you secure territory. I mean the factions should be doing something to reward our hard work, and also kinda just doing what they wanted in the 1st place. Make the player feel like they are really fighting for something. Right now you taker over a bunch of systems, and your faction doesn't really seem to give a ****. They don't expand, or build new bases. they just don't care. I'm not saying take away control from the players, I'm saying focus on the idea that if you leave FW to go play in 0.0, one advantage is you get to upgrade your own systems, while FW is a 0.0 lite, pvp training ground.
I'm not saying all my idea are great, or feasible. but I feel, in general something to this extreme is what is needed, while working inside the current system we have.
If you read this, i just want to say thank you.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
118
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:07:00 -
[59] - Quote
more room.
also by giving both sides huge advantages to intell, i feel spies won't be as bad... but I could be wrong. :P
If anything have new players start in a fw corp. Just force pvp into people lives outside of 0.8 or lower. OK maybe that's a terrible terrible idea, but I would love that world :P
if you want to be safe, go join a player corp. : )
DeBingJos wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys 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'm not in favor of such a change. Currently Highsec is relativly safe when you are in fw. Removing faction police would also remove a safe haven that new fw pilots need when they don't want to pvp or need to replace some losses.
I feel there just need to be enough positive benefits to being active in FW, that you wouldn't need too much time to replace losses. as long as your being active and fighting for your flag, you should be rewarded.
edit: I remember the answer to this now from 3-4 years ago. The PVP IS the reward. yeah well, look how far that got you ccp. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
118
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:07:00 -
[60] - Quote
ugh double post/ |
|
DeBingJos
T.R.I.A.D
110
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:14:00 -
[61] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:Good stuff
Hey you are back! Welcome back!
Fix FW ! |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:14:00 -
[62] - Quote
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.
There was a suggestion to make the security status of high sec and low sec shiftable. I liked it alot. |
Vadeim Rizen
Wolfsbrigade
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:21:00 -
[63] - Quote
Sorry if it's already been covered, I tried looking through and I didn't see it anywhere.
But for the love of god can we make it so FW mates can rep flashy FW mates without taking faction standing hit!?
I understand the need for GCC, that makes atleast a little bit of since, but losing standing with Amarr for repping Amarr does not. Especially since some GM's just give it back anyways, so I've been told.
|
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:37:00 -
[64] - Quote
Vadeim Rizen wrote:Sorry if it's already been covered, I tried looking through and I didn't see it anywhere.
But for the love of god can we make it so FW mates can rep flashy FW mates without taking faction standing hit!?
I understand the need for GCC, that makes atleast a little bit of since, but losing standing with Amarr for repping Amarr does not. Especially since some GM's just give it back anyways, so I've been told.
Yeah this is ********. Let me look into this. |
|
Goodwill George
For a fistful of Veldspar
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:47:00 -
[65] - Quote
What about using the Incursion mechanics for player incursions? Attackers win, then system loses sec status. System goes below 0.0 then they win the system.
Sec status of gained and held system would slowly increase over time, as long as they're not successfully attacked. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 09:55:00 -
[66] - Quote
Goodwill George wrote:What about using the Incursion mechanics for player incursions? Attackers win, then system loses sec status. System goes below 0.0 then they win the system.
Sec status of gained and held system would slowly increase over time, as long as they're not successfully attacked.
That would be our long term thought. Deadline for the winter patch is coming up though, so I'm trying to grab smaller stuff. |
|
flakeys
The Great cornholio's Paper Tiger Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:02:00 -
[67] - Quote
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.
Not an FW expert , hell never joined it but pirated in the FW area's though.
That said i think this change MIGHT get more people into FW as FW is something wich certainly will appeal to new players IF they can do it in high-sec too.Basically you are talking constant wardec/RvB style here.
I for one would immetialty join FW if this change would be implemented.But as said not an active FW pilot so the needs for the current FW pilots offcourse should stand above others as they have been urging for changes for way too long allready.
|
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:07:00 -
[68] - Quote
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.
There are scores of players that are enlisted in FW but rarely venture into lowsec, and for at least the caldari/gallente section of faction war, new players who are in highsec have been for the most part have been forgotten. This change would be interesting and I support it. |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:08:00 -
[69] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Vadeim Rizen wrote:Sorry if it's already been covered, I tried looking through and I didn't see it anywhere.
But for the love of god can we make it so FW mates can rep flashy FW mates without taking faction standing hit!?
I understand the need for GCC, that makes atleast a little bit of since, but losing standing with Amarr for repping Amarr does not. Especially since some GM's just give it back anyways, so I've been told.
Yeah this is ********. Let me look into this.
If you are going to touch flashies and rep mechanics, can you also look at the GCC? It makes no sense that two flashy gangs can shoot each other with no GCC, but the instant someone activates a remote rep the sentries open up. |
Cailais
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:13:00 -
[70] - Quote
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 was very surprised when this wasn't the case when FW was released and it really constrained and limited the possibility of what FW could be.
Id support this change!
C.
|
|
DeBingJos
T.R.I.A.D
110
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:17:00 -
[71] - Quote
Cailais 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 was very surprised when this wasn't the case when FW was released and it really constrained and limited the possibility of what FW could be. Id support this change! C.
Don't forget that if you remove the faction police FW will become a lot less casual friendly.
Take me for example: I have far too little time to play due to rl issues and work related stuff. I am in FW and when I do find the time to log in I have a nice choice: I can run a relaxed Lv 4 or I can go to lowsec for some unrestricted pewpew. I like to be able to have the choice! If I want to pew fulltime I can just join a nullsec alliance.
imo removing faction police is making FW less attractive to people like me. Now we have a choice, after this change we won't. Fix FW ! |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 10:33:00 -
[72] - Quote
you could do something about the whole 'stealth bombers reaming through level 4s and crashing the market through easily farmed LP' |
Cunane Jeran
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 11:09:00 -
[73] - Quote
First of all I'd love to see the FW LP gain tuned down, to get rid of the mindless stealth bomber farmers. Money is good, and I've made a lot through it, but it just brings so many alts who don't care for it, and just run around in a bomber farming.
Secondly, I'd like to see it not just take place in Lowsec, I think the Caldari Border Zone and Gallente Border Zone in highsec would be a fantastic secondary battleground, and hopefully more newbie friendly as well, instead of throwing them in Lowsec with no clue how to survive the locals. (Of course keeping the missions in lowsec and having a bigger reward for taking part in lowsec)
Another cool idea would be the smaller factions throwing their weight behind one of the empires, in lowsec so instead of knowing "Right in this complex, its going to be same old same old there could be NPC's using different tactics"
For example, Gallente having Syndicate help (yes I know they aren't friendly ><) in lowsec, with long range kitting NPC's instead of just the Gallente NPC's being kited to high hell. Or Mordus for Caldari doing something funky. (Amarr could see Ammatar and Minmatar the Thukkers.)
Just a few ideas me and some of the guys were talking about the other day |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
193
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 11:10:00 -
[74] - Quote
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.
And how exactly would them bad boy mission runners with -10.00 standings to the Amarr Empire would be punished?
(don't look at me) Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum KUGUTSUMEN.
194
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 11:17:00 -
[75] - Quote
Have FW systems "evolve" based off of ownership. The longer you own it the higher the sec status gets, and the stations would slowly shift and will be ran by said faction corporations.
Using the Incursion mechanic except with Factions.
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
193
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 11:19:00 -
[76] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:Have FW systems "evolve" based off of ownership. The longer you own it the higher the sec status gets, and the stations would slowly shift and will be ran by said faction corporations.
Using the Incursion mechanic except with Factions.
What, except with falcons?
Oh.. nvm.. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 11:52:00 -
[77] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:...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.
This would be bad. It removes one of the few ways that the factions actually participate in the war, which would make it even more phoney. Also, some of us enjoy the daring raids into enemy hisec and the necessary planning to do it.
As for suggestions, I've posted previously, but for you convenience summarise them here:
Replace regular missions with missions to capture complexes eg Minmatar Agent: "Our operative has detected an Amarr complex in Oyanata system, go and capture it and return to me" or Amarr Agent: "Our operative has detected an Amarr complex under attack in Oyanata system, go and save it and return to me"
- The same mission could be given to multiple players.
- LP and ISK reward would be the same as for a regular mission of the same level.
This way the militias would actually get pod pilots actually working towards faction warfare's supposed goals, promote PVP and gang activity.
It could either replace or supplement the poor plex spawn mechanic.
Also:
- Require all NPC's to be eliminated to allow capture of complexes
- No docking in enemy occupied systems
- Either keep racial flavour of NPC Ewar but fix the counter, eg ECCM vs ECM, or Equalise NPC Ewar
- More LP for kills
- Bounties for system/plex capture based on standings gain
|
Dr Mercy
EC Riders Mech Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 12:07:00 -
[78] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Goodwill George wrote:What about using the Incursion mechanics for player incursions? Attackers win, then system loses sec status. System goes below 0.0 then they win the system.
Sec status of gained and held system would slowly increase over time, as long as they're not successfully attacked. That would be our long term thought. Deadline for the winter patch is coming up though, so I'm trying to grab smaller stuff.
For me, there are several smaller improvements that would entice me back to FW:
* Removal of NPC's from Plexes. The racial EWARs are not balanced - Caldari jamming is not balanced by Gallente lock range nerfing. * Plex spawn mechanics becoming independent on DT * No more losing Factional standing when repping a -5 or GCC FW mate. * No more losing Factional standing when a FW mate dies in your bubble when roaming nullsec * Occupancy starts to mean something - possible change to FW mission income based on occupancy, either at the global level or system level (nerf or boost) - no docking rights, or substantial docking fee - access to, or cost of, station services. - market tax breaks? * some alert system for plexes being run by the enemy. If they are supposed to encourage and enable PVP, then please give us the intel required to engage the enemy! |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
135
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 12:39:00 -
[79] - Quote
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. |
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
57
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:14:00 -
[80] - Quote
I think it is a darn shame that because super caps need to be able to enter low sec to travel from one location to another without having to spend a day on the process (a reasonable demand), all content and warfare in low sec have to be adjusted to the presence of these ships. Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook-á |
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
330
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:32:00 -
[81] - 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. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:35:00 -
[82] - Quote
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 don't feel strongly either way. But one problem is if one side gets a huge numerical advantage over the other then they can camp their base station all the time. Basing out of high sec is a last ditch way to avoid this problem for the outnumbered side.
Maybe have the navys have a slower reaction but come with more and more force to prevent one side getting camped in. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:38:00 -
[83] - Quote
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. |
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
330
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:44:00 -
[84] - 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. |
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
195
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:46:00 -
[85] - 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.
You are completely forgetting about the ones who messed up their own faction standings below -5.00 without ever getting enlisted in factional warfare. You take out faction NPC's and suddenly faction standings means nothing unless you're enlisted in a militia. Otherwise you can just screw your own standings in faction missions and not have any penalties. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:49:00 -
[86] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote: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.
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. |
|
Aynen
SI Radio Split Infinity.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:58:00 -
[87] - Quote
I was actually thinking about FW changes in a bit of an old west 'landgrab' style. Currently the FW landscape is quite fixed, and the only way it could be much more dynamic and less 1 empire versus 1 other empire would be in new space. What I'd do is add a new bunch of wormhole systems that can be claimed for your faction, allowing for a very dynamic battlefield. These wormhole systems, and the way they connect to eachother would be a bit more map-able than the current wormhole system allowing for more strategic theory crafting to take place. This means that the battlefield, which starts out not owned by anyone, will allow your nabouring system to switch from being an enemy to being a friend to being a different enemy in a matter of days, even if no system changes hands. Also, it being innitially a land grab with no background information about what systems are 'suppost to' belong to which factions, it is far more freeform than the current system. Do not, however, use the current wormhole systems for this idea, as you'd get in the way of allready established gameplay. Things to consider would be (among other things):
-under what circumstance will the overview start working like it does in known space? -under what cirumstances will sleepers appear in a system, if at all? -what gameplay can be generated from occupying and keeping a wh system for your faction? -If you cannot generate missions where you need to travel to a specific wh system due to the changing connections, what mission types would generate pvp action? Placing beacons ,which establish system control, that players can jump to from other wh systems? -Can wh system control be linked to the ability to access the known space market? |
Ynot Eyob
Nisroc Angels The Obsidian Front
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 13:59:00 -
[88] - Quote
Dehlandrae wrote: Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed.
This I would like to see, that would be awesome. We have so many within out alliance asking about FW. Iv told alot i belive they should leave their corp for a week or two just to try it and get the exspirance, which they have.
I miss FW from time to time, but as alliance CEO im kind of stuck, a choice iv made ofcause. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:01:00 -
[89] - 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.
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
331
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:03:00 -
[90] - 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. |
|
Bengal Bob
Royal Order of Security Specialists
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:04:00 -
[91] - Quote
Hmm, low hanging fruit for quick patch?
Plexes:
redistribute the spawning to throughout the day add more plex variations so noobs in T1 ships can actually compete without Dramiel/Vigilant/Cynabal etc reward for plexing - ranking would be good for plexers, but missioners shouldn't be included in that ranking system Change NPC spawns so all of them are equal, and they don't provide too much of an advantage to defenders. Plexes should not be able to be speed tanked - make it so all NPC have to be dead before timer counts down Material reward for plexing - LP or random faction ship bp drops from plex NPC
Missions:
These should not be soloable in a SB etc. Stop cloaking in a mission to ensure that there is some element of danger in a FW mission, or remove the gate so warping in can be done quickly. Make the missions harder - 3 mins to get 25k lp is not exactly balanced.
For gods sake, sort out the map. Activity levels have changed dramatically in FW areas and links between systems and between high and low sec need to change to reflect that. Minnies need access to high sec around their home areas, and Amarr need better access to low sec. Pretty sure the Gall/Caldari have similar problems.
Also, get a move on. We are losing players daily that have lost hope in FW being fixed. |
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:06:00 -
[92] - 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.
The NPC Navies don't enforce, either in their hisec or their complexes, as they don't have warp jammers. They assist the players.
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.
Erm, no. Your proposal would make faction standings more arbitrary. I am part of a lobby that wants to make them more meaningful, not less. In my opinion, Faction standings should work in the same way as alliance standings in nullsec, e.g. locked out of stations and harassed in sovereign space.
NPC navies in faction warfare can blur the distinction between PVE and PVP. Creating interesting and different combat environments. As do complexes. Else it's all going to be Kourmonen/Auga gate camping and station games. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
104
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:11:00 -
[93] - 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.
I do like the idea.
I think it's a step in motivation in the right direction for FW. There should be concerns about the safety of "newer" pilots. I think you should consider keeping the FW NPC's in 1.0 high sec space - although Rens is not 1.0 space, someone will setup a hub in the nearest 1.0 space to the war zone (and the warzone will open up as well) for FW pilots to work safely from regularly.
Doing something along those lines would keep some balance to the safety of the zones and be somewhat sensible.
I am also slightly concerned that this change might broaden the "warzone" too much - but it would stop people from sitting in the militia for the hell of it and never actually partaking IN the war.
So, I think this could be a good move, balanced with concerns over security for the FW noobies and the fact that RENs and Amarr will be camped in 24-7...
You really need to reinvent the sovereignty system - please take a look at my thread in Features board for my personal ideas that has many pages of commentary from people you see here as well!
Features & Ideas - FW Redesign Thread
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
104
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:18:00 -
[94] - 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.
Well, I think security status is the wrong way to go. Many militia pilots fraternize with Pyrates! That should have no bearing on what they can enter and assist them or not in an FW plex.
Electus Matari will assist the Minmatar FW pilots, but their pilots run the gamut from high sec status to pure outlaw. So why should they get shot in an FW plex just because they're outlaw? The NPC Ships aren't Concord anyways.
Meanwhile, on the other hand, neutral pilots that have good sec status can go into an FW plex and engage the FW pilot.
Either way, please - listen to us - change the PLEX and Mission system for FW. Sadly, I don't think there's enough time left to expansion launch to implement this and I'm sure that FW's few minutes in the light for this expansion will get absolutely no actual healthy changes to help NEW PILOTS getting introduced to PVP or EVE - the actual content to make FW quasi-successful requires serious changes to the whole process. I am being cynical here, but FW will simply get a spit polish and shine and then neglected again.
Whatever you do, PLEASE focus on features for NEW PILOTS getting into FW. Many go in, get disenchanted and leave - you lose many potential subscriptions because of FW - I have absolutely no doubts about that. NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |
DeBingJos
T.R.I.A.D
110
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:18:00 -
[95] - Quote
Soundwave, can you explaing WHY you want to get rid of the faction Navies?
This will create a much larger combatzone, but do we really need more space to fight in? I think not. The quality of the fights in the existing space should be improved. Quality above quantity. We need more people in FW not more space to fight in! Fix FW ! |
Bienator II
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:22:00 -
[96] - Quote
regarding the navy/police NPCs.
can you explain the reasinong behind that?
IMO its a bad idea since it makes all space equal. There is no longer any difference between friendly and enemy space. It was a quite cool property to have some advantage in friendly and disadvantage in enemy space... You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Rees Noturana
Red Rock Mining Company
62
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:26:00 -
[97] - Quote
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. Rees Noturana // Professional Treasure Hunter |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
332
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:38:00 -
[98] - 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. |
Rees Noturana
Red Rock Mining Company
62
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:43:00 -
[99] - Quote
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...
Rees Noturana // Professional Treasure Hunter |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
332
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:48:00 -
[100] - 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. |
|
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:50:00 -
[101] - Quote
I am sure they'll add in all the ideas they presented at last year's fan fest :( |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 14:51:00 -
[102] - Quote
Dr Mercy wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Goodwill George wrote:What about using the Incursion mechanics for player incursions? Attackers win, then system loses sec status. System goes below 0.0 then they win the system.
Sec status of gained and held system would slowly increase over time, as long as they're not successfully attacked. That would be our long term thought. Deadline for the winter patch is coming up though, so I'm trying to grab smaller stuff. For me, there are several smaller improvements that would entice me back to FW: * Removal of NPC's from Plexes. The racial EWARs are not balanced - Caldari jamming is not balanced by Gallente lock range nerfing. * Plex spawn mechanics becoming independent on DT * No more losing Factional standing when repping a -5 or GCC FW mate. * No more losing Factional standing when a FW mate dies in your bubble when roaming nullsec * Occupancy starts to mean something - possible change to FW mission income based on occupancy, either at the global level or system level (nerf or boost) - no docking rights, or substantial docking fee - access to, or cost of, station services. - market tax breaks? * some alert system for plexes being run by the enemy. If they are supposed to encourage and enable PVP, then please give us the intel required to engage the enemy!
I think this post offers changes that we are "pretty much" in agreement on and seem to be fairly easy to implement.
I would add that we should see allied militia the same way we see our own militia as another potential easy change. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
284
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 15:04:00 -
[103] - Quote
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.
Oh man, so many great suggestions since I last checked in! Soundwave, great to have you back in the discussion. I'm thrilled to have you involved, and that you share (most of our) sentiments that there are some "easy" fixes (at least for those who don't understand the complexities of programming) that can be tackled in time for Winter, even if there's some equally great ideas that are more expansive in scope and may require more significant development time.
As for this suggestion, its an intriguing one. My only hesitation about this is that it kills the awesomeness when one of our corpmates assasinates WT's in highsec between enemy lines despite the NPC police. :) That aside, removing faction police certain expands the scope of the war, and brings new strategic objectives into the game. Being able to have the Amarr camp Rens, or the Minmatar invade Sarum Prime, could make for some exciting storytelling, and allow the factions to have more economic angles for where and when fleets are deployed.
It could also be a royal pain in the ass, and deter new players as well who enjoy being safe in highsec some of the time, while openly able to dabble in lowsec PvP in a more structured environment, with lots of friendly support. I guess we'll have to see where the feedback falls - this is definitely a double-edged sword though.
Personally, I think its better to focus on improving the elements that deter people from engaging in FW in the first place - we simply HAVE to get the involvement numbers up again. If you take current participation levels into account, and than spread them across highsec, I think you're stretching the active militia too thin. If we fix some standings issues, give players better rewards / objectives and incentives to come play for a faction, and we see a spike in militia enrollment, THAN i think its time to see the warzone expanded.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
284
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 15:15:00 -
[104] - Quote
Vordak Kallager wrote:I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but...
PIRATE Faction Ships should count as TECH TWO, not TECH ONE, in regards to the Combat Plex Acceleration Gate Restrictions.
This is a serious damper for newer players as they really have no chance of competing with a Cynabal/Dramiel/Daredevil/Vigilant/Etc in these kinds of plexes when they are limited to tech one ships.
I feel this would significantly improve the quality of small scale plex fights without overhauling the entire plexing mechanic (which is a whole different issue that also needs to be looked at).
I can't imagine this being a long and costly fix to develop, either.
QFT - Killer suggestion, Vordak.
This is EXCELLENT on multiple levels - first off, it restores fairness to the plexing system and its original design intent - providing makeshift arenas where newer players can engage in PvP without being overwhelmed.
Secondly, it address the OMGNERFTHEDRAMPLZ complaints most players have across the entire game when it comes to ship balancing. Many players are upset that Assault ships, interceptors, are effectively outdated in terms of dogfighting, since certain pirate ships are simply a best choice in the hands of a competent pilot.
Locking dramiels/cynabals out of plexes (even if it means blocking assaults and inty's as well) gives players who aren't even involved in FW an incentive to enlist. I'm absolutely certain there are players interested in PvPing in ships other than the flavor of the month, and even if it means mixed tech 1 gangs, I'm sure this is seen as a more fun (and extremely cost effective) way to get your PvP fix without worrying about "Keeping up with the Joneses".
Players everywhere may come back to FW if there is incentives to actually plex (some sov changes, or greater impact from actually owning a system for your faction) combined with "Dramiel-free zoning" where they can test their skills without relying on a gimmick ship.
|
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 15:25:00 -
[105] - Quote
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. As an outlaw, I endorse this proposal. :3
edit:
Jowen Datloran wrote:I think it is a darn shame that because super caps need to be able to enter low sec to travel from one location to another without having to spend a day on the process (a reasonable demand), all content and warfare in low sec have to be adjusted to the presence of these ships. How exactly would it be bad for the game if it were made harder for supercaps to move from one end of the universe to the other? |
Piar Stolpien
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 15:52:00 -
[106] - Quote
Ok, quick idea from someone who doesn't do FW. (Note to self: Gotta get around to try it someday..) And no, it's (probably) not low-hanging fruit.
Would it be feasible to keep faction navy NPCs, but instead of a constant presence/auto-response type of thing, it could be influenced by players? Meaning; the server keeps track of where the NPC navy fleets are currently located, and the FW players can send in intel reports and requests for backup.
Example: There is an Amarr FW gang headed for minnie highsec system X. While travelling, several players spot them and sends in intel reports to minnie NPC HQ. The number of reports recieved causes NPC HQ to relocate forces to system X. When the Amarr gang tries to gank a lone minnie FW player in system X, he can call for backup, and the NPC forces will be able to respond very quick since they are already in that system. Meanwhile; Another Amarr FW gang manages to slip nearly undetected into minnie highsec system Y, some distance away from system X. When they attack minnie FW players in system Y, they can still call for NPC backup, but since the nearest NPC forces are in system X, it will take a long time for help to arrive. The server would of course have to do some weighting of incoming reports based on number of reports, reported number of enemy forces and rank of the players who sends them. Possibly also take into account how deep into highsec the enemy is.
The point of all this would be to maintain a NPC presence/protection in highsec, while providing the opportunity to make raids and decoy operations, and rewarding hit-and-run type ops in highsec.
As I said, I don't do FW myself, just thought of this just now after reading some of these posts and thought I'd trow it out there. :-) |
mkint
162
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 16:07:00 -
[107] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen 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. Oh man, so many great suggestions since I last checked in! Soundwave, great to have you back in the discussion. I'm thrilled to have you involved, and that you share (most of our) sentiments that there are some "easy" fixes (at least for those who don't understand the complexities of programming) that can be tackled in time for Winter, even if there's some equally great ideas that are more expansive in scope and may require more significant development time. As for this suggestion, its an intriguing one. My only hesitation about this is that it kills the awesomeness when one of our corpmates assasinates WT's in highsec between enemy lines despite the NPC police. :) That aside, removing faction police certain expands the scope of the war, and brings new strategic objectives into the game. Being able to have the Amarr camp Rens, or the Minmatar invade Sarum Prime, could make for some exciting storytelling, and allow the factions to have more economic angles for where and when fleets are deployed. It could also be a royal pain in the ass, and deter new players as well who enjoy being safe in highsec some of the time, while openly able to dabble in lowsec PvP in a more structured environment, with lots of friendly support. I guess we'll have to see where the feedback falls - this is definitely a double-edged sword though. Personally, I think its better to focus on improving the elements that deter people from engaging in FW in the first place - we simply HAVE to get the involvement numbers up again. If you take current participation levels into account, and than spread them across highsec, I think you're stretching the active militia too thin. If we fix some standings issues, give players better rewards / objectives and incentives to come play for a faction, and we see a spike in militia enrollment, THAN i think its time to see the warzone expanded. I'm not a FWer, so take the following with a grain of salt.
The counter argument for removing highsec navies is solid. I'd say the argument FOR removing highsec navies is not entirely solid.
Why bother to camp any highsec trade hubs when they could just :go to jita:? Maybe leaving NPCs in border systems (maybe based on sec status) would help create something of a territorial barrier (along with buffing the NPCs so the difficulty of crossing borders is not changed,) as long as every faction border is plugged.
I'm not sure exactly what the advantages are to removing the faction NPCs except to try to compete with RvB. I don't think FW should be trying to do that. I think FW should be enticing enough on it's own to draw sufficient numbers.
That said, the only reason I have not joined FW up to this point is that I have not wanted to drop my corp. That's a pretty massive deal breaker for me. I've seen the suggestion in this thread to make FW more like a PVP flag instead of needing to join a FW corp. I would definitely take it a step further by making sure people who flag for FW instead of join FW fully don't get the LP discounts FWers get (FWers get 50% discounts yes? As posted in a dev blog a couple years ago? I haven't checked because I never joined myself.) There should be an enticing reason for flagging for FW, but that shouldn't nullify the reason for joining fully. |
Meeogi
Debitum Naturae RED.Legion
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 16:38:00 -
[108] - Quote
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.
YES YES YES YES ...This is a fantastic Idea. I have had some of my best fights in FW .. cruising through 0.0 and seeing an opposing side...... across the universe, from fw zones.
Ney Sayers, to opening it up...are just thinking of their personal farming/ missioning..and not the larger picture. .. and that is indeed part of the problem. Guys farm with zero risk .... ignore FW... then when they have PLENTY of isk to burn ..they jump in.
Having bad guys about.... will get people interested in intel, for self preservation.... and I think epic fights would come from this. Angling off of selfishness and greed is the way to go....best way to get help when being attacked? " I cant blow up chelm..can some one help?
If this is implemented..and I Pray that it will be... You will actually get a use for constilation chat. But the people that can use it will be for the factions space they are in.
So you would have militia chat.... and then a localized constilation intel. channel. Just like we do in null sec. SERIOUSLY COOL and we already have it...but its never used.
|
RougeOperator
Autocannons Anonymous
91
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 16:43:00 -
[109] - Quote
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.
make this happen
Spread the carnage out so more people can get awareness of FW.
And it will make some of the High Sec carebears see that there is more then just running missions to play with in EvE
And it will finally make afk Miners in FW corps have to pay attention to local |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 16:57:00 -
[110] - 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! |
|
mkint
162
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 17:15:00 -
[111] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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! So you're in the "FW should die" crowd. Got it.
I'm in the "FW should thrive" crowd. To get FW to thrive, people need to see reasons to join. To get exposure up, people need to get some form of tasty "samples." Once they've gotten their tasty samples and want the full thing, then they can decide if they want the full thing.
People are already committed to their corps. They aren't going to drop that commitment to commit to fling with some random strangers who, knowing EVE, are probably self-superior douchebags (one of the things I've always heard about FW is that people are always douchebags to their own FW mates if they are not in the same corp.) That is the #1 reason why I have not joined FW, and I guarantee there are hundreds, if not thousands of others who feel the same. Broken mechanics and the general pointlessness of it all might make it hard to stick around or to fully commit, but it's not what stops people from joining. |
Degnar Oskold
Valkyr Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 17:34:00 -
[112] - Quote
The problem with removing NPC navies altogether is that it risks alienating FW players by making the trade hubs they rely on permanently inaccessible.
Another solution could be to have NPC navies triggered by the entry of FW enemy players into a system. A Navy spawn would be trigged between 0 and 10 minutes of entry (randomised so you don't know what to expect), and would then remain in system for 20-60 minutes (randomised again). The speed of a navy spawn appearing and then leaving would be higher depending on the sec status of the system. |
Lugalzagezi666
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 17:45:00 -
[113] - Quote
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.
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 17:54:00 -
[114] - Quote
I very much dislike the idea of removing the Navy from high sec. That is not going to open up faction war, that's just going to cause a lot of station camping in the main market hubs. That is a quick fix we do not need.
Anyhow, we already go to the enemy high sec systems, nano gang anyone? It's much more fun to catch someone unaware in high sec now when they aren't expecting it.
The war zone is big enough, we have tons of systems that's technically a part of our war zone but they see very little action because no one cares to go there. What's the point? You have a handful of hardline plexers but that is it. Make plexing worthwhile and then you'll see use of the war zone that we already have.
How about a super stargate? How about a few of them spread around our war zones that only militias can use, one's that will jump you into our allies systems. We could make more use of allies if we didn't have to fly 25 jumps to get there to help each other out.
Another thing could be some kind of news blurb in the main market hubs local channels about what their militia's have accomplished, ie, Amarr Militia has captured Ezzara, etc.
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.
Also I agree with all of the other recommendations everyone else has posted. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
332
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:00:00 -
[115] - 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 -
[116] - 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. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
119
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:05:00 -
[117] - Quote
If being in FW doesn't feel like the NPCs are current at war, and your in a war zone, then you will have completely missed the point, again,
THIS IS NOT A CAPSULEER WAR.This is a war between fations, that we are taking part in. This is not player verus player. And the sooner you figure out that any good game in the past 6 years that's had this sort of set up worked like this, the better.
Even new games, like SPAZ under stand this. With epic huge space battles happening between factions, and you can join in those battles. Use your skill to help one side or the other. It's fun ccp, something your game desperately needs. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
287
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:12:00 -
[118] - Quote
RougeOperator wrote: make this happen
Spread the carnage out so more people can get awareness of FW.
And it will make some of the High Sec carebears see that there is more then just running missions to play with in EvE
And it will finally make afk Miners in FW corps have to pay attention to local
AFK miners in FW corps should already pay attention to local ;) There are those that are quite proficient in the art of the highsec gank behind enemy lines.....it just takes balls and some know-how but the current NPC's are quite survivable for long enough to get lucrative kills...
...and like I said, that's almost reason for me to say leave it alone, or maybe simply pare the strength back on the NPC's just a tad - enough to deter openly hanging out in enemy highsec, but still gives players the chance to make a bold move into dangerous territory and gank the enemy in the heart of their homeland.
Giving pilots unrestricted freedom to pass through enemy higsec kinda kills the "home turf" feel a bit.
Maybe there's a compromise? Like having enemy highsec stations fire on you, or gate gun fire, but maybe less random police drops so fights can occur in belts, plexes, missions? Or just NPC's on gates, and not the follow-you AI that they do now.
The other huge advantage though, is that there are a lot of mission farmers only registered in FW for the LP. Making higsec more dangerous would discourage people from joining just to run missions - which is a huge detriment to the community. It waters down the market for those who actually PvP as well, and contributes nothing to fleet opportunities if they simply carebear in highsec and lowsec equally but never join in actually fighting the other faction.
Removing the stock NPC corp in favor of more of a pseudo- static alliance is a much better way around this, in my opinion - I think forcing players to join a player corp to do Faction Warfare is a great idea. Players corps are much better about monitoring and filtering farmers and spies - the players who sign up for 24th crusade or TLF usually have a crap experience if they stay there - they are simply treated as riffraff anyways by any militia pilot who has been around longer than a few weeks.
Lots of pros and cons on the unrestricted highsec issue - i'm conflicted myself, so I'm just throwing out what I see as potential consequences, coming from the perspective of a two-year full-time veteran. I welcome the ongoing discussion, and hope Soundwave takes it all in and considers both arguments carefully.
Also, Soundwave - while i have alliances on the brain, any reason that we cant be allowed in the Alliance Tournament next summer?? There is some EXCELLENT small gang pilots ready to show off their talent to the nullsec crowd. I think Factions should be treated as alliance for entry requirements, it really sucks that under the current system everyone has to forsake their corp and everyday gameplay just to form a temporary alliance and register. Its a huge inconvenience that no other player in the game has to face, and there is no doubt that the talent level for tournament-style gang warfare is equally as strong in the militia as it is in nullsec. Our corp has been having great fun sparring with Pandemic Legion now that they've moved home to Amamake :) I want to see it on the big screen!
Sorry, bit off topic but had to throw that out there since I dont know when we'll have Soundwave's attention again after this round of fixes!! Its an old drum i've been beating but now someone is listening.....
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:14:00 -
[119] - Quote
Must admit I agree with most of the OPs topics (though it is OCCUPANCY not Sovereignty!)
Alliances would not make much impact on FW at this point and I'm completely against the idea of only 'some' of the corps of an alliance being involved as this is repulsively carebear-ish and also open to abuse.
Freedom to travel enemy highsec (in an autopiloting freighter for example without Navy spawns ) should be fine, but I do think after a 'while' navy NPCs should spawn, especially for combat ships. Imagine Caldari Navy FW player tears for example if people were camping them out of Jita 24/7 unchallenged by the Caldari NPCs. It would be a bit unfair and we'd see FW gank squads set up in every major trade hub.
Plenty of good ideas already in this thread. I just for the main hope you buff/reward the PVP side of FW a bit in terms of contributing to some greater objective, since the PVE content (although broken) already offers quite lucrative rewards and has the (admittedly useless) occupancy targets as bragging rights. |
Lugalzagezi666
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:28:00 -
[120] - Quote
Allow alliances in fw and make occupancy/sovereignity in fw mean something (in terms of profit) - and be prepared for endless 0.0 style blobs.
|
|
Shaalira D'arc
Quantum Cats Syndicate
234
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:41:00 -
[121] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:If being in FW doesn't feel like the NPCs are current at war, and your in a war zone, then you will have completely missed the point, again,
THIS IS NOT A CAPSULEER WAR.This is a war between fations, that we are taking part in. This is not player verus player. And the sooner you figure out that any good game in the past 6 years that's had this sort of set up worked like this, the better.
Even new games, like SPAZ under stand this. With epic huge space battles happening between factions, and you can join in those battles. Use your skill to help one side or the other. It's fun ccp, something your game desperately needs.
I heavily suspect that NPCs aren't set up to actually shoot each other in this game.
There are some scripted 'battles' in missions where NPCs on both sides blow up at pre-determined points. But they don't actually fire upon each other. During the live events where CONCORD or the Empire Navy turned up on the same grid as the Sansha (usually by players doing stuff to make them spawn), the red and grey crosses didn't interact at all.
I bet if you spawn Amarr and Minmatar navy NPCs on the same grid, they'll just orbit each other merrily.
On topic...
If the DMs are looking for quick fixes and low-hanging fruit to revitalize FW pending a full-scale mechanics overhaul, here are my suggestions.
Plexing: 1) Fix downtime-only spawning. 2) Balance or remove plex NPCs. (eliminating e-war and replacing all missiles with turrets would be an easy fix. Not as easy as simple removal) 3) Fix commonly-known exploits where a pilot of an allied militia doesn't spawn additional waves, and where high standing makes you immune from NPC aggro. If you simply remove the NPCs, this will be moot. 4) A tangible reward. While you're looking for long-term overhauls of occupancy mechanics, a simple LP reward for capping a plex would draw pilots into doing them. I know a lot of pilots who would rather make isk doing an activity that invites PvP instead of running FW missions in a PvE fit. 5) Tweak acceleration gate permissions to account for faction ships. 6) Now that you have the CQ 'news display,' add a feed that shows occupancy changes like you announce sovereignty changes. This is a minor, cosmetic thing, but raises awareness of FW among new players and empire-dwellers. News of ongoing campaigns might draw people into enlisting.
Missions: This is actually something I'm ambivalent about. FW missions are clearly imbalanced, with some factions' missions being absurdly easy while other factions (coughGallentecough) must contend with missile spam and constant ECM. Also, FW missions are essentially an LP fountain with an absurdly high isk return for time invested.
At the same time, the easy isk is what allows FW regulars to spend almost all of their time pew-pewing, only occasionally having to do a mission day to pay for their PvP ships.
I think the biggest issue for missions is that the isk-making is wholly separate from the core FW mechanics of plexing, occupancy, and a free wardec. Mission-runners do get caught on occasion, usually from their own carelessness. But otherwise it's impractical and next to impossible to deter a FW mission-runner from making isk. If we militia members actually got paid by our empires for taking and defending territory, then more options would exist to sideline FW missions in favor of more interesting mechanics.
If you're looking for 'low-hanging fruit,' there's not much you can do with FW missions other than fix a lot of the long-standing bugs and rebalance NPCs. The system as a whole should get another look-over.
PvP and General Mechanics: - Standings issues with GCC and perma-flashy militia members. Others have elaborated these issues in detail already. - Alliances in FW. There are a number of good proposals to make this viable without mixing FW with the nullsec sovereignty blocs. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 18:59:00 -
[122] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:[quote=RougeOperator]
Removing the stock NPC corp in favor of more of a pseudo- static alliance is a much better way around this, in my opinion - I think forcing players to join a player corp to do Faction Warfare is a great idea. Players corps are much better about monitoring and filtering farmers and spies - the players who sign up for 24th crusade or TLF usually have a crap experience if they stay there - they are simply treated as riffraff anyways by any militia pilot who has been around longer than a few weeks.
Absolutely. That is a great idea, Hans.
http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Lugalzagezi666
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 19:11:00 -
[123] - Quote
Shaalira D'arc wrote:Missions I think fw missions should be made NOT SOLOABLE by bomber or bomber + inty. Being able to blitz them by basically uncatchable ships /in lowsec/ is stupid. I personally would implement some kind of "fail" trigger for enemy militia players too, preferably with some kind of lp reward /even if low/.
But tbh id just tie them to plex warfare /something like 1 l4 mission per day + 1 additional per plex captured or defended/. Or completely get rid of them and make plex warfare new income for fw players. Ofc it depends how ccp decides to change plex mechanics, because with current mechanics it would be easily abused.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
289
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 19:22:00 -
[124] - Quote
mkint wrote:(one of the things I've always heard about FW is that people are always douchebags to their own FW mates if they are not in the same corp.) That is the #1 reason why I have not joined FW, and I guarantee there are hundreds, if not thousands of others who feel the same. Broken mechanics and the general pointlessness of it all might make it hard to stick around or to fully commit, but it's not what stops people from joining.
Part of the big problem is people making up their mind about whether FW is worth joining based on rumors. I can assure you, that while corps do work independently in a lot of cases, each making their own fleets with own styles, there is not a ton of hostility between purple-to-purples. Most of us treat open hostility towards other purples as a grave offense, even if we all dabble in going negative sec status from time to time.
Every part of the game has its share of asshats, but in general, most of the Faction Warfare corps are on great terms and get along well and support each other in times of need. The big division is between player corps and the NPC corp - there is no respect given till a pilot has proven their loyalty on the killboard, which is difficult if no one wants to invite you to a fleet in the first place because you're part of the NPC corp. its a vicious cycle that's difficult to break past and into a place where you're trusted.
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 19:24:00 -
[125] - Quote
Plexing would be awesome if:
*there was an ISK reward along with the VP reward. VP is mostly useless. If there were money involved, many more pilots would be running them. If you do nothing else to FW, giving money for plexing with vastly change things.
* the spawning mechanic allowed for new plexes all day long.
*make some plexes accessible with only tech 1 ships.
*double the amount of plexes for each faction. I think when I was in PIE they kept records on how many plexes were out at one time, it was something like 60 or 70 per faction?
Everyone has already said these things countless times, I hope they are implemented! http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 19:26:00 -
[126] - 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?)
|
Lugalzagezi666
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 19:36:00 -
[127] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:Everyone has already said these things countless times, I hope they are implemented! The we can only suggest devs to read it and think about it - instead of proposing changes that noone really wants and will bring absolutely nothing for fw /= no navy in hisec change, almost looks like they really have no idea what to do with fw/.
X Gallentius wrote:Get super caps out of low sec 100% support, only "travel mode" for supercaps in non- sov systems. |
Cunane Jeran
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 20:11:00 -
[128] - Quote
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Get super caps out of low sec 100% support, only "travel mode" for supercaps in non- sov systems.
This |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 20:17:00 -
[129] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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. 4. VP = LP. Give those little plexing minions a table scrap for their efforts.
Losing faction standings for RR: This issue has been around for forever. Fix it please!
You forgot one, fix the post dt plexing.
BTW, maybe some motivated individual should make a poll on all of these topics and we should get FW'ers to vote?
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
291
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 20:27:00 -
[130] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:Plexing would be awesome if:
*there was an ISK reward along with the VP reward. VP is mostly useless. If there were money involved, many more pilots would be running them. If you do nothing else to FW, giving money for plexing with vastly change things.
* the spawning mechanic allowed for new plexes all day long.
*make some plexes accessible with only tech 1 ships.
*double the amount of plexes for each faction. I think when I was in PIE they kept records on how many plexes were out at one time, it was something like 60 or 70 per faction?
Everyone has already said these things countless times, I hope they are implemented!
Agreed, agreed, agreed, agreed. VP need a payout, or to be done away with. Pay for plex is the number one way to keep people fighting. Its a crude carrot, but vastly better than no carrot. I dont think anyone in this debate is going to argue with this point.
^^ THESE are the nuts and bolts of your "quick fix", Soundwave! Shalee couldn't have summed it up any better. People have been talking about plex respawns and payouts for ages - there needs to be 24/7 TOTAL WAR!!!!! BURN THEM ALL MWAHAHAHAHAHA
ok im done |
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 20:28:00 -
[131] - 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.
|
Gael Itrus
Aethernity
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 20:42:00 -
[132] - Quote
While we're throwing ideas around, how about instanced full-scale NPC battles at planets, over and under gates and stations, outside starbases.
I'm talking epic scale, NPC navies hundreds strong, fighting with sleeper AI routines in high and low sec. Players would be able to join in the maelstrom of course. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 20:44:00 -
[133] - Quote
Lots of good ideas here and nice to see a Dev taking part in the discussion.
Some of these things have been said already but these things would get my support. Oh and I am a militia Pilot.
- Remove NPC e-war from plex
- Faction Warfare missions to count towards occupancy
- Faction Warfare missions to not be farmable in a stealth bomber and interceptor
- Faction NPCGÇÖs should switch aggro/distribute when other pilots or neutrals enter missions and Plexes. Not to their own militia pilots obviously.
- Neutral Pilots should be engaged by the faction NPCGÇÖs in missions/plex as if they are the enemy regardless of standings; they can get a warning message when warping to the plex if you like.
- Allow whole alliances but none holding Sov
- Move Plex spawning away from Downtime.
- Greater LP/ISK rewards for plexing and PVP kills.
Slightly more complicated or potentially unpopular ideas.
Regarding High sec Navies - I have read the posts and agree some change could be made. The higher security systems should be left pretty much as is hey should after all be well defended, lower security status say 0.5 and 0.6 could have further delayed weaker spawns or perhaps only engaging on gates and stations leaving the players free to engage each other in belts, missions, safe spots etc.
Regarding the NPC problem how would people feel about a further spawn of your own allied factions ships when a war target enters the plex or is already present, not to engage the other player but for both sides NPCGÇÖs to lock each other up and ignore the players for a time allowing more even PVP to take place.
Docking in Enemy Space - I do not think restrictions on docking or logging off in enemy space would encourage the play we would like, however perhaps pilots with an aggression timer from combat with a player could be prevented from docking for the full 15minutes rather than the 60s I believe it is now.
Faction War Intel Mini map - 2D region based intel map, Highlight activity, shows number of plexes taken lost/missions completed and militia ships destroyed in the last hour and importantly shows current plexes in progress, perhaps with some delayed intel say 8 minutes so it does not take the place of proper scouting and maybe only for the region you are in.
War Taxes - Controversially I would perhaps propose a tax on High sec based corps based in that factionGÇÖs space. This tax only exists where there is a significant imbalance in the systems held. The worse your faction is doing the higher the tax the more ISK is goes to that government. (Not a huge percentage tax though perhaps just 2% or 3%)
The pay-out for PVP kills and flipping systems would then be higher when a faction is losing. Seems unfair but it is to create a balance so that everyone does not just jump on the winning side and that perhaps the militia is reinforced when doing badly due to greater incentives. This would require more than just the swinging of a few systems to trigger, maybe when you have lost say 30% or so and perhaps your own rewards would drop if you faction becomes too dominant.
Elected Militia leadership with some powers to dictate increased rewards for completing objectives in selected systems. Would have to comprise a certain number of pilots with shared power and not more than one from any corp/alliance. Rank requirement. Perhaps some additional fleet bonus ability.
Faction warfare live events - Details up to CCP |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 21:05:00 -
[134] - Quote
"Elected Militia leadership with some powers to dictate increased rewards for completing objectives in selected systems. Would have to comprise a certain number of pilots with shared power and not more than one from any corp/alliance. Rank requirement. Perhaps some additional fleet bonus ability." - Alticus C Bear
****
I don't think we absolutely need that. Militia already has leadership in a sense. People follow who they trust and admire. Corporations naturally form bonds with other corporations and people already work together. That is why we have private intel channels and main FCs put together ops and lead fleets etc. So I think we pretty much already have that kind of thing, at least in Amarr Militia.
Personally I'd rather not see Alliances have the ability to join militia. I think too many bored null sec alliances would join for the lols and ruin everything. We just don't have the resources that they do.
I would love to see some kind of live events centered around FW. That'd be great. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
297
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 22:14:00 -
[135] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote: Personally I'd rather not see Alliances have the ability to join militia. I think too many bored null sec alliances would join for the lols and ruin everything. We just don't have the resources that they do.
Don't they join for the lulz anyways?? I mean, your faction has called in Razor on us, we've cynoed in AAA against you (i'm probably botching which is which, but to me an alliance blobdrop is an alliance blobdrop. Its always the same, and its always a buzzkill.)
And both of us have had Pandemic Legion crawling throughout our warzone like a bad case of pubic lice whether we like it or not. My philosophy is that if you fix the mechanics to encourage gameplay that restricts ship or fleet size (the plexing system) than alliance participation is a non-issue, we can still fight each other without the really big stuff getting in the way.
The problem now is the fighting happens on stations, on belts, on gates. Nowhere else. This is prime hotdropoclock territory, and the reason the Alliances have access to us.
I think CVA, U'K, should be able to join militias and participate - the way I see it, its not whether alliances can join FW that makes them a threat - its the mechanics of FW, along with unnecessary supercap presence in lowsec, that make them a threat even without enlisting directly.
To me its silly that the largest RP alliances can't be more directly involved in fighting on either sides of the faction war without individually wardeccing every single militia corp. Theres very little interaction between RP alliances and militia corps despite all kinds of reasons they should be fighting together. And *ahem* lets be *ahem* honest, its not like they're knee deep in defending large amounts of territory out there....I'm sure UK and CVA would love an opportunity to do well.....anything relevant. (sorry if i've offended anyone but I don't know what the hell those guys do anymore)
Perhaps there is a standings fix so that corps/alliances can set entire factions to positive or negative status? or somehow form pacts with militias so they can enjoy pewing without going GCC?
I just think if the plexes are fixed and fun to hang out in again, it wont matter whether you have a massive supercap fleet and own a million moons in nullsec. The warzone should be fixed so that kind of power is more or less irrelevant for the kind of games we play. Once that's done, enrollment doesn't have to be restricted to anyone, alliance or otherwise.... |
Flyinghotpocket
Ascetic Virtues
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 22:55:00 -
[136] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:
Elected Militia leadership with some powers to dictate increased rewards for completing objectives in selected systems. Would have to comprise a certain number of pilots with shared power and not more than one from any corp/alliance. Rank requirement. Perhaps some additional fleet bonus ability.
No, no and NO.
|
Flyinghotpocket
Ascetic Virtues
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:07:00 -
[137] - Quote
Also just a new idea Plexs could have multiple entrances, and so should missions, and missions should have the ability to be stopped/repelled by opposing militia. with rewards rewarded to whoever whichever fleet completes the mission
Go from there. |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:17:00 -
[138] - Quote
Keep Supercaps in lowsec!
If ur gonna nerf the **** out of them u should give us the option to trade them for isk through a petition. A titan cost's 90bill on the forums why the hell shouldn't it be as great as it is?
Anyway just give us FW peeps something to fight for...
Also if u guys let big alliance's in with all there fagotry politics it will cause ALOT of drama. they will try be the boss's and the miltia vets will tell them to **** off. I for one will kill any EM / Draggons. members i come across |
Feyona
Ascetic Virtues
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:23:00 -
[139] - Quote
Personally, I think the super nerf will help out with the batphoning problem at least a little. The rest (stuff like PL titan bridging BS fleets onto FW fleets) is something that we will have to learn to deal with, and it's a problem that comes and goes with various different corps. Eventually they will probably find better things to do and move on.
The bigger problems that FW faces are in my opinion the stagnation of facing the same people, day in, day out - you get to know each other's tricks and eventually things just sort of devolve into station games which seems to be where Amarr/Minmatar FW is at right now. Both sides end up living in the same stations, and undocking to shoot at each other and then redock before they die. (Though there are some actual fights and of course lots of 10 vs 1s or 20 vs 5s or whatever.)
I believe that the station game aspect could be fixed pretty easily. Some people advocate that when a system changes hands that the opposing faction can no longer dock there; CCP has stated that they are against this and I think it is a little bit too close to 0.0. (Plus, what about all the neutral factions who have nothing to do with the conflict, etc.) I think a good compromise would be to simply disallow the opposing faction from docking at militia stations.
IE Minmatar can never dock at 24th IC, 24th IC can never dock in Tribal Liberation stations. It would give each faction 'home' stations to get more FW people actually living in lowsec and break up fighting on stations because nobody wants to fight where they have a disadvantage. This would, I think, lead to more actual fights and ships getting blown up. Add to that, it's silly lore-wise that the 24th IC would let Minmatar dock at their stations and vice versa.
To avoid people corp-hopping to get docking access, put a length cooldown timer on leaving or joining a corp in the militia, like say 24 hours after you give the command until you're out, and another 24 hour timer for joining a militia corp. (Any, not just the NPC corp.)
As far as plexing goes... give us some substantial LP rewards, like maybe half of what equivalent level FW missions give out, for plexing... THEN you will see people doing it, and you will see more fighting over it. Give a significant reward for being in a system at the time that it changes hands. Maybe change the actual mechanics of it, maybe not, but putting actual decent rewards on it would get people doing them. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:24:00 -
[140] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: And both of us have had Pandemic Legion crawling throughout our warzone like a bad case of pubic lice whether we like it or not. My philosophy is that if you fix the mechanics to encourage gameplay that restricts ship or fleet size (the plexing system) than alliance participation is a non-issue, we can still fight each other without the really big stuff getting in the way.
The problem now is the fighting happens on stations, on belts, on gates. Nowhere else. This is prime hotdropoclock territory, and the reason the Alliances have access to us. ....
I think you see the problem. The plexing mechanics which help prevent blobbing remain fairly abandoned. If they were fixed then if an alliance wanted to join for the lulz and send down a bunch of frigates and cruisers to do plexing, well that would be great. Ultimately ccp has to figure out a way to make this plexing mechanic work. Once they do, the more, the better. If the plexes fill up then they can make more plexes and more factions - such as the pirate factions.
As for large groups killing fw militia outside of the plex mechanics I'm not sure there is much ccp can do. I'm really not thrilled about some sort of ban of all super caps from low sec just to protect fw pilots. Perhaps the changes to supercaps will be enough to prevent people from bringing them out too much in low sec.
I anticipate some wars will be starting up after the winter expansion in null sec.
I understand PL has been a problem for some of the fw pilots. I haven't been involved with the larger fw fleets so I haven't noticed this first hand. But when it comes to fighting in plexes they have been good to have around IMO.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:26:00 -
[141] - Quote
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.
Hey that is a great idea mate. I hope the others like it. Before u "Fix" FW would it be to much trouble for ur team to run some ideas past actual FW members? Maybe choose 5 members form each faction and get them into some kind of mail list. were u can throw ideas at each other. Members who are leading on killboreds (alltime kills) would be a good indication to members who are dedicated to FW. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
129
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:30:00 -
[142] - 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.
How does us living in Amamake have any effect on you and faction warfare being broken?
I seriously doubt you'd get anything close to this, as its a silly artificial limitation, supers are part of the game, Titans already can't DD in lowsec to help lowsec peoples fragile ego's.
We picked where we want to live, and now you want CCP to ask us to leave because you can't yourself?
Yea, sounds plausible.
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:55:00 -
[143] - 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). |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.20 23:58:00 -
[144] - Quote
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?
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 00:12:00 -
[145] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Alticus C Bear wrote:
Elected Militia leadership with some powers to dictate increased rewards for completing objectives in selected systems. Would have to comprise a certain number of pilots with shared power and not more than one from any corp/alliance. Rank requirement. Perhaps some additional fleet bonus ability.
No, no and NO.
Well I guess that was an unpopular idea.
As another poster mentioned this almost exists if not in name and the idea was not really meant to be about the leadership as such as they would have no real power to make anyone do anything. I have seen a number of posts suggesting focusing the fight more and this was merely a game mechanic to provide increased rewards in a certain locations, although I admit to tacking it on to the post last minute.
It is largely down to other fail game mechanics but it feels a long time since there was a major coordinated strategic push.
Consider it withdrawn.
|
Jimmy Nickson
The Lucky Star
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 00:26:00 -
[146] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:
Occupancy War Modifications: Four 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. 4. VP = LP. Give those little plexing minions a table scrap for their efforts.
1. Disagree and agree at the same time, most of the time you don't get a fight etc... boring to just sit there and shoot a bunker. At the same time though Bunker bashes have had resistance in past, and generaly if you have two dreads and a carrier on field you'll likely get some attraction from somone for a fight. 2. Disagree! it makes it more challenging and is more cause for plex fighting! 3. Iffy on because what if a single plex don't spawn in the system that day and its 2900 vp! 4. YES! I'll agree with that allot lol..
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Also just a new idea Plexs could have multiple entrances, and so should missions, and missions should have the ability to be stopped/repelled by opposing militia. with rewards rewarded to whoever whichever fleet completes the mission So i fyou wanna be a dedicated mission runner hunter that can be your profession
Go from there. I agree with it for plex'es it would certainly make it more intresting, missions I don't really see the point because people will run at the first sign of a ship on scan anyway.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just think if the plexes are fixed and fun to hang out in again, it wont matter whether you have a massive supercap fleet and own a million moons in nullsec. The warzone should be fixed so that kind of power is more or less irrelevant for the kind of games we play. Once that's done, enrollment doesn't have to be restricted to anyone, alliance or otherwise.... In a way this is agreeable because of the fact cyno's arn't able to be used on the same grid as even the acc gate of a plex so and ship restricting would dictate how fleets fly etc... but at the same time disagree because of the amount of players that would influx to one plex, it would make plex's just 20v3, bad enough when its already 7v3. I say this from both being the 3 or the 20 or the 7 fleet... lol ganking is just no challenge, that won't stop me from doing it though.
Silence iKillYouu wrote:Hey that is a great idea mate. I hope the others like it. Before u "Fix" FW would it be to much trouble for ur team to run some ideas past actual FW members? Maybe choose 5 members form each faction and get them into some kind of mail list. were u can throw ideas at each other. Members who are leading on killboreds (alltime kills) would be a good indication to members who are dedicated to FW. 5 members of each faction... I would prolly say 10, but I agree none the less, FC's I know often hear about combat stuff, Role Players are not that hard to find, or even just get a couple of people are already in fw to go around with a survey, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to do it if it means somthing to be done about FW.
Btw people still complaining about supers just don't bother, because wether you like it or not we would prolly just resort to somthing just as OMG NERF!... like getting a dozen dreads drop ontop of your triage carrier along with our subcap fleet and nuets! who can forget the nuets... Capitals die etc... its a cycle, I have been in plenty of fleets with supers being dropped on field and no one freaking dies so PL drops supers on the 20man gang I'm in, it's just making us laugh whilst waisting their fuel, besides which a Supercap nerf is already happening is it not? So if you want restricted battles maybe you should go do some plex'ing! Fire ze missiles! |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 00:30:00 -
[147] - Quote
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.
This is key and much needed.
PIE is an RP corp with a long history (as some of you may know) and FW and the high sec changes have effectivly cut the RP community in half. On one end you have CVA, UK, EM, SF and the RP alliances in high sec, and Terra Matar, PIE, TRIAD and the likes inside FW. There is no way for us to go over to Mini space to disrupt EM/Uk and their logistics operations, and no way for TM and TRIAD to come into Amarr space to do the same to us.
This situation, more then anything, has done a great deal of harm to the RP community.
I disagree with the idea that highsec should be 'relatively safe' that kind of soft attitude has lead to a metagame outside of FW which has direct effects inside FW. The segregation is too harsh.
PIE has on many occasions debated leaving FW because of this. FW is CCPs manifestation of P storylines that many of us in PIE and elsewhere have worked on, developed and nurtured throughout the last 9 years. To see all that basically flushed away has done more harm then good. |
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 00:37:00 -
[148] - Quote
As an outsider looking in, the two things I'd most like to see changed about FW relate to plex mechanics. I think the minor plexes should be broken out into two separate tiers - one that admits only T1 frigates and one that admits any frigate/destroyer hull, T1 or T2. It's important that newbies in Rifters and Tristans or whatever have an opportunity to find one another and fight, without just getting curbstomped by some guy in a comet or a dram. Similarly, it's silly to be roaming in an AF or interceptor and see a similarly-powerful (pirate) faction frigate or destroyer in a minor plex but be unable to engage just because you're in a T2 ship.
Second, I think the position at which you drop out of warp after using an acceleration gate to enter a plex should be randomised somewhat, in the same sort of way it is when you use a stargate. As it is, whoever is inside the plex knows exactly where the attackers will be dropping out of warp when they come in, making it trivial for them to determine the starting range of the engagement to the nearest kilometer. This can easily be a decisive advantage, especially given that the attackers don't have the option of burning back and jumping out and have no non-suicidial means of scouting the inside of the plex. |
XIRUSPHERE
Deadly Intent.
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 00:47:00 -
[149] - 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.
As someone who has been KOS to amarr and caldari for years it would be interesting but it would take all the effort required to actually get back into their space away if you aren't using an alt. That being said I do support the concept for the fact that it may be hard on casual players but if they want to dip their toes into FW they need to participate. I think the greatest casualties would be those that are solo FW pilots doing missions and little else and that's not a bad thing at all.
If anything I think it would add some badly needed action to highsec and it would help attract more people to it. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 01:09:00 -
[150] - Quote
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. Hey Kris, good to see you taking an interest in FW, even if it only for the short term (keep it up, though and watch your sub numbers climb even more!).
Some things that could easily be done:
- For the coming patch, realistically you can only change some small things, as changing big things could lead to serious problems if not properly balanced. - Fix the most aggravating problems first. - The FW missions need balancing amongst the factions. Minnie and Caldari missions need to made easier or Amarr and gallente more difficult. The later is probably easier to implement and with all FW missions requiring robust ships and/or teams of players to do it would encourage fights, which is what FW is about. - Plex spawning times. The post downtime plexers need to get nerfed or the plexes need to spawn at random times. Very simple fix, will make people happy. - Plexes and sov need to mean something. In the short term, sov offering better payout in terms of LP would be a good idea. Restrict the better LP payout to the corps who did the work. This will encourage people to work for sov in plexing and discourage abuse. Alternatively, make losing sov have negative LP payout effects on all of the losing faction. You could also tie the improved/negative LP payouts to the FW mission rewards (possibly by making the losing side lose FW rankings/the winning side gain FW rankings). This will again encourage fights and drama, which is also what eve is about.
The above mentioned fixes should encourage fighting that is not always on gates or stations. This will be a pro move.
Some things that should not be done without more thought and time:
- Removing faction navy NPCs from hisec, while a nice idea to terrify all the nubbs who have purple stars on the overview but who never venture into losec, is probably a waste of time. This can be and is already done by those who know the mechanics, i.e. bring enough friends to keep the NPCs occupied or using neutral scouts to scout down hisec WT mission runners and then jump them with the main from an orca or a neutral who keeps a ship ready to go in space. The only real advantage to this is that it makes FW space much, much bigger and will encourage much drama and tears around the trade hubs. - Doing things like removing docking rights on losing sov will only make the sov system more unstable, akin to the problems of nullsec, where, when a FW faction has won enough sov, it will be almost impossible for the other side to recover. This is bad and will make people leave FW. Don't do this without some sort of timer that reverts sov and docking rights over time. - Allowing alliances into FW is a bad move without further thought. While RP alliances like CVA/SF/UK etc would enjoy this, there is a big potential for this to strangle newe corps and players. FW is an amazing way to get into PvP. Don't turn it into the sewer that is nullsec politics, the sewer that is FW politics is bad enough. - Don't remove the NPC factions. These are very important to new players. The argument that it encourages spies is irrelevant because there will always be spies and it makes the game more interesting.
Some things that must be changed, preferably in the short term:
- Repping of GCC or -5 FW fleet mates shouldn't have faction standings consequences. - The terrible standings loss to enemy FW factions makes it close to impossible for newer players who didn't know better to recover those standings once they're low enough. Implement an ISK bribery cost to make this a non issue. - Remove the plexing loophole that makes non-direct enemy factions able to do plex with impunity. - Make friendly FW factions show up as such on the overview, i.e. Gallente show up as friendlies to Minnies and Caldari to Amarr etc.
I hope to have given you some food for thought.
-- Bomb. |
|
Lugalzagezi666
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 01:31:00 -
[151] - Quote
In hisec you : - cant build caps and cant use them there /you can spin them and mine with them though, if thats all what you want to do with scs in lowsec, im ok with it/ - cant build supercaps and cant use them there
lowsec : - can build caps and can use them - cant build supercaps, but can use them there
whs : - can build caps and can use them - cant build supercaps and cant use them
nullsec : - can build caps and can use them - can build supercaps and can use them
Removing scs from lowsec would be great fw and general lowsec buff. Whines from people, who are afraid that with their moms gone same will happen to their pvp skills, only confirm that. Its same with supercarrier fix - "noone" is using them for anti subcap combat, but when ccp want to cut their anti subcap weapons, "leet" pvpers manage to whine out 50 pages in few days... Best way is only allowing "travel mode" in any empire faction sovereignity space - no ewar immunity, no fighters, no ecm...
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just think if the plexes are fixed and fun to hang out in again, it wont matter whether you have a massive supercap fleet Yeah, lets limit fw pvp just to plexes. If ccp decides, that there will be new fw system of occupancy - that will actually offer something worthwile for faction holding the system - then the fights for the system should happen only in the plexes with subcaps /of all classes!/. But you cant just give up all pvp, that happens on gates. Seriously, its mainly sentry free pvp on gates without uberblobs and annoying politics, why is fw such good enviroment for small scale combat.
Ruah Piskonit wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:we might be able to do very easily is remove the faction NPCs This is key and much needed. You will be able to "intercept em/uk logistics operations" whatever it means - at the cost of every semi inteligent tax avoiding miner, hauler or missioner leaving fw and fw players doing this activities with an alt. There will be much less targets in hisec, than there are now. But at least you will be able to roam free around enemy hisec, but for what reason? For example i dont care about intercepting logistics operations at all and i guess most of people in fw neither do.
Ruah Piskonit wrote:Alliances should not be let in - it would throw off the numbers. This is my thought too. Are you asking why is lowsec so good for small gang warfare? One of the things why is it so - there isnt really alot of people involved /that actually do pvp/. This is the thing that keeps gang numbers low.
|
Flyinghotpocket
Ascetic Virtues
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 01:54:00 -
[152] - Quote
Jimmy Nickson wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:Also just a new idea Plexs could have multiple entrances, and so should missions, and missions should have the ability to be stopped/repelled by opposing militia. with rewards rewarded to whoever whichever fleet completes the mission So i fyou wanna be a dedicated mission runner hunter that can be your profession
Go from there. I agree with it for plex'es it would certainly make it more intresting, missions I don't really see the point because people will run at the first sign of a ship on scan anyway.
why would they run away. if they know their mission can be completed by an enemy. why would they run away? wouldnt they fight for their mission? with an actual gang of people? new dawn of fighting in militia, over those stupid missions everybody keeps complaining about LP farming. As a bonus to not let you just let your mission expire, it would count as a disadvantage in VP for the system its in to let the enemy take it. And a obvious corresponding advantage for the VP in the system, if completing the mission
as for implementation be something like, an incursion style log in your journal say Faction warfare tab> current missions in system tab. and other tabs would be missions and an overview of what needs to be accomplished. and it will say what you as the enemy need to accomplish or the friendly needs to accomplish, when said mission pops on overview.
just a thought is all. |
Piar Stolpien
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 02:01:00 -
[153] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ...and like I said, that's almost reason for me to say leave it alone, or maybe simply pare the strength back on the NPC's just a tad - enough to deter openly hanging out in enemy highsec, but still gives players the chance to make a bold move into dangerous territory and gank the enemy in the heart of their homeland.
Giving pilots unrestricted freedom to pass through enemy higsec kinda kills the "home turf" feel a bit.
Maybe there's a compromise? Like having enemy highsec stations fire on you, or gate gun fire, but maybe less random police drops so fights can occur in belts, plexes, missions? Or just NPC's on gates, and not the follow-you AI that they do now.
The other huge advantage though, is that there are a lot of mission farmers only registered in FW for the LP. Making higsec more dangerous would discourage people from joining just to run missions - which is a huge detriment to the community. It waters down the market for those who actually PvP as well, and contributes nothing to fleet opportunities if they simply carebear in highsec and lowsec equally but never join in actually fighting the other faction.
(My emphasis)
From an outside perspective, I really think Hans is on to something here.
I've already posted some thoughts on this earlier in the thread (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=218454#post218454), but I think I'm basically saying what Hans did here - keep a home turf feel to it, but allow/encourage hit-n-run type ops into enemy highsec.
Enemy NPC's should follow you, but their forces in an area could be limited, so if you coordinate, one group could engage the NPCs using stalling tactics, enabling another group to roam free for a while. Combined with the idea in my earlier post, I think it could make for a pretty interesting cat & mouse game with faction NPCs. The same system could also include non-FW pilots with negative faction standing, so if lots of FW fighting going on in an area, they can slip through without being caught by the faction NPCs. |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 02:17:00 -
[154] - Quote
Removing npcs will give FW pilots a chance to fight away from 3rd party's It's easy to do |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 02:19:00 -
[155] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Jimmy Nickson wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:Also just a new idea Plexs could have multiple entrances, and so should missions, and missions should have the ability to be stopped/repelled by opposing militia. with rewards rewarded to whoever whichever fleet completes the mission So i fyou wanna be a dedicated mission runner hunter that can be your profession
Go from there. I agree with it for plex'es it would certainly make it more intresting, missions I don't really see the point because people will run at the first sign of a ship on scan anyway. why would they run away. if they know their mission can be completed by an enemy. why would they run away? wouldnt they fight for their mission? with an actual gang of people? new dawn of fighting in militia, over those stupid missions everybody keeps complaining about LP farming. As a bonus to not let you just let your mission expire, it would count as a disadvantage in VP for the system its in to let the enemy take it. And a obvious corresponding advantage for the VP in the system, if completing the mission as for implementation be something like, an incursion style log in your journal say Faction warfare tab> current missions in system tab. and other tabs would be missions and an overview of what needs to be accomplished. and it will say what you as the enemy need to accomplish or the friendly needs to accomplish, when said mission pops on overview. just a thought is all.
I like the idea of more pvp centered faction war but not every mechanic will lead to pvp. I think trying to make missions a platform for pvp is not likely.
One side will have to fit for pve and have allot of npcs pounding them and giving them ewar headaches the other side will have none of this. If they make it like the incursion ai where the rats might start shooting at the new arrivals there are other problems. 1) Why would they be shooting at their own faction? 2) it just makes the pvp random. Whoever the npcs decide to target likely loses.
I really think the fw missions are by and large ok. I would even call them a successful and ingenius way to implement missions in low sec. Yes have more painters and missiles so people can't solo them in an sb. Perhaps make it so you can't cloak in them. That way new spawns will target the gank ship at least forcing it to warp out.
Perhaps have a requirement that pilots get at least a few pvp kills against the enemy militia before they can cash in their lp. I think this was discussed earlier in this thread or the thread in features and ideas.
Flying for the amarr militia the missions can be pretty tough. Probably reduce the lp payout to where it was before the agent changes. Add more or boost the fw specific lp items. Amarr Armor plates should have better fitting requirments than meta 4.
But thats about it. I don't see anything urgent there.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Jimmy Nickson
The Lucky Star
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 02:31:00 -
[156] - Quote
Cearain wrote:I really think the fw missions are by and large ok. I would even call them a successful and ingenius way to implement missions in low sec. Yes have more painters and missiles so people can't solo them in an sb. Perhaps make it so you can't cloak in them. That way new spawns will target the gank ship at least forcing it to warp out.
Perhaps cycle the rats, so that they shoot anybody who is agressing inside the plex etc.. so shoot for a little bit at your speed tanking friend than shoot at the SB forcing the missions to not be done in an SB, this also would mean balanced rats so minmatar and caldari can't solo the mission in an SB either, abit of missile spam into the mix! Fire ze missiles! |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 02:54:00 -
[157] - Quote
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:In hisec you : - cant build caps and cant use them there.
When the first line of your post is completely and utterly wrong, I feel no need to read through the rest of your broken jumble of thoughts.
Since its so obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about, I'll help you with a fun fact:
There is absolutely NOTHING stopping any capital currently in high sec from using offensive weaponry.
Go ahead and ask any one of the holders, Chribba is one, he could tell you. You can fit, target, and fire your weapons on a dread in high sec. You can check around, I'll wait here.
The rest of it is wrong too, Supers would function normally in wormholes, if they could get in, so you're just making things up with the rest of your 'points'.
Educate yourself about the game you play. One thing Goonswarm went out of the way to do was document the hell out of this huge game. Most of that information has somehow slipped out into the world and its all at your finger tips, all you have to do is look. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 03:03:00 -
[158] - 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..... |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 03:14:00 -
[159] - Quote
To me killing NPCs has nothing to do with PvP.
I've yet to find a "Camp Tama Gate for 1 Hour" mission
Or, you give both sides a mission to "Patrol" the same planet |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 03:51:00 -
[160] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: Which capital ships in high sec are you talking about - all those carriers and dreads ganking players who don't venture into low sec?
X Gallentius wrote:Edit: Oh yeah one guy has a legacy dread in Amarr.....
You are aware there are well more than one 'legacy' dread right? There are quite a few, the Jita Chimera for instance that went up on auction about 6 months or so ago.
Theres well more than just Chribbas Veldnaught.
All of this has been documented before, have you never tried looking for it?
X Gallentius wrote: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.
I'm all about opening up where they can be built, but unfortunately EVE has never been about a level playing field
|
|
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 04:09:00 -
[161] - Quote
Keep the thread about FW.
Not everything has to be about PL and supercaps
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 04:13:00 -
[162] - Quote
Silence iKillYouu wrote:Keep the thread about FW.
Not everything has to be about PL and supercaps
Hey I didn't start it, they did.
I got into FW at its launch, stayed with it for 2 months, once we realized that the ability to take systems was completely broken we bailed.
3 years later its still broken.
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
205
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 04:16:00 -
[163] - Quote
Make the plex rats uniform. Same damage type, same tracking, same resistances (remove missiles, have the Caldari ships use railguns instead). If the rats use ewar make them use all forms of Ewar, not exclusive to a faction. Because ECM is broken.
If you make the plex rats like Sansha rats, you'll fix the plexing imbalance. Use their AI while at it too its very good.
Basically what I'm asking you is this:
FW plex rats:
1)Do omni damage and omni tank. 2)They use all forms of EWAR. 3)Become harder. 4)Smarter.
And you'll fix plexing as of its current state. |
Flyinghotpocket
Ascetic Virtues
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 04:26:00 -
[164] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Silence iKillYouu wrote:Facts
Dribble
stayed with it to get your lolz then leave and you can legitly chip in your 2 cents like now. |
Andre Vauban
Quantum Cats Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 04:35:00 -
[165] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:X Gallentius wrote: Which capital ships in high sec are you talking about - all those carriers and dreads ganking players who don't venture into low sec?
X Gallentius wrote:Edit: Oh yeah one guy has a legacy dread in Amarr..... You are aware there are well more than one 'legacy' dread right? There are quite a few, the Jita Chimera for instance that went up on auction about 6 months or so ago. Theres well more than just Chribbas Veldnaught. All of this has been documented before, have you never tried looking for it? X Gallentius wrote: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. I'm all about opening up where they can be built, but unfortunately EVE has never been about a level playing field
The issue most of us lowsec people have is that super capitals are the ultimate weapon. You cannot build them without sov and you cannot get sov without them. You're only option to get them is to join an existing power block.
That being said, what frustrates most people is that a bored 0.0 alliance can come down to lowsec, stomp on people, and head home with no worries about leaving themselves vulnerable at home. If a 0.0 alliance wants to come to lowsec to live for a bit and stomp people (ie PL right now), well that sucks for lowsec folks but that is Eve.
To give a flawed RL example, this is a bit like Russia and China being involved in a massive land war. Then China says, gee morale is not very good right now and Russia isn't going to attack us until tomorrow. Hmmm, let's redeploy all my troops, tanks, plane, warships over to Haiti to curb stomp them and then be home before Russia can react.
IMHO, this needs to be addressed somehow. Some people suggest banning supers from lowsec. This is Eve, a bigger group should always be permitted via game mechanics to curb stomp a smaller entity but they shouldn't be able to do it because they have nothing better to do and it doesn't cost them anything.
Anyway, a few other random thoughts on FW:
-Fix the remote rep to -5 causes faction loss. I see the reason for the faction hit for repping GCC (ie keep Militia's from being pirates), but there is no reason for the just being -5 or lower.
-We all agree that we should have some reason to take space, but be real careful that it doesn't give an advantage that makes it that much harder for the losing side to make a come back (ie denying docking rights, sentry guns, etc). Maybe start with free offices for militia that holds occupancy?
-Leave highsec alone, but do something about the permanent faction hits that can occur. People won't want to try Gallente FW if they may be permanently banned from Jita. (And no, grinding missions for months with the latest level 1 change isn't enough).
-I actually like having alliances in FW so long as they cannot hold sov at the same time. Those Alliances are already involved, so its really not changing much. Maybe set some really high (ie 5 or 6) average standing requirements.
-Combine missions and plexes. Make the rewards (ie LP) stay like missions are today. Get rid of VP and make everything LP. Have them spawn like missions do today (ie you go to an agent, and he spawns a plex in some system using some CCP algorithm to throttle how fast systems can be made vulnerable). Let the mechanics inside the mission/plex function as plexs do today except get rid of the NPCs inside (or at a minimum balance the faction NPCs).
-Make it so pirate faction ships count as T2 for plexs/missions.
-I can foresee an impact to FW with the destructible customs stations. I would REALLY like to see them have some sort of rate-limited damage that can be taken. In other words, limit the amount of damage that can be applied to them over a given unit of time (ie 1 minute) so it alwys takes at least X time to kill them. Make it so this time is reasonable with decent small gang, but long enough so the 0.0 SC fleets will not want to roll through every single custom station in the game. Make them for small gangs, no matter how many people are shooting it it will always take at least X time to reinforce.
-Don't do any of the silly ideas about electing a central militia leader. FW is for the unorganized, relatively low drama, and relatively low politics. If you want grandiose politics and intrigue, then go to 0.0.
-Add regular T1 ships to the faction LP stores. It would help with supply lines and lower the cost of low end FW pew-pew. Maybe this can be tied to occupancy?
|
S810 Jr
Shadows Of The Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 04:45:00 -
[166] - Quote
FW Plexs:- Remove ALL NPCs from them. That way we have a level playing field between the Militias. It will also mean more PvP as a single pilot coming across a WT in a plex will not have to try getting backup before the plex is finished by the WT.
Example, Gallente in a frig comes across and squid...I mean Caldari in a frig running a Caldari plex. For the Gallente pilot to win they have to get in, burn to the button, point the WT and kill it before the Caldari NPCs just ECM them and missile spam. Yeah great PvP that being jammed out so that even a 1 day old plexing alt just has to point and web you to kill you, most alts just fly Griffins now too.
Where as the other way around, the Caldari going into a Gallente plex, Caldari burns to the button points the WT, NPCs then damp the Caldari, who already has a lock and is at point blank range so does nothing. And then damage from NPCs... they can't track them with hybrids.
Removing all NPCs means 1 day plexing alts can still plex, but now will need to have their owner keeping an eye on them. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 06:20:00 -
[167] - Quote
Andre Vauban wrote:
The issue most of us lowsec people have is that super capitals are the ultimate weapon. You cannot build them without sov and you cannot get sov without them. You're only option to get them is to join an existing power block.
First: We're not here because we're bored, we're here because Amamake is in basically the center of EVE, and the fact that 0.0 isn't worth owning right now. If it was, we'd own it. The fact that we can remotely earn income from the only thing in 0.0 worth owning speaks massive volumes about the state of 0.0. You people complain about the state of faction warfare, its not just your part of the game, its the game as a whole thats suffering right now.
We live where we live because its worth no more or less than any other part of EVE right now.
And as for supers...
We didn't join any power bloc to get ours, regardless of what you've read. We bought them with money.
The first ones were the hardest admittedly, it took the efforts of the entire alliance and they were obtained before my time, but I still know the pains and troubles they went through. It took donations from the entire alliance, and time, lots of time, to get our first Titan.
My personal supercaps were obtained through me spending 3 months locked in a wormhole with 14 other members of snigg doing my best carebear impression.
Then I bought one.
You don't need to build supercaps, in fact its probably the worst possible way to get hold of them.
Realistically the only thing stopping any person in EVE from getting a supercarrier or titan is themselves, and how much effort they're willing to devote to the task.
Every member of PL who owns one put out their own herculean effort to get one, and now suddenly that makes us the bad guy, meanwhile there is absolutely nothing stopping anybody else from going through the exact same thing that any of our members went through (and continue to go through) to get theirs.
The fact that you choose not to do it shouldn't be held against us in anyway, and the fact that people are lazy shouldn't be reason to nerf people who aren't lazy's game play. |
Pater Peccavi
Shadow Shadow Bo Badow
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 06:26:00 -
[168] - Quote
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 altar (if they haven't already, since hi sec raids happen despite the NPCs) and things would settle down to pretty Mich the same **** as always after a couple weeks.
Except for the new players, who don't have alts that they can shift hi sec activities to. They'll stop joining FW altogether (or quit after losing some ships in PvP, and then losing their PvE ships as they try to recoup their losses). And FW will continue to stagnate with the same old faces.
If you want to give FW systems where they can fight without having to deal with pirates/caps/outside actors, then maybe remove NPCs from some border systems, but doing so from all hi sec strikes me as a bad idea. |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 06:40:00 -
[169] - Quote
I think i have a idea with help. From a amarr pilot in local lol. Sabotage :)
If we make the Plex's as mini incursion type things (were u would need a certain amount of pilots per each size) Make sure the rats are smart like the incursion rats. U split the LP the same as incisions. So if 2 fleets are in one plex only the most helpful fleet gets reward.
Everyone fights for the plex's Each side would be alot more active to get the LP Keep the gates how they are to filter ship types.
EASY FIX We have something to fight for Alot of pilots would join and be FORCED to fight for there isk. Good start EASY FIX
Soundwave mail me ur ideas |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 07:06:00 -
[170] - Quote
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.
|
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
73
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 07:20:00 -
[171] - 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. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
335
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 07:28:00 -
[172] - 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. |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:14:00 -
[173] - Quote
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:Ruah Piskonit wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:we might be able to do very easily is remove the faction NPCs This is key and much needed. You will be able to "intercept em/uk logistics operations" whatever it means - at the cost of every semi inteligent tax avoiding miner, hauler or missioner leaving fw and fw players doing this activities with an alt. There will be much less targets in hisec, than there are now. But at least you will be able to roam free around enemy hisec, but for what reason? For example i dont care about intercepting logistics operations at all and i guess most of people in fw neither do.
this does not happen now?
I am frankly not interested in preserving FW mission runners, miners, and haulers - and they can't run those missions with an alt. If they could then that is another issue all together as it breaks the risk to reward system. Are you telling me that you want more of these mission runners and the like to join FW for the sole purpose of making money? If anything, that is exactly what should end. LP and ISK should be rewarded for PvP in FW - not an upgrade to motsu level 4s.
Or am I missing your point.
The only thing the prevention of FW members entering enemy space has done is to give a safe haven for people who exploit this system. I should be able to fly into any high sec space an hunt down enemy targets - to not be able to do that limits the war an further segregates between those who are in and not in FW and furthermore contributes to the general 'high sec is safe sec' attitude that is most undesirable.
I guess thats the point - people will use alts anyway, they do now in FW already. And the people who are going to leave because they are basically involved in a war and don't want that to contribute to their loss' are perhaps in it not for the PvP but for the profit of running FW missions. I suppose I would rather FW became smaller and more PvP oriented, then become another mission category to just milk for profit. |
Gallactica
Shadows Of The Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:28:00 -
[174] - Quote
My suggestion to CCP would be to speak to a few of the long term FW'ers in each of the militias with the emphasis on having people who have EXPERIENCE in different aspects of FW.
ie, have someone who has a lot of experience in Plexxing, also someone who is just in it for the pvp and yes also include someone who is the high sec carbear FW'er. There are a hell of a lot of people who want FW to work and tbh if you guys at CCP get this right you are going to get an awful lot of people not only wanting to try it, but also returning back to the game.
Personally i dont think removing the factions NPC's in high sec would work, people do this because they THIINK its safe to do so, not because it IS safe to do so - By removing npc's your simply going to make those people do something else in eve they think is safe and leave FW.
Please please please please do remove the faction standings hit for repping -5's and worse, it just is insane that i get a faction standing hit for repping someone who is in my own bloody corp.
Regards to plexxing, yes an easy fix would be to remove all npcs from them and thus making them entirely player driven to capture them.
CCP if your going to do this, then please dont do it half arsed and **** it up, you have an awful lot of peoples continued subscrption to eve balancing on a knife edge at the moment - Make sure the carrots you are dangling to keep us interested actually materialise into something worthwhile, because if you dont then you will lose a hell of a lot more than you already have.
Gallactica Proud member of Evil Synns bitter vet club. |
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:40:00 -
[175] - Quote
Personally I love the fact that Pandemic Legion are basing out of Amamake, but then again, I like a challenge.
- I kill all the navy ships in complexes - good for tags too.
- I won't dock at a station in enemy occupied space
- I am proud of my negative status to the Amarr Empire - the scum!
I am a role player at heart and think the background story actually has a place in EVE. It's why I participate in FW.
Silence iKillYouu wrote:Removing npcs will give FW pilots a chance to fight away from 3rd party's It's easy to do NPC's aren't third parties, they're our allies, they're the regular forces to our irregular. It's their fight that we are participating in.
One issue that doesn't seem to have been raised yet is that NPC's in missions are hostile to all, including their allied militia. If it's the job of the militia to stop the enemy from being able to fulfil their missions, and the mechanics are made available to do so, then the faction navy should not be aggressive to their allied militia. In order to penalise abuse by using an alt in the opposing milita to complete your mission there needs to be a severe standings penalty so that they can't abuse it too frequently.
Of course since I'm a proponent of removing missions and rewarding plexing with LP/ISK instead, then this problem would be removed too. |
Bengal Bob
Royal Order of Security Specialists
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:40:00 -
[176] - Quote
Guys, Soundwave has already gone from thread.
Guess they are going to remove hi sec npc to spread out the fight and make long term standings less of an issue.
Usual CCP fix - remove something rather than fixing and adding new content.
FFS, can we have an actual FW dev assigned to start planning out changes in discussion with players - preferably one that isn't going to go to Russia and hide for months instead of answering questions. Maybe even one that PLAYS eve and is involved in FW.
Unless of course they have all unsubbed in protest. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
298
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:40:00 -
[177] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote: First: We're not here because we're bored, we're here because Amamake is in basically the center of EVE, and the fact that 0.0 isn't worth owning right now. If it was, we'd own it. The fact that we can remotely earn income from the only thing in 0.0 worth owning speaks massive volumes about the state of 0.0. You people complain about the state of faction warfare, its not just your part of the game, its the game as a whole thats suffering right now.
We live where we live because its worth no more or less than any other part of EVE right now.
I think most people are using the term "bored" more loosely than you think. I personally mean bored in that, like you said, there isn't incentive to hang around in 0.0 Whatever fun and isk were to be made out there has been figured out, repeated over and over again, and than nerfed to the point of killing any reason to be there, when you could be living and fighting in low or highsec and making the same amount of money, meanwhile having a greater number of targets at your disposal.
Which is precisely what I would do if i were your alliance leaders. I'd assess the situation, and all things being equal in terms of economic resources, I'd choose to hang out where the activity was. And frankly, for as much as Faction Warfare is trolled on for being "dead", there is more activity in and around Amamake than in most large nullsec expanses, save for the hotspots like Delve.
I certainly hope you're not bored, no one should be out fighting or mining or ganking or hot dropping or any of that if they're not having fun. Lest we all forget this is a game, we're all here for the lulz. In particular, me and my corpmates have taken this as an opportunity to fight the same alliance that wins Tournaments - honing our skills against what are supposedly some of the best small-gang warfare pilots in the game.
I can't speak for other militia pilots, but my purpose in starting this thread was not in any way to present the FW crisis as somehow superior in significance over the nullsec crisis, I WANT you to have your sanctums, moons, and sov battles working in tip top shape, so that you guys get a chance to spread out again and seize that slice of New Eden for yourself again. Faction Warfare is served just as equally by CCP giving attention to the stale nature of 0.0 gameplay, so that each group of players gets a chance to have the kind of fights they enjoy, in the environment they like to have them. This need for nullsec attention has been a common theme of my posts outside this thread.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with owning and using Supercarriers, its just that different player groups have fun different ways. Some like cap battles, others like cruiser gangs, the need to cater to varied player tastes is the whole reason for having differences between hi, low, and nullsec, along with the reason for having wormholes. This thread is just trying to get the FW mechanics in particular back to a point where militia players can enjoy themselves at the scale of warfare we like to enjoy. You're right, we could all train supercaps, but thats not really our idea of a good time.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
298
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 08:46:00 -
[178] - Quote
Bengal Bob wrote:Guys, Soundwave has already gone from thread.
Guess they are going to remove hi sec npc to spread out the fight and make long term standings less of an issue.
Usual CCP fix - remove something rather than fixing and adding new content.
FFS, can we have an actual FW dev assigned to start planning out changes in discussion with players - preferably one that isn't going to go to Russia and hide for months instead of answering questions. Maybe even one that PLAYS eve and is involved in FW.
Unless of course they have all unsubbed in protest.
Seriously? We don't need this kind of doomsday buillshit here. Rabble rabble rabble, why not just be glad that there's some people reading and sharing ideas, just because Soundwave's not posting every minutes does not mean he's not taking our feedback into consideration - we're throwing a lot at him here, and there is a diverse array of viewpoints on the topic being presented.
Last time I checked there wasn't a "doctor is in" sign that indicates whether a dev is present or not. Give it some time - we have a long way to go but theres no need to throw in the towel yet.
Lets keep this respectful and not resort to CCP trolling like the rest of the forums, the militia community could set an example for others in how to have some constructive dialogue without things breaking down into cynical naysaying. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
301
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:04:00 -
[179] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote: How does us living in Amamake have any effect on you and faction warfare being broken?
I seriously doubt you'd get anything close to this, as its a silly artificial limitation, supers are part of the game, Titans already can't DD in lowsec to help lowsec peoples fragile ego's.
We picked where we want to live, and now you want CCP to ask us to leave because you can't yourself?
I don't care if supers stay in lowsec as long as plexes are fixed and younger players who want to learn pvp have opportunities to fight where your supercaps cant get at them. The three-tiered security status for systems was created for a reason, and is a fundamental element of Eve's game design. I think supercap battles are great when they're fighting other supercaps. I think supercap battles are lame when they're happening against battlecruiser gangs, and dampening the amount of fleeting and fighting that is occuring in what used to be a more active region. It shouldn't be difficult to understand why supercaps in and around FW are a fun-killer.
It's no different than saying that bubbles and bombs and other stuff like that are useful for large fleet battles, but less fun for those who enjoy smaller gang warfare, and thus providing them with lowsec where they can travel and get into fights a bit more freely without being hampered by some of those more powerful PvP tools.
Saying "supers are here, deal with it, stop crying cause we already had our doomsdays taken away" just kinda comes off like you think that all of eve should be nullsec, and that we're all somehow being coddled for wanting to have gameplay zones like lowsec in EvE that encourage smaller scale warfare and freelance piracy.
It may not have been what you meant, but that's how it sounds is all.
|
DeBingJos
T.R.I.A.D
113
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:06:00 -
[180] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Grath Telkin wrote: How does us living in Amamake have any effect on you and faction warfare being broken?
I seriously doubt you'd get anything close to this, as its a silly artificial limitation, supers are part of the game, Titans already can't DD in lowsec to help lowsec peoples fragile ego's.
We picked where we want to live, and now you want CCP to ask us to leave because you can't yourself?
I don't care if supers stay in lowsec as long as plexes are fixed and younger players who want to learn pvp have opportunities to fight where your supercaps cant get at them. The three-tiered security status for systems was created for a reason, and is a fundamental element of Eve's game design. I think supercap battles are great when they're fighting other supercaps. I think supercap battles are lame when they're happening against battlecruiser gangs, and dampening the amount of fleeting and fighting that is occuring in what used to be a more active region. It shouldn't be difficult to understand why supercaps in and around FW are a fun-killer. It's no different than saying that bubbles and bombs and other stuff like that are useful for large fleet battles, but less fun for those who enjoy smaller gang warfare, and thus providing them with lowsec where they can travel and get into fights a bit more freely without being hampered by some of those more powerful PvP tools. Saying "supers are here, deal with it, stop crying cause we already had our doomsdays taken away" just kinda comes off like you think that all of eve should be nullsec, and that we're all somehow being coddled for wanting to have gameplay zones like lowsec in EvE that encourage smaller scale warfare and freelance piracy. It may not have been what you meant, but that's how it sounds is all.
This is worth repeating Fix FW ! |
|
S810 Jr
Shadows Of The Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:10:00 -
[181] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bengal Bob wrote:Guys, Soundwave has already gone from thread.
Guess they are going to remove hi sec npc to spread out the fight and make long term standings less of an issue.
Usual CCP fix - remove something rather than fixing and adding new content.
FFS, can we have an actual FW dev assigned to start planning out changes in discussion with players - preferably one that isn't going to go to Russia and hide for months instead of answering questions. Maybe even one that PLAYS eve and is involved in FW.
Unless of course they have all unsubbed in protest. Seriously? We don't need this kind of doomsday buillshit here. Rabble rabble rabble, why not just be glad that there's some people reading and sharing ideas, just because Soundwave's not posting every minutes does not mean he's not taking our feedback into consideration - we're throwing a lot at him here, and there is a diverse array of viewpoints on the topic being presented. Last time I checked there wasn't a "doctor is in" sign that indicates whether a dev is present or not. Give it some time - we have a long way to go but theres no need to throw in the towel yet. Lets keep this respectful and not resort to CCP trolling like the rest of the forums, the militia community could set an example for others in how to have some constructive dialogue without things breaking down into cynical naysaying.
It's been under 24 hours since CCP Soundwave's last post, so a crazy idea maybe that he's gone to do some work with the rest of the people in his team about things that have come up in this thread and then maybe... I don't know, gone home to bed? |
Lugalzagezi666
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:36:00 -
[182] - Quote
Finally some people realized, that removing faction navy in hisec wont bring anything good to fw. Only less pvp opportunities to people, who do hisec raids now. In w&t theres a thread about one - loren galen for example, amarr militia has a guy from wbr, minnies have jalmon ...and there is alot of people who randomly go to enemy hisec with arty canes/trashers and pop haulers or miners - and get poped by people hunting them. Some people from tried used to do this. I even remember "loty granat" from amarr militia, who got the most of his kills in minmatar hisec. If ccp removes faction navy, it will remove all targets too...
Plex mechanics - i will leave that discussion to plexing vets, since i never did many plexes. Mainly because they are really boring. With exception of post dt plexing some time ago, where both sides regularly fought on frig/cruiser/bc level for about 2 hours after dt. But being able to get good plex fights only for people that can play in this short time frame is broken - as have been pointed many times.
Also if someone with good overview of all opinions about "quick fixes" for fw could create some list of them, it would be much appreciated by many people here. Not fundamental changes like plexing or occupancy, keep in mind that its almost end of october, if devs tried to do some bigger change to please the people, it could as well end in big mess.
For example quick fixes like : 1. fix dt plex spawning 2. fix fw mission farming, making them unable to be soloed and blitzed in uncatchable ships 3. remove faction/pirate frigs from minor plexes and create new "unrestricted" minor for them, same with meds 4. balance faction npcs ... - this is just a few things already mentioned 9000 times
Then people could discuss the points at one place and not just randomly posting ideas all over eveo, where they will gather dust. And devs can come look - and be inspired - and dont do "we might easily be able to..." thing again. I know some people already did their lists /cearain, veshta.../, but now try to avoid all big changes there isnt consensus about - and that dont really have a chance to be done in winter exapansion.
@ supercaps in lowsec and pl guy : you are biased and uninformed, hisec capitals cannot be used to get ANY advantage over other people - doing this may lead to 2 week ban and removing cap from hisec - if this were the rules for supercaps in lowsec, id be ok with that.
|
Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 09:43:00 -
[183] - Quote
@ CCP SOUNDWAVE
1) Fix Plexing. There are a lot of broken mechanics about Plexing currently, the Pirate Faction bullshit I mentioned earlier, the fact that it is pointless, the fact it gives no LP Reward, etc. Fixing Plexes is the key to fixing FW, this should be your priority objective. When we go back to fighting in Plexes as opposed to fighting at gates and stations, it'll fix a lot of the complaints about Blobbing, Hot - Drops, outside interference that people have with the current state of FW.
2) You proclaim that FW is a place for "people to dip their toes in the world of PvP" but that is not the way it is at all. The NPC Corps are completely broken. New players have a terrible experience in them and don't learn how to PvP because they don't get to PvP with the main fleets of Militia except for a few brave FCs who pick up Xs in General Militia. You need to change the way new players are introduced into Militia (eliminate NPC Corp and force them into Player Corps is a decent idea) or you need to change the label of FW as being a place for new players.
3) Don't give us new zones to fight in, fix the zones that we have. Expanding HighSec to standard FW Combat will simply thin the crowd out even more. Part of the reason I love FW is because the whole front is contained in a single region, a few constellations, a few key systems. There is no 30 jump roams going on, if you want a fight, you go one or two jumps over to the enemy's main systems and find them there.
@ The Rest of Us in this Thread
Ignore Pandemic Legion's attempts to troll. This isn't about Pandemic Legion. This is about Faction Warfare; about us. If he wants to provide actual ideas, thats fine, but giving his trolling recognition in the thread is detracting from the purpose of the thread and making it harder for CCP Soundwave to pick out the good ideas.
my 2cents.
|
Bengal Bob
Royal Order of Security Specialists
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 10:31:00 -
[184] - Quote
S810 Jr wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bengal Bob wrote:Guys, Soundwave has already gone from thread.
Guess they are going to remove hi sec npc to spread out the fight and make long term standings less of an issue.
Usual CCP fix - remove something rather than fixing and adding new content.
FFS, can we have an actual FW dev assigned to start planning out changes in discussion with players - preferably one that isn't going to go to Russia and hide for months instead of answering questions. Maybe even one that PLAYS eve and is involved in FW.
Unless of course they have all unsubbed in protest. Seriously? We don't need this kind of doomsday buillshit here. Rabble rabble rabble, why not just be glad that there's some people reading and sharing ideas, just because Soundwave's not posting every minutes does not mean he's not taking our feedback into consideration - we're throwing a lot at him here, and there is a diverse array of viewpoints on the topic being presented. Last time I checked there wasn't a "doctor is in" sign that indicates whether a dev is present or not. Give it some time - we have a long way to go but theres no need to throw in the towel yet. Lets keep this respectful and not resort to CCP trolling like the rest of the forums, the militia community could set an example for others in how to have some constructive dialogue without things breaking down into cynical naysaying. It's been under 24 hours since CCP Soundwave's last post, so a crazy idea maybe that he's gone to do some work with the rest of the people in his team about things that have come up in this thread and then maybe... I don't know, gone home to bed?
It has been 2 years since CCP have made any improvements on FW.
For those of you that think kissing arse wil get you anywhere, you should think again. The ONLY reason CCP is looking at FW again is because activity levels and subs have dropped across EVE. The panic button has been hit and they are now working on damage control.
Being pathetically grateful for a few posts that have addressed none of the concerns of the FW community is sad.
The only comment from CCP is "Lets remove NPC from high sec" This is a sign of someone that has been sent out to shut us up, and wants to do it quickly with the least effort. He has completely ignored all of the many many good suggestions offered over the last two years. Too lazy to read up on FW and find out the real problems and issues experienced by players.
I am more than happy to have constructive dialogue with CCP, should there actually be dialogue. All I see is Soundwave is completely out of touch with FW. Do we really want to settle for being fobbed off again? Or should we be saying now that CCP needs to take seriously the FW players that have been very patient?
Is it too much to ask for an active eve player from CCP to be engaging the FW community in "dialogue" Maybe even one that is involved in FW? Or prepared to take the time to read up on FW and find out what are the mopst common problems?
Stop being grateful for scraps, that is what got us to where we are. |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 10:53:00 -
[185] - Quote
On the PL front, hasn't changed W-BR game play at all. Not really changed any of the player corps. They have a right to be their, so what if the warp 6 Titans in to kill a Dram. It should have taken any good player about 30 seconds to see Amamake = Super blob. Enter at ones own risk and expect to see the Supers coming in.
As for FW. Pretty much all be said so I will just toss out the Highlights once again to add another voice to them.
- 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.
- Removal of standings hits for repping FW members who are for their own reasons Pirates. Its just dumb and every GM returns standing anyway so leaving it as is just makes work for GMs.
- Fliping systems should reward players involved with HUGE LP rewards. Like wise, should a bunker be attacked and saved. said saving pilots should get rewarded. This would mean moving Bunkers into some sort of gated area So only those on grid and involved get the LPs.
- The high sec thing, Players in FW can already enter enermy high sec, dealing with the Navy is just the cost of said trips. Ask Bobamelius Two or Loren Gallon if its hard. They both get more then enough kills in enermy high sec.
- Cal/Amarr Gal/Min NEED to see each other as Friendly. If I see minnies and Gals as WTs then my brothers in arms should damn well be blue, or purple as it is.
- FW is not really noob friendly. Sure any **** can join the Militia but unless you're in a player based corp, you're likely to go unheard.
Also please stop thinking or FW as a steping stone. FW is not a half way house into Null Sec. My own corp are GAINING members from null. Low sec is a hell of a lot more fun then Sov warfare, we won't be moving to null to take part in the boring "End Game".
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 |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 11:41:00 -
[186] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:On the PL front, hasn't changed W-BR game play at all. Not really changed any of the player corps. They have a right to be their, so what if the warp 6 Titans in to kill a Dram. It should have taken any good player about 30 seconds to see Amamake = Super blob. Enter at ones own risk and expect to see the Supers coming in.
As for FW. Pretty much all be said so I will just toss out the Highlights once again to add another voice to them.
- 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.
- Removal of standings hits for repping FW members who are for their own reasons Pirates. Its just dumb and every GM returns standing anyway so leaving it as is just makes work for GMs.
- Fliping systems should reward players involved with HUGE LP rewards. Like wise, should a bunker be attacked and saved. said saving pilots should get rewarded. This would mean moving Bunkers into some sort of gated area So only those on grid and involved get the LPs.
- The high sec thing, Players in FW can already enter enermy high sec, dealing with the Navy is just the cost of said trips. Ask Bobamelius Two or Loren Gallon if its hard. They both get more then enough kills in enermy high sec.
- Cal/Amarr Gal/Min NEED to see each other as Friendly. If I see minnies and Gals as WTs then my brothers in arms should damn well be blue, or purple as it is.
- FW is not really noob friendly. Sure any **** can join the Militia but unless you're in a player based corp, you're likely to go unheard.
Also please stop thinking or FW as a steping stone. FW is not a half way house into Null Sec. My own corp are GAINING members from null. Low sec is a hell of a lot more fun then Sov warfare, we won't be moving to null to take part in the boring "End Game".
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
Forgot fixing the plex spawn mechanics. Any sov mech change needs that.
As far as seeing cal/amarr and gal/min friendly NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 1 of two things will happen. 1) Standing hits won't change and you will see people that are "friendly" shooting you. 2) Standing hits WILL change for shooting the allied faction. This would be lame, because i like to jump fences every so often and shoot everyone.
|
DQuijote
Autocannons Anonymous
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 13:00:00 -
[187] - Quote
1. Highg-sec navy should stay or else high sec trade hubs will be camped. New militia members ganked in they newly fitted t1 frigs and they will leave militia. Its pretty easy to fight in enemy high sec now if u know how to do it but the NPC navy prevents gate and station camping which imo is good.
2. No need to ban supers from low-sec. I think EVE doesnt need any restricions of that kind. It should be as "open" as possible (u may laugh at my english :) ). PL presence in Ama area is great. They deliver more targets and prevent FW blobing. FW is great arena of small gang solo now. Thank u PL.
3. Faction NPC corp station guns in militia "owned" systems (TLF for example) should open fire at enemy militia but they should allow them to dock with 50% shield 50% cap penalty at undock. That would mean less staion camping. Im sure every1 saw what was happaning at Auga 3rd which was camped 23/7 (Huola 24 imperial is capmed as well, i know that ). Fresh unexperienced militia members ganked in their frigs got frustrated and left. That would allow to make such stations safer allowing them to grow into low-sec trade hubs for militia members.
4. Faction frigs leveled with AF. No more drams in minor plexes.
5. If u look at militia kb ull recognize that there are less then 100 pilot names. Rest of militia members just farms LP from FW lv4 missions. I make ISK not in FW missions so it easy for me to say it but lower the LP income from FW missions or get rid of the missions. Give more LP for 1.killing enemy militia, 2. taking plexes, 3.defending plexes, 4.taking over a system.
6. Plexes may be more diverse. Minor-1 , Minor-5, Minor-unrestriced, would allow to enter 1 pilot from both sides, up to 5, or unlimited number on both sides. I like the idea of alarm visible to militia membres in constelation/system informing about a plex being taken.
7. Minor plexes have to be doable solo. Spy-paranoia prevented new militia members from getting into a good corp. They have to have a chance of making ISK/LP from plexing solo, work for their name and look for a corp.
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 13:36:00 -
[188] - 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 -
[189] - 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. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
73
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 14:13:00 -
[190] - 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/). |
|
Creat Posudol
True Knights Templar
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 14:18:00 -
[191] - Quote
I haven't read the entire thread yet, so apologies for any double-posting or no not including previously made arguments. I'll catch up soon though and will post again...
Disclaimer: I have been in FW for a relatively short time pretty soon after it launched. Back then there were mostly medium-sized blobs (50 players or so) and it was entertaining for a while, but got old pretty fast. Missed any incentive to engange in small numbers to have an actual fight develop instead of others jumping into us, lag lag, shoot a couple shots, lag lag, dead. (yes I know, lags with fleets that size won't happen anymore, but you also wouldn't get fleets of that size in FW together nowadays from what I read)
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.
This would have a pretty huge impact! It would change FW to be basically a normal war. It would most likely stop being about low-sec (if the rest stays the same at least, let's hope it doesn't!) and move more to Hubs and the like, be more about station games there trying to catch people unprepared instead of trying to find others also looking for a fight in the "designated areas".
Outside of FW I'm very much in favor of this though. The current standing/navy mechanic is quite unfair to Gallente/Minmatar for those that want to do normal missions against other facions (or have done so in the past before they knew any better). Why? Because Jita happens to be Caldari space. Most people have to (or at least want to) go there every once in a while.
So this is a dilemma now, and it would just turn to a different dilemma if this was changed. Now/Before change: Joining FW means it's impossible to go to jita for any market activity, because of navy. Even after leaving FW my standing with caldari will probably be low enough that they'd shoot me then too. After change: I can always go there, but joining FW means I can be shot by the opposing side pretty much everywhere, including in my home system while doing something carebar-y. So in both there are pretty strong incentives not to join FW (which I assume we're trying to get rid of I presume), but all in all removing the navies will be the better solution in my opinion. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 14:22:00 -
[192] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: 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.
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. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 14:29:00 -
[193] - 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 -
[194] - 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
303
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:03:00 -
[195] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: 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.
Agreed.
I think the important thing to remember about farming is that we're all going to do it as long as there's isk and its still fun. I am more than willing to say I farm faction warfare missions, because they are the most lucrative form of income I have access to, and they offset the cost of PvP.
The reason I have no shame in saying this is that there isn't a single time that I've set out to do a round of missions that I haven't engaged in PvP along the way, even if its purely games of cat and mouse, outrunning, evading, and sometimes confronting your attackers.
Bombers have always been my ship of choice (anyone can see my lossmails to know this, no secrets there), though I don't use an Inty, I just speed tank the aggro myself. Even if I'm solo farming, the fun for me is the challenge of fighting an NPC fleet in the most fragile ship in the game, while being chased by sometimes groups of war targets. It's dangerous, you'll lose ships every time you make a single mistake, but there is great satisfaction in knowing that you've managed to survive against the odds, complete your objectives, and come home with a pocket full of cash.
There is great fun when you're in a system full of WT's chasing you, you have three missions to do, and you can cloak past accel gates, get in there, complete the mission, and get out before they realize that you've snuck past them. And than do it again. And again, taunting the dramiels and slicers with a kill thats forever just out of reach. When they finally get me, they've earned it.
To me, this is a form of PvP even though I'm engaging in what is considered whoring/farming missions. I'm entertained, the WT's are entertained, there is real risk as the offset for the rewards.
All this to say, I dont see missions as necessarily broken, there has to be a substantial income source for militia pilots if we are expected to pew pew daily in support of our factions.
The pilots who actually PvP on the frontlines are not getting absurdly rich off this, we burn through this isk as fast as we make it. The problem are the huge number of alts that fill up the NPC militia corps and farm missions while refusing to plug in to a player corp who they can fleet with as well.
TL: DR - Its not the money that can be made off the missions (or plexes if the rewards are shifted there), or the fact that they can be done solo, its the lack of oversight over those who join general militia with an alt, farm faction gear which should be the unique reward for the militia pilots, flood the market and hurt the only viable living most milita PvPers have, but never actually contribute to the PvP scene.
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:30:00 -
[196] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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. .
Then increase the chance there will be opposition. Give a notification to the enemy militias.
X Gallentius wrote: 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.
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. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Lord Meriak
Amarrian Retribution
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:00:00 -
[197] - Quote
Re move the bunker bash, and make all the faction station conquerable.
This would give a system meaning allowing only owner's of sytem to dock. + agents loss / gained
If alliance are allowed to join fw. then dont remove fw navy in high sec. make them think more about who they side with ie jita / amarr hubs.
Fw navy needs balance.. ie amarr navy shud have neuts. tracking and hit harder then it does.
Use Fw missions to differnace rather then sitting at aplex for 15 + mins. This would spread the warfare out more then just lets sit in 1 system. This get rid of the spawn at dt.
|
Tear Miner
Republic University Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:04:00 -
[198] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Silence iKillYouu wrote:Keep the thread about FW.
Not everything has to be about PL and supercaps
Hey I didn't start it, they did. I got into FW at its launch, stayed with it for 2 months, once we realized that the ability to take systems was completely broken we bailed. 3 years later its still broken.
3 years later and you're still bitter. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:05:00 -
[199] - 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
305
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:13:00 -
[200] - Quote
Sorry, I must have missed something here - what is this "poison pill" thats being talked about? |
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:18:00 -
[201] - 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). |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
73
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:32:00 -
[202] - 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 |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
307
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:45:00 -
[203] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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).
EEEwwwww.....I hate cutting the net. In that case, consider me a "no" vote for more crap like that....
I think "griefers" should be able to disrupt mission runners by chasing them off or killing them, but a simple gimmick that prevents them from ever completing it due to an item seems too overpowered.
If every mission had these, you could effectively follow targets and deny missions, not by outmatching them but beating them to the can, forcing them to wait out the entire mission expiration before being able to grab more missions.
I've you've made the mission runner target take a 20 minute break to play another game, you've successfully disrupted his income source in a significant way.
FW missions are lucrative in terms of isk/hour. Every 20 minute timeout you provide the target, reduces this isk/hour ratio drastically. If you're chasing targets around and discouraging missioning, you're killing his income and hitting him in the wallet same same as if you blew up a ship. By reducing his isk/hour ratio, you're killing the advantage that he has by running the privileged missions over other forms of income like level 4's, mining, or exploration.
If the majority of militia pilots rely on FW missions to fund their PvP, being able to make hits on their income through mission interception is a totally legit strategy, but making it so that WT's can force you to wait 12 hours every time they best you simply means that too many people won't be able to run them at all.
None of us have the free time to take an hour to pick up a stack of missions, spend another hour getting themselves locked out of the mission missions beacuse of WT's, and than spend another 12 hours waiting for the offer to lapse. We'd never get anything done.
20 minute time outs are more than painful enough. Poison pills could kill the incentive to go out and mission at all. |
Memorya
Random Curiosity
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:49:00 -
[204] - Quote
There are several major problems with factional warfare.
Proposed fixes by me:
- Adjusted all E-war from NPCs. - Mixed out weaponry more, some long range, some shortrange, some missiles for all 4 races. - All NPC's must be destroyed to capture the site. - Loyalty point shop coud be revamped with beter items.
Quote:Currently, when a system changes ownership, there is no reward nor consequence to this. It will be listed on the factional warfare statistics page but no credit is given. In addition, there are no changes in the system itself. People can still dock at stations, and agents will still hand out missions. There is nothing that shows that a faction occupies a system besides a little bit of text at the top of the screen.
Proposed fixes by me:
- If system is taken by enemy faction, only that faction have control over that system (dock and use of the station). - NPC guard's coud be setup'd at stastion/gate once the system is taken. - If enemy hold's the system, you are unable to dock or take any missions from that station. - Station attack's you and there are npc's at the station to guard.
Consequence vs Reward, afterall this is EVE.. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:53:00 -
[205] - 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.) |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
73
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:55:00 -
[206] - 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!).
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:57:00 -
[207] - 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.
and what is to stop PL from joining their alliance to a faction? your idea wouldn't change anything. besides PL would just bridge in a fleet of tengu's or even the new tier 3 bcs to whoop your ass. Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless your from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
307
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:57:00 -
[208] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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
Do you consider me an alt? Do I not have the right to run these missions for income? Fixes that discourage alt-farming should not punish legitimate PvP participants who want to use missions for income. It's what they were designed for.
I'd hardly call them risk-free either. It's quite possible to camp, chase, trap, and kill mission runners, regardless of what ship they are in.
Yes, I won't argue they are high in terms of isk/hour, arguably the most lucrative activity in the game. But as long as they're being run by those who than go and spend the money fighting against their opposing faction, its not really abuse at all.
There needs to be a more surgical fix for the alt-mission runner problem, than just killing our ability as legitimate PvP participants to fund our pew habits.
We're not in nullsec, we don't have the resources they do, but our faction warfare scene is designed to encourage regular, ongoing, PvP. Something has to exist in order to fund this.
It's a double edged sword, but a necessary one at the moment without a viable alternative. If you kill militia member's primary income source, one they are rightfully entitled to as active contributors to the scene, there is no faster ticket to killing regular PvP and FW in general. We're trying to encourage more people to come play with us out here, a sustainable income source in one form or another is an absolute necessity. |
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:02:00 -
[209] - Quote
I still have to use 3 Sensor boosters to be able to target in a mission. Locking a battleship rat can take up to 40 seconds in some scenarios due to damps. Remove all NPCs ECM/damps and reduce their dps to such **** that I can bring a pvp ship rather than a pve one if this "poison pill" concept is to have any merit. Everyone that wants to make isk making a pvp activity just want to gank pve fitted ships with their pvp fitted ship. Mixing pvp and pve has already proven to be a bad idea (see FW plexing). |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
307
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:06:00 -
[210] - Quote
David Grogan wrote:
and what is to stop PL from joining their alliance to a faction? your idea wouldn't change anything. besides PL would just bridge in a fleet of tengu's or even the new tier 3 bcs to whoop your ass.
We are quite capable of dealing with PL tengu's and tier 3 BC's, spend some time perusing our corp's killboard. We quite enjoy engaging PL in these kinds of ships and welcome the presence of more targets in our systems of this size.
We are in militia precisely because we enjoy subcap warfare more than capital warfare, and consider it a much better test of a pilot's skill than whether they can drop a super onto someone. Clearly, any noob right now can grab an ebay super toon and flap this around and be successful, it doesn't say anything about their skill. PL has certainly earned theirs I'm sure through months of hard labor, but that doesnt mean that flying a super shows off your talent over being able to fight in a Tengu.
The problem currently is that to engage PL regularly, we have to become pirates. I would vastly prefer that PL be able to align themselves with a militia, (hopefully Amarr) so we can blow up their smaller ships on the regular, as long as the trade-off was that measures were in place to ensure that Faction Warfare continues to be a bastion of small gang and small fleet warfare as it was originally designed. |
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
73
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:08:00 -
[211] - 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 *pop*pop*pop* |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:13:00 -
[212] - 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
307
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:17:00 -
[213] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:I still have to use 3 Sensor boosters to be able to target in a mission. Locking a battleship rat can take up to 40 seconds in some scenarios due to damps. Remove all NPCs ECM/damps and reduce their dps to such **** that I can bring a pvp ship rather than a pve one if this "poison pill" concept is to have any merit. Everyone that wants to make isk making a pvp activity just want to gank pve fitted ships with their pvp fitted ship. Mixing pvp and pve has already proven to be a bad idea (see FW plexing).
Excellent point, and I sympathize with those in other militias who have ewar being used on them that makes mission running a royal pain in the ass. I haven't run missions for other militias, but I hear its pretty awful.
I won't pretend the Minmatar don't have it easy, its almost cute when the Amarr spam my Hound with 27 tracking disruptors. The fact that you are having to fit multiple SeBo's to mission run is utter horseshit.
Tweaking the NPC behavior in missions is a fantastic way to fix up faction warfare and make it more balanced, and more fun.
Missions should absolutely be designed to be run in PvP - fit ships, you are spot on in this observation.
The currenty imbalances that are a direct result of sloppy, inconsistent AI difficulties from militia to miliita have large, noticeable market indicators that things are out of control.
CCP Soundwave would be well served to look at the prices of the faction gear being farmed and sold on the market, to see that Minmatar LP rewards flood the market with much more frequency than those of other factions, whos prices are much higher comparatively.
The fact that the market clearly indicates a preference for the farming of one factions missions over another is also a fantastic demonstration of the sheer number of alt-farmers who only enlist for the purposes of creating and selling gear. If the missions were of similar difficulty in scope, I think the natural balance between player RP preference would be evident in seeing people enlist in a variety of militias, and run a variety of missions, not just loading up minmatar because their cake is tastier and is easier to obtain.
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:22:00 -
[214] - 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
311
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:26:00 -
[215] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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 *pop*pop*pop*
I don't quite follow - are you suggesting that AUTOZ don't go out and run missions in gangs and prefer to station camp? What a daft suggestion. Apologies if I'm misunderstanding you - but really, AUTOZ activity is pretty regular and not that difficult to observe and see what we've been up to. Your implications couldn't be farther from the truth.
Running missions in gangs is the BEST way to run them, in terms of overall fun level. Its just unfortunate the mechanics don't encourage this more. I think that being able to run missions solo should still be viable, but a definite challenge and the overall design should make running them in gangs the most efficient method to earn income, to encourage this kind of gang work. |
NeoTheo
Dark Materials
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:46:00 -
[216] - Quote
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.
How about keep them in 1.0 and 0.9. Nuke them from every place else.
To oftern we talk about "low sec" and "empire", if we arnt doing much with system sec levels then we shouldnt really have them now should we? I know some things are done with them, rat quality and mineral quality etc. but lets be perfectly honest, the difference between a 0.9 and 0.5 is minimal - its one things CCP has needed to fix for years and never did anything about, this might be a good place to start.
|
Kain De'Stroi
Spiritus Draconis
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:48:00 -
[217] - 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.
I speak as the dirty (currently in fw) pirate i am. be carefull here. i think this could be a good idea whit npc customs but not for this.
The current mechanics are ok, but they might even need a boost. I already now se fellow fw pies like myself perma tanking navys whit simple canes and drakes, ganking fw newbies outside stations that didnt know they should check local before undocking.
there is a reason why us pirates are forced out to low sec. we can never be enforced, only kept at bay, NPC are stupied, and players are often to weak.
Currently navys and players together is just that. a force that keep us at bay. But if you removed them, ach poor fw newbies.. I think you pretty soon would find alt boosted SEBO camps at every main gate that would be practically invulnerable becasue no one could light a cyno on us.
so be carefull before you unleash our evil and let our alts go rampant in empire.
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:06:00 -
[218] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:I still have to use 3 Sensor boosters to be able to target in a mission. Locking a battleship rat can take up to 40 seconds in some scenarios due to damps. Remove all NPCs ECM/damps and reduce their dps to such **** that I can bring a pvp ship rather than a pve one if this "poison pill" concept is to have any merit. Everyone that wants to make isk making a pvp activity just want to gank pve fitted ships with their pvp fitted ship. Mixing pvp and pve has already proven to be a bad idea (see FW plexing).
This.
The thing is, if you reduce the rat dps so that it doesn't effect a pvp tank then why have them at all?
I think we need to stop trying to make a pve activity into a pvp one. Mixing the 2 never works.
Mission running is a pve activity. It can be fun to chase after misssion runners but when you do it, don't claim your looking for a good fight - your looking for a gank. That's fine and good, but call it what it is.
There are ways to catch mission runners in this game now. I have been caught a few times at gates and by people cloaked at the warp in. I have chased enemy mission runners myself. If they just make a few tweaks so you can't run them solo in sbs that will be fine.
Faction war missions could use some tweaking (I posted my thoughts some pages back) but we are not going to be able to turn mission running into a pvp activity. Nobody wants to pvp under npc fire with a ship fit to fight npcs unless they have a large numerical advantage. Nobody wants to fight against an opponent with a large numerical advantage.
Plexing on the other hand can and should be a pvp activity. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cal Gin
The Necromonger
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:35:00 -
[219] - Quote
My problem with allowing alliances into FW has nothing to do with the uber blobs (we all know thats what it would become) my problem is with the income aspect of it. FW remains one of the best ways to make isk in this game short of being a tycoon. Caldari already has a problem with corps that are there solely for farming missions (including a number of well known alt corps for the bigger alliances). This can easily be seen by the price of Navy Scorps and Scorpians in recent months... Once news about the impending fix to FW was released Navy scorp prices dove 20 to 30 mil and scorpian prices jumped 10 mil, there where even a few times in Jita where there seriously was not a single scorpian for sale... I say if you really wanna fix FW create a mechanic that would kick out the carbears... On paper Caldari milita out numers the other militas by 2k members... in practice we are probably one of the smallest of the militias...
Allowing more people into FW would kill the market far more than it already has esp[ecially since the ships that FW provides are hardly ever used in combat (navy scorps and ravens) in fact the only faction ships seen regularly in FW are the faction frigates, their needs to be a new ship that can be priced just right so that its expensive enough to make isk but low enough that you dont kill your KB every time you loose one, i think Faction BC's would really fill that void since most of our fleets are BC fleets anyways.
P.S. sorry if what i said has already been said.... too many pages to read everything :) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
311
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:58:00 -
[220] - Quote
Cal Gin wrote:
P.S. sorry if what i said has already been said.... too many pages to read everything :)
I hear ya Gin, many threads get so long its easiest to throw down your thoughts whether its been said or not. Welcome to the discussion anyways!
I am by no means the authority here, there are lots of opposing opinions, many of which are valid concerns as well.
But here are my personal thoughts on the issues you raised though...to save you some search time.
Here is how I feel about the idea that letting alliances in automatically means blobbage.
Here is how I feel about the idea that letting more FW players in automatically means more market destruction.
Dont just take my word for it, I'm just one of the more verbose contributors, there is a lot of great ideas kicking around so if you're interested, take the time to read more! |
|
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:22:00 -
[221] - Quote
Cal Gin wrote:My problem with allowing alliances into FW has nothing to do with the uber blobs (we all know thats what it would become) my problem is with the income aspect of it. FW remains one of the best ways to make isk in this game short of being a tycoon. Caldari already has a problem with corps that are there solely for farming missions (including a number of well known alt corps for the bigger alliances). This can easily be seen by the price of Navy Scorps and Scorpians in recent months... Once news about the impending fix to FW was released Navy scorp prices dove 20 to 30 mil and scorpian prices jumped 10 mil, there where even a few times in Jita where there seriously was not a single scorpian for sale... I say if you really wanna fix FW create a mechanic that would kick out the carbears... On paper Caldari milita out numers the other militas by 2k members... in practice we are probably one of the smallest of the militias...
Allowing more people into FW would kill the market far more than it already has esp[ecially since the ships that FW provides are hardly ever used in combat (navy scorps and ravens) in fact the only faction ships seen regularly in FW are the faction frigates, their needs to be a new ship that can be priced just right so that its expensive enough to make isk but low enough that you dont kill your KB every time you loose one, i think Faction BC's would really fill that void since most of our fleets are BC fleets anyways.
P.S. sorry if what i said has already been said.... too many pages to read everything :)
An increase in the population that can supply faction items such as navy scorps, domis, etc will infact drop prices further. Implementing more items (such as the customs office BPCs, other faction ships) available to spend the LP on will help alleviate this though. I was really hoping for that "iterative cruiser balance" to fix a lot of the navy faction cruisers (the lower teired ones in particular) which would make them appealing, giving them more value. |
Wa'roun
Quantum Cats Syndicate
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:35:00 -
[222] - Quote
DeBingJos wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys 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'm not in favor of such a change. Currently Highsec is relativly safe when you are in fw. Removing faction police would also remove a safe haven that new fw pilots need when they don't want to pvp or need to replace some losses.
+1 |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:54:00 -
[223] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:Cal Gin wrote:My problem with allowing alliances into FW has nothing to do with the uber blobs (we all know thats what it would become) my problem is with the income aspect of it. FW remains one of the best ways to make isk in this game short of being a tycoon. Caldari already has a problem with corps that are there solely for farming missions (including a number of well known alt corps for the bigger alliances). This can easily be seen by the price of Navy Scorps and Scorpians in recent months... Once news about the impending fix to FW was released Navy scorp prices dove 20 to 30 mil and scorpian prices jumped 10 mil, there where even a few times in Jita where there seriously was not a single scorpian for sale... I say if you really wanna fix FW create a mechanic that would kick out the carbears... On paper Caldari milita out numers the other militas by 2k members... in practice we are probably one of the smallest of the militias...
Allowing more people into FW would kill the market far more than it already has esp[ecially since the ships that FW provides are hardly ever used in combat (navy scorps and ravens) in fact the only faction ships seen regularly in FW are the faction frigates, their needs to be a new ship that can be priced just right so that its expensive enough to make isk but low enough that you dont kill your KB every time you loose one, i think Faction BC's would really fill that void since most of our fleets are BC fleets anyways.
P.S. sorry if what i said has already been said.... too many pages to read everything :) An increase in the population that can supply faction items such as navy scorps, domis, etc will infact drop prices further. Implementing more items (such as the customs office BPCs, other faction ships) available to spend the LP on will help alleviate this though. I was really hoping for that "iterative cruiser balance" to fix a lot of the navy faction cruisers (the lower teired ones in particular) which would make them appealing, giving them more value.
Yep other than the stabber the cruisers really have no place. For pve there are better ships, such as the pirate ships. For pvp they are too expensive for what they add. I'm not exactly sure how to make them more appealing but they definitely need some sort of boost. Maybe more speed. Other lp items could be balanced a bit so they have some sort of role.
I don't have a problem with pvpers running the missions and buying stuff to get blown up in fw. I just don't like it when people join fw *only* for the missions. IMO that is the problem and the solution should be tailored to that problem. I think they should just say something like you can only do 40 missions until you get a certain number of vp for pvp kills.
Making missions so you have to join a fleet to run them is not tailored to the problem.
Making them more challenging so they can't easilly be done by an alt is also a good idea. I think that is more of a problem for the caldari and Minmatar militias because they have the easiest missions to run. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 20:18:00 -
[224] - Quote
I keep seeing how CVA and other alliances should be allowed into Militia because they are already supporters of it.
Since when?
I have been in militia my entire EVE time flying with Amarr and I've heard of CVA helping once. As far as I can tell, they don't really care about militia, they have their own problems. I know in a roleplay sense they do care, but that is just words, it means little out on the war front.
The militia is supposed to act like a loose alliance anyhow, so I personally don't see the reason to allow alliances to join.
Alliances have different goals than militia corps do, and I really don't want to see those huge alliances coming out to farm kills and missions then leaving at a whim.
Just my two cents.
Also, I think it is a great idea to get rid of the NPC militia corps. There are countless new players who end up joining the militias that way without having a clue to what it is about. They see a shiny button and press it, tada they are in an insta war and haven't an inkling of what is going on.
At that point, they are asking in militia channel and they are most likely not getting the warmest of welcomes because most of the vet FWers are thinking they are spies. They aren't getting help, they aren't getting picked up for fleets, they aren't learning anything really but how to troll.
http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
314
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:16:00 -
[225] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote: I have been in militia my entire EVE time flying with Amarr and I've heard of CVA helping once. As far as I can tell, they don't really care about militia, they have their own problems. I know in a roleplay sense they do care, but that is just words, it means little out on the war front.
Agreed, indeed. We have the exact same issue with UK and EM. We are approached by them with requests for mutual blues, and its a difficult thing to agree to (though most minnie FW corps do) because they dont spend time in our warzone, even though we'll roam out through 0.0 looking for action.
The result is basically that the alliances gain protection from us shooting them in nullsec, but we receive nothing in return. And no corp that takes its pew pew seriously enjoys arbitrarily shortening its target list, even for roleplay reasons.
Here's my speculation on the reason why. In 0.0, standings are irrelevant, you can shoot whoever and nothing changes. But when CVA comes to lowsec, and starts firing on Minnie Militia, they are treated as criminals by CONCORD, and eventually they wouldn't be able to hang out in their own faction's highsec space.
If that were the case, I'd never come to our warzone to help our militia "friends" either. I think CVA and UK/EM would love to assist the militia in principle, but the mechanics make this impossible to sustain for any period of time.
Perhaps a representative from those Alliances could chime in here if they're reading list, I don't mean to insult them or pass judgement, this is merely my speculation based on what I've seen play out as well.
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:26:00 -
[226] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:The militia is supposed to act like a loose alliance anyhow, so I personally don't see the reason to allow alliances to join....
I think this is a good point. And yeah it seems pandemic legion cares more about faction war than cva if actions speak louder than words.
But wouldn't it be hard for them to start shooting minmatar militia in low sec and killing their sec status with their anti-piracy policy? I'm not sure what their rules are. But it may be that they can't really do much to help because they are not allowed to. Under the current mechanics most of the third parties that war dec fw corps are seen more like leeches than help. Its not really their fault though. They may want to join in but now they can only war dec single corps.
As far as the npc corp I think it serves a purpose. Rather than trying to keep track of a hundred small no name corps it makes sense to group everyone that is new, or in between corps, into the npc corp.
On the other hand, people who are brand new to low sec probably shoud have a corp that they can ask questions of.
Perhaps the militia should act more like an alliance and make a faq about low sec, and faction war mechanics, as well as some other things about joining fw. It could be a decent web page with some youtube videos imbedded. That way whenever someone new shows up in militia chat instead of trying to explain stuff over the chat channel (which is frustrating) we could give a link to this web page. I imagine many corps have this already in the form of many forum posts. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
314
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:44:00 -
[227] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Perhaps the militia should act more like an alliance and make a faq about low sec, and faction war mechanics, as well as some other things about joining fw. It could be a decent web page with some youtube videos imbedded. That way whenever someone new shows up in militia chat instead of trying to explain stuff over the chat channel (which is frustrating) we could give a link to this web page. I imagine many corps have this already in the form of many forum posts.
We have to have something for the new people to do besides learn PvP by being tossed in with Veteran pilots and learning by monkey-see-monkey-do. New players should have a role to play besides tackle and cannon / troll fodder, even if its just having some working plexes that they can run in small gangs of cheap ships, even if the veterans are doing their own thing in the larger plexes.
That's how it used to be - younger corps taking on smaller plexes in frigs/cruisers, older corps taking the lead on larger plexes in BS fleets with tech 2 ship support. There was a variety of things to participate it, and new pilots felt relevant. Thats how it was when I started - but the plexing got old real fast, and it wasn't long before hardly anyone in militias participated anymore, because half of FW pilots moved to nullsec out of boredom, and the remaining group graduated into advanced enough ships that small plexes were not worth the bother.
I hate to write a giant media site promoting FW in its current state. There isn't much to say other than there's some great pilots, who have a static war, and run missions, but there isn't any GOALS to work for or strategic objectives. The only advice I can give to newbies I can give right here - grab some rifters and ruptures, get kills on your own somehow, someway, for long enough till a corp like ours is satisfied you're not a spai and lets you in. Than, the only thing to do is hop in fleets, make mistakes, take correction well, and slowly learn the ropes as you get better. But dont expect much except the same kind of roaming much like the pirate corps do. For a lot of us the PvP is fun enough, but for others its not enough to feel like you're accomplishing anything.
But if FW is indeed "fixed" and theres some new rewards and objectives, than hell yes, there will be a host of people willing to contribute to promoting the **** out of it.
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:58:00 -
[228] - 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! |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:05:00 -
[229] - Quote
You're right Hans. When I first started I felt relevant in my little punisher out running the small plexes back in the day. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Garr Earthbender
Quantum Cats Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:08:00 -
[230] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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!
Good call bubba!! |
|
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:16:00 -
[231] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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!
^ this |
Bootleg Jack
Potters Field
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 23:32:00 -
[232] - Quote
Wa'roun wrote:DeBingJos wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys 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'm not in favor of such a change. Currently Highsec is relativly safe when you are in fw. Removing faction police would also remove a safe haven that new fw pilots need when they don't want to pvp or need to replace some losses. +1
Safe?
I say pull the NPCs and all the PvE missions out of factions.
What is so wrong with a PvP only activity? |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:16:00 -
[233] - Quote
Silence iKillYouu wrote:I think i have a idea with help. From a amarr pilot in local lol. Sabotage :)
If we make the Plex's as mini incursion type things (were u would need a certain amount of pilots per each size) Make sure the rats are smart like the incursion rats. U split the LP the same as incisions. So if 2 fleets are in one plex only the most helpful fleet gets reward.
Everyone fights for the plex's Each side would be alot more active to get the LP Keep the gates how they are to filter ship types.
EASY FIX We have something to fight for Alot of pilots would join and be FORCED to fight for there isk. Good start EASY FIX
Soundwave mail me ur ideas
|
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:22:00 -
[234] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:
Also, I think it is a great idea to get rid of the NPC militia corps. There are countless new players who end up joining the militias that way without having a clue to what it is about. They see a shiny button and press it, tada they are in an insta war and haven't an inkling of what is going on.
At that point, they are asking in militia channel and they are most likely not getting the warmest of welcomes because most of the vet FWers are thinking they are spies. They aren't getting help, they aren't getting picked up for fleets, they aren't learning anything really but how to troll.
If we took away the NCP corps we could manage the miltia's allot better. Also LP farmers would find it hard witch is good. EASY FIX
Like!
Anyway it dosnt matter what CCP do there will always be whiners. Non of us can agree on anything so we just going to have to hope for the best. And adapt to whatever changes happen.
Also Were are the Faction Battlecrusiers? |
FlyingSpoonyBadger
The Imperial Fedaykin
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:49:00 -
[235] - Quote
My two cents:
1. Remove NPC corps definately a good idea it allows the militia's to more effectively manage their own militia.
2. Generate many more plexes make them give you LP for running them and just scrub the missions completely.
3. Vastly increase the LP for getting kills and award the LP evenly across the killers/gangs not just to the top damage dealer.
4. Removing the NPC navies.... This has some potential, I like the idea of widening the scope for combat hugely I get tired of roaming the same systems over and over. It gives people the chance to run gangs without capitol or pirate interference and it reduces the strain on the server generating all the NPC response.
5. Give occupancy some meaning again another good idea, station guns maybe free repairs definately. I dont like the idea of gate guns getting involved though. Perhaps some jump bridges into friendly systems? NPC ones that allow system controlling faction to use them maybe with a small charge or perhaps they could just be fuelld by the occupying forces?
6. Putting faction frigates and cruisers into the same bracket as T2 ships of the same size for plexes is a must I reckon.
7. An alert system for when plexes are being conquered is good, but we have to have the ability to turn off the notifications!
8. Like it or not RP is an element of the FW game, some "events" need to be included, e.g. NPC navies forcibly settling systems or clashing in low sec would be good.
Good thread, nice work getting it rolling Hanz. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 04:05:00 -
[236] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I hate to write a giant media site promoting FW in its current state. ...
I agree. CCP has to iterate on the fw mechanics first. Once they get them down we could do something decent. In the meantime I think we are pretty limitted to just the low sec mechanics. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Leon Razor
Measure Zero
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 07:41:00 -
[237] - Quote
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.
You could remove / balance faction NPCs based on sec status. So maybe 0.5 has no NPCs but 1.0 has a lot. That way militia will have some hisec places to PvP, and there will still be safe hisec systems. |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 08:59:00 -
[238] - Quote
Ok, i have one suggestion and one question/suggestion.
Introduce the pirate factions, and add a few more low sec regions for them to live in. It would be awesome if you couldnt travel from amarr space to caldari space etc without going through some pirate faction's low sec space.
second thing, what the heck is the logic behind letting members of the oposit faction being able to dock in the stations belonging to the ppl they are at war with? it makes no sense at all, and if changed, would actually force more pvp to happen
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 19:35:00 -
[239] - Quote
Bump back up
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 00:09:00 -
[240] - Quote
Take away NPC corps Take away NPC Navys Make plex's worth fighting over. Make them more like mini incursions.
Should all be fairly easy |
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 01:11:00 -
[241] - Quote
Silence iKillYouu wrote:Take away NPC corps Take away NPC Navys Make plex's worth fighting over. Make them more like mini incursions. Fix the bombers-farming-missions problem
Should all be fairly easy
fypm |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 07:14:00 -
[242] - Quote
I suspect Hans is a carebear.
The idea that fw is entry level pvp is idiotic. Fw missions as a way to 'attract' more people is counterproductive. Alliances joining FW will also completely break it.
Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it. The people who want it to stay 'safe' and those who think it should become more hardcore.
I am of the opinion that people have become mighty soft. |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 07:47:00 -
[243] - Quote
Ruah Piskonit wrote:I suspect Hans is a carebear.
The idea that fw is entry level pvp is idiotic. Fw missions as a way to 'attract' more people is counterproductive. Alliances joining FW will also completely break it.
Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it. The people who want it to stay 'safe' and those who think it should become more hardcore.
I am of the opinion that people have become mighty soft.
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.
|
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 07:57:00 -
[244] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Ruah Piskonit wrote:I suspect Hans is a carebear.
The idea that fw is entry level pvp is idiotic. Fw missions as a way to 'attract' more people is counterproductive. Alliances joining FW will also completely break it.
Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it. The people who want it to stay 'safe' and those who think it should become more hardcore.
I am of the opinion that people have become mighty soft. 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.
This does indeed look to be the truth sadly. FW needs to be made more hardcore, and the ammount of isk u can make from missions needs to be changed as well
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 13:53:00 -
[245] - 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 -
[246] - 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) |
Lugalzagezi666
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 16:32:00 -
[247] - Quote
Hey, you already have the tools - you can sit cloaked and waste your time there, while farmer completes 5 other missions.
No seriously, making fw missions be easily blitzable in bomber /or bomber + inty/ was stupid idea from the start. Something like being able to decline any number of fw missions without standings loss.
|
Berendas
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 16:53:00 -
[248] - Quote
There is one thing I would like to see ESPECIALLY if FW was taken into high sec by way of faction police removal. It would be awesome if people with low sec status could join a militia and while a member could travel into high security space. A Dirty Dozen-esque 'serve to redeem yourself' mechanic would be a fun way to allow career PVPers to participate. Of course this would need to be balanced out so that pirates couldn't abuse it. Perhaps a certain number of solo or gang kills against enemy militias is required weekly/monthly for an outlaw to maintain their amnesty in high sec. This would also be a slight buff to low sec by giving pirates something to do when traffic is dead as well as access to high sec trade hubs.
This would need to be regulated (heavily) of course to prevent abuse, but I think the idea has some merit. I don't think it's over CCP's heads to invent a good system to keep this balanced. Anyone else have thoughts on this? |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 18:08:00 -
[249] - 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.
|
zero2espect
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 20:09:00 -
[250] - Quote
while i applaud you for trying to get the biggest bunch of girlz in eve (EM) into FW - all of your ideas apart from removing big non faction alliances from FW space are tbh just bad. verging on idiotic.
all serious FW pilots should just boycot this thread.
what faction warfare needs is real rewards for plexing. bonuses (or non-reverse) bonuses for fights in FW systems.
not the ability for people who are cowards to join fw to blob it out while sucking moon goo out of 0.0.
i'd love to see faction pilots able to deploy interdictor bubbles in fw space as it adds another dimension to the game. no large bubble camps though. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
316
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 20:22:00 -
[251] - Quote
Ruah Piskonit wrote: Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it.
It's called a killboard, go use it.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
316
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 20:34:00 -
[252] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: "go ahead, take away my ability to bomb all the missions". Just make us able to earn the same income / hour with a gang, and we'll be good.
Also guys, please take the time to actually read previous posts before you go off half cocked and make ignorant statements.
I've consistently said that missioning should not be able to be abused for profit, and I've consistently said that the ability to solo missions should be nerfed, to encourage fleetwork not solo work.
I've also pointed out that the need to have an income potential from FW stems from the fact that we lose ships regularly, and I've also stated before that rewards should be stepped up in plexing, moreso than missions.
Lets keep this thread respectful, and if you're going to rant, read about **** first.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
316
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 20:41:00 -
[253] - Quote
zero2espect wrote: not the ability for people who are cowards to join fw to blob it out while sucking moon goo out of 0.0.
The reasons why Alliance participation does not mean blobbing if they fix the mechanics have been well documented in this thread.
Whether blobs form and fight each other or not has nothing to do with whether its Alliance members doing it or not, its the current plexing mechanics that discourage people from even using the plexes, and thus lead to blobbing on gates, belts, etc.
The militias blob themselves far too much, this has nothing to do with "filthy moon goo suckers", its a mechanics issue.
But clearly you've got a need to stereotype players, and hate on alliance members as if they're all the same and all use the same tactics.
If you want a medal for your bravado and swagger, I'll be happy to give you one. Everyone, zero2espect is a badass pilot, and has a bigger 3p33n than all of you. You're all cowards if you dont **** **** up as much as them.
Ok, hopefully now we can move on and get to discussing ideas again.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
316
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 20:42:00 -
[254] - Quote
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:Hey, you already have the tools - you can sit cloaked and waste your time there, while farmer completes 5 other missions. No seriously, making fw missions be easily blitzable in bomber /or bomber + inty/ was stupid idea from the start. Something like being able to decline any number of fw missions without standings loss.
Agreed, indeed. If we're going to have missions at all, they should not be blitzable in solo ship. The difficulty level should be set so the most effecient way to complete the missions is as a fleet. |
JamesCLK
Lone Star Exploration Narwhals Ate My Duck
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 20:57:00 -
[255] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Lugalzagezi666 wrote:Hey, you already have the tools - you can sit cloaked and waste your time there, while farmer completes 5 other missions. No seriously, making fw missions be easily blitzable in bomber /or bomber + inty/ was stupid idea from the start. Something like being able to decline any number of fw missions without standings loss. Agreed, indeed. If we're going to have missions at all, they should not be blitzable in solo ship. The difficulty level should be set so the most effecient way to complete the missions is as a fleet.
Which could be done with a system not dissimilar to Incursions.
And when we're talking Incursions, I think Minmatar incursions into Amarr space! How cool would it be if you could assist the incursion force in taking control of the target space? Hell, make the actual inursion itself player driven! If enough militia frequent a particular claimable system, give them the ability to start influencing this system's infrastructure.
And on the topic of infrastructure and prescence, what if you could turn lowsec into hisec and vice versa (with some limits) once enough militia frequented it?
Since FW is up for a complete redoing, it's practically a blank slate.
Also, <3 |
Johnny Punisher
Wolfsbrigade
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 00:09:00 -
[256] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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.
^^ This.
Also it would move people out of lowsec and lowsec is already empty! Horrible idea imo.
And pvp in highsec is pain in the ass, damn complicated keeping track on all the neutrals. At least if you take out the npc navy, make it so that giving neutral-RR to any faction warfare member gives GCC (so if you RR militia ppl in highsec with neutral-RR, you get concorded). Hell, it should be like that even in lowsec... Anyway: it's better to keep the fighting in lowsec.
What you SHOULD fix:
1) pirate frigs not allowed into minor plexes.
2) no standing loss in remote repping friendly militia member who is pirate/gcc
3) make plexes worth doing / dont spawn most of them after dt |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
316
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 00:23:00 -
[257] - Quote
Johnny Punisher wrote: What you SHOULD fix:
1) pirate frigs not allowed into minor plexes.
2) no standing loss in remote repping friendly militia member who is pirate/gcc
3) make plexes worth doing / dont spawn most of them after dt
Thanks Johnny, controversy over higsec NPC's being removed aside, for those at CCP reading this, all three of the fixes you've posted here have been pretty much unopposed by the contributors of this thread and many others. If the devs are looking for concrete fixes that wont rock the boat, you've nailed it.
Its good to see after 13 pages of great ideas (on both sides of certain debates, including the removal of higsec NPC's) there are ideas like these that are clearly floating to the surface and could easily be implemented in time for Winter Expansion.
I also agree with those that say that this is not enough. These would only scratch the surface, and take care of the stuff that those of us involved in FW for years now have been asking for pretty much the whole time. I, and many others, would love to see this not stop here, and move towards a full overhaul of the Faction Warfare system even if it can't be done in time for Winter. |
BoneEater
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 01:39:00 -
[258] - Quote
bump.... blog please? |
Marlakh
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 02:16:00 -
[259] - Quote
Sorry if this has been suggested before, I've not really read this thread fully. But:
When establishments comes fully online, I'd like to be able to wear my uniform around in station that (1) reflects which faction navy I signed up with, and (2) what rank I'm at.
A new uniform reflecting the new rank may be issued each time when you've been promoted. This way, the same design may also be used multiple times with minor variations in each rank.
When a player reaches the highest rank (eg Divine Commodore), a special uniform (like the 12,000 Aurum Field Marshall cloak being sold now in Nex) may be issued, or partially given with Aurum purchase.
I know this suggestion flies in the face of the shift away from Nex clothing and Aurum sales, and Establishments, so this may not even be considered in the near to medium term. Nevertheless I think being able to wear (and show off) our faction uniforms will aid in the RP aspect of FW rewards. When the time is right, I'd love for this to be implemented.
Cheers.
M |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
317
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 05:05:00 -
[260] - Quote
Marlakh wrote:Sorry if this has been suggested before, I've not really read this thread fully. But:
When establishments comes fully online, I'd like to be able to wear my uniform around in station that (1) reflects which faction navy I signed up with, and (2) what rank I'm at.
A new uniform reflecting the new rank may be issued each time when you've been promoted. This way, the same design may also be used multiple times with minor variations in each rank.
When a player reaches the highest rank (eg Divine Commodore), a special uniform (like the 12,000 Aurum Field Marshall cloak being sold now in Nex) may be issued, or partially given with Aurum purchase.
I know this suggestion flies in the face of the shift away from Nex clothing and Aurum sales, and Establishments, so this may not even be considered in the near to medium term. Nevertheless I think being able to wear (and show off) our faction uniforms will aid in the RP aspect of FW rewards. When the time is right, I'd love for this to be implemented.
Cheers.
M
Would be fun, but like you said CCP isn't going to do any more NeX/Incarna stuff any time soon, its permanently on hold. The players have spoken and Hilmar's agreed, no more of that junk for now. It's all spaceship stuff the next few expansions (except for Dust, of course).
Also, they better not do it unless they take care of the ranking system first. The ranks should have something to do with kills, its total bullshit that you get called a general for going out and running a stack of NPC missions. |
|
S810 Jr
Shadows Of The Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 08:39:00 -
[261] - Quote
If CCP really want to remove Navy from high sec then how about only removing them from systems that have a Sansha incursion happening in them. Navy is too busy with Sansha to do anything with Militia pilots if they have to RP it. That would allow Militias to do *yawn* high sec gate camps in set places and maybe get a response fleet to counter. But only as long as the incursion lasted.
Removing Navy from all high sec just sounds dumb from a RP point of view, you'd pull navy back to high sec from low sec and give the Militias the job of doing everything in low sec. |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 08:49:00 -
[262] - Quote
Remove npc's from high sec, remove docking from stations belonging to factions you are at war with.
AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD REMOVE ECM FROM CALDARI NPC'S
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 09:23:00 -
[263] - Quote
Keep in Simple
|
Bengal Bob
Royal Order of Security Specialists
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 09:44:00 -
[264] - Quote
I guess I called it early, silence from Devs indicates FW "refresh" is removal of npc navies from high sec.
Lol.
Please can someone from CCP that still plays eve try FW and see for themselves - I am talking about the pvp/plexing, not just going "Awesome missions, FW is WIN"
PS: Yesterday was loads of fun Amarr, please keep it coming |
subtle turtle
Wolfsbrigade
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 01:20:00 -
[265] - Quote
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.
Hmmmm.. Never thought about that, TBH. My issue is is if this would end up killing low-sec pretty much for good, as there would be no reason to fight there and risk pirate intervention, capital ships, etc.... One idea I had relating to this is that in high sec, NPC standing could really matter related to FW. For example, I am in Amarr Militia. If you remove the NPC intervention, you could make it so if I go into a high sec system with a station owned by a Minimatar loyal corp (Boundless Creations, for example), I would automatically be KOS for any non-FW player in that system with a standing of higher than some set amount (5.0 or so) to that corp. There would no longer be the NPC threat, but there would be an added player threat. There would be a local flag, similar to when a pilot is GCC or a wartarget to signal that I was a valid target. Of course, as soon as a non-FW player would agress the FW interloper, they would become a valid target for return fire. This would provide new PVP opportunity for all players, not just FW members, including a easy introduction to PVP for the high sec missioner. It would also open new and interesting PVP mechanics, like HS gate camps to catch potential interlopers, missioner baiting as FW members could scan out active missioners and bait them into agressing the flashy red ship that just warped into their mission. It would ad an element of surprise and danger, as NPC corp standings aren't readily available, so you wouldn't know if that ship next to you was able to shoot you until the bullets start flying. This also wouldn't minimize low sec, because the mechanics there favor the knowledgeable FW pilot more than the new, risky mechanics of enemy high sec. It would also address the "NPCs shouldn't fight battles between players" issue in a sandbox game like Eve. The real advantage of this is that it would make the ongoing struggle between the 4 factions a MUCH larger part of gameplay for all players in Empire, high or low. It would matter to missioners who they grind for, as that could influence PVP opportunity. |
Lord Meriak
Amarrian Retribution
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 08:49:00 -
[266] - Quote
With useing the incursion system.
Would this work say amarr system 100% to armour as the system became more contested this would lower and become more shield based.
these effects would effect say speed shield armour.
many differant ships needed all way threw make for a changing battlefield.
any more ideas on this.
I know some peeps only fly vega darkes etc but a good way to push out differant ships. |
Wendi Wu
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 13:05:00 -
[267] - Quote
I don't think removing NPC navies is a good idea for three reasons:
GÇó It makes absolutely no sense. It's bad enough that the NPCs let war targets dock in their stations, now they can't even be bothered to patrol their own supposedly-high-security space? GÇó Every griefer, camper and noob-targeter in FW will immediately make a beeline for the opposing side's market hub (Amarr, Jita, Dodixie, Rens) and station camp it 23/7. GÇó FW is brutal enough for newbies already. They need some kind of safe harbour.
Instead i'll repost Hans' very sensible list of suggestions that virtually everyone in FW wants:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:1.) Add rewards to plexing. Make it a desireable activity, with a distinct PvP focus and less NPC shooting and button orbiting. 2.) Fix the spawning of plexes to not only occur at downtime. Make them spawn more often, and round the clock. 3.) Remove pirate ships from any othe plexes that restrict tech 2 ships. 4.) Make docking at an enemy station hazardous to your health - either deny access completely, or if that is too extreme/imbalanced at very least cause gate guns to fire if your enemy has Sov. 5.) Fix GCC/standing for repping friendly militia members. Most of us who PvP to shoot neutrals from time to time, whenever there is "suspected enemy collaboration". 6.) Fix missions so they aren't farmable in bombers.
To which I'd add:
7.) Have friendly militias show up as blue or purple on overview so that we don't get continual friendly fire incidents between Caldari/Amarr and Gallente/Minmatar. 8.) Balance NPCs so that Amarr/Gallente rats are less of a joke compared to Minmatar/Caldari. 9.) Massively increase LP rewards for killing enemy war targets. |
Creat Posudol
True Knights Templar Pegasus Coalition
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 14:12:00 -
[268] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote: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 if 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.
This would give faction standing some meaning after taking away the navies (great idea as I've stated before). It would also give another advantage to having good standing. Be allowed to shoot those with extremely bad standing The docking thing, logical as it seems, breaks too much. If I'm flying for gallente/minmatar I can't dock at caldari stations? Comes back to the same problem as the current navies: I can not go to Jita without using an alt. The whole point of removing the navies would be to to allow for free movement, right? But this doesn't have to apply to low-sec (especially FW areas), after all that is an entirely different kind of region...
About the removal of the faction navies, I'm against anything that treats Hubs any different from other systems. Those currently have no special treatment in-game, they just happen to be used as hubs by player (and could at least in theory shift to different systems at any time). It should stay that way. If caldari FW members start camping Dodixie I'm sure the Gallente guys can muster up some kind of defense on their home turf? Would be pretty sad if they couldn't....
I'd also love to be able to join FW on a more or less day-by day basis without leaving my corp (because that is just not gonna happen). Eve is about diverse possibilities and not being limited in what you want to do. At least for me it is. If I'm in the mood for some pewpew I can join and do so (including hopefully revamped missions for the militia involving some sort of player-interaction) for a day or two. I'd say some commitment should be required, if I kill someone he probably wants so kill me right back. He should have that opportunity. How about this, anyone can join FW as an individual without leaving his corp, but has to commit for at least 48 hours. He can cancel his "membership" at any time, but it takes 24 hours to be actually out (respecting the initial 48 of course). Also, this should be extended for any aggressive action. If he shoots a FW-Target during that time (i.e. engages in FW), the 24 hours reset. Only if he is the aggressor though, not it he gets shot and just shoots back. This should also extend to supporting other FW members in a logical way (cap/shield/armor transfer, tracking link, ...).
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Removing the stock NPC corp in favor of more of a pseudo- static alliance is a much better way around this, in my opinion - I think forcing players to join a player corp to do Faction Warfare is a great idea. Players corps are much better about monitoring and filtering farmers and spies - the players who sign up for 24th crusade or TLF usually have a crap experience if they stay there - they are simply treated as riffraff anyways by any militia pilot who has been around longer than a few weeks. I think that is a bad idea, it fixes a symptom and not the problem itself. And it has a downside: rather new or just hesitant players might try FW via the NPC corps, getting fresh blood into FW is obviously one of the main objectives of any fixes! The NPC corp can be (and I would expect it to already be) a stepping stone for joining an FW player corp. FW itself needs to be fixed in such a way that it can't be farmed without player-interaction/PVP (sure a mission objective can be achieved without PVP, but it should be the exception and not the norm). I agree that player corps are of course better for FW members in general and I do see the point of spotting spies. Also what's stopping them from creating corps to join FW just to spy? It might make things somewhat better, but it won't really fix anything. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 15:23:00 -
[269] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote: I'd also love to be able to join FW on a more or less day-by day basis without leaving my corp (because that is just not gonna happen). Eve is about diverse possibilities and not being limited in what you want to do. At least for me it is. If I'm in the mood for some pewpew I can join and do so (including hopefully revamped missions for the militia involving some sort of player-interaction) for a day or two. I'd say some commitment should be required, if I kill someone he probably wants so kill me right back. He should have that opportunity.
Thanks Posudol, you make many great suggestions.
One of the more interesting points you bring up is that we are talking about militas, not military service. The current FW model shares much more in common with military service, than it does mimic the idea of citizen-soldiers taking up arms.
I think that if we are to have citizens engage in FW, and police higsec themselves (as CCP Soundwave suggested) than we simply must implement a mechanic where a broader range of people can engage in militia work without having to permanently enlist in the service of one faction or another.
Standings are the way to do this - your every day mission runner grinding Brutor level 4's is no doubt going to have low Amarr standing, I think its as simply as allowing highsec players to attack each other once you've pushed your standings down far enough. Someone who has been grinding missions for a minnie corp and nuking their amarr standings, should be attackable (like criminals are currently) once they tread into opposing space.
This would create faction warfare outside of lowsec, in a way that is consistent with RP and dovetails the already-in-place system of criminals being targetable by players once they tread into highsec. Also, it helps offset the trade hub camp issue - if I personally were to go to Jita, it means that instead of NPC's harassing me, I'd have every player in system that had high caldari standing on my ass - not just the ones that had signed up for full military service by belonging to a FW corp.
This people-not-in-FW-engaging-in-FW could be supplemented by reinforcing the static wardec scenario we currently enjoy, and eliminate a few of the frustrations - by allowing factions to set factions to blue, we can eliminate a huge amount of cooperative fleet headaches that currently serve as barriers to amarr-caldari cooperation and minni-gallente collaboration. Also, by fixing the GCC for repping militia members problem, we can allow the current FW pilots to engage in pew pew much more often, self-policing the lowsec areas and having more freedom to engage neutral targets (but only when they are suspected enemy collaborators, of course! )
I think all of this may have been what Soundwave was on to with his comments, but maybe he can clarify....everyone's speculating like crazy in the meantime. The question is - Soundwave, do you have the balls to tell the highsec mission runner base they can expect a slew of new, non-voluntary pew pew? Everyone is still crying over the goons and their ice war - I can see removing highsec NPC's and allowing highsec FW as sparking the very same backlash.
Without involving standings and utilizing the general citizens of highsec to engage intruders, the simply removal of NPC's would indeed lead to hub gatecamp station games. And this would discourage anyone from joining FW, if they saw the crap at the stations and decided they wanted nothing to do with that business.
|
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:22:00 -
[270] - Quote
Moving this over to the desired thread as per Spitfire's request.
Completely agreeing with Hans on this, who oddly enough has been a pretty clear voice for the FW community (despite the low numbers post on here). He is doing a great job at voicing well thought out opinions.
As for Wendi's last post, I just want to widdle this down to once again things that are doable and everyone can agree upon
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.
On a deadline, these should be EASY to accomplish. Although there are six things, maybe some of the others are too far reaching for the upcoming expansion (including meaningful sov, redistribution of LP rewards, and changing the act of plexing). Yes, we want these looked at, but personally I would rather see these get waited on and get some hotfixes on the above three problems.
As far as friendly cal/amarr and gal/matar, I stand by my analysis that people are going to regret this and noobies are going to be extremely frustrated. The reason you don't shoot your own militia is because of the standing hit, which doesn't and shouldn't exist cross militia.
Just to reiterate: PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD CCP FIX THESE THREE PROBLEMS THAT ARE PISSING OFF EVERYONE. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:49:00 -
[271] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Completely agreeing with Hans on this, who oddly enough has been a pretty clear voice for the FW community (despite the low numbers post on here)
What did you mean about low numbers? Did I miss something?
|
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:54:00 -
[272] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Completely agreeing with Hans on this, who oddly enough has been a pretty clear voice for the FW community (despite the low numbers post on here) What did you mean about low numbers? Did I miss something?
i was talking about the variety of people posting in here vs the number of active (pvp) pilots flying around. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:55:00 -
[273] - Quote
Edit: DAMN YOU GANKED FORUMS |
Creat Posudol
True Knights Templar Pegasus Coalition
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:30:00 -
[274] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Standings are the way to do this - your every day mission runner grinding Brutor level 4's is no doubt going to have low Amarr standing, I think its as simply as allowing highsec players to attack each other once you've pushed your standings down far enough. Someone who has been grinding missions for a minnie corp and nuking their amarr standings, should be attackable (like criminals are currently) once they tread into opposing space.
This would create faction warfare outside of lowsec, in a way that is consistent with RP and dovetails the already-in-place system of criminals being targetable by players once they tread into highsec. Also, it helps offset the trade hub camp issue - if I personally were to go to Jita, it means that instead of NPC's harassing me, I'd have every player in system that had high caldari standing on my ass - not just the ones that had signed up for full military service by belonging to a FW corp.
Well, all mission runners I know don't accept missions against another factions, so it might not be as bad as you think. But yes, most likely many L4 runners will have somewhat bad standing with the opposing faction. While I (obviously) like all that it still has the significant galente/minmatar vs. amarr/caldari disadvantage that Jita happens to be Caldari. This for me is really just as critical unfortunately. I need to and want to go there on occasion and I hate using alts for stuff like this, as I think it shouldn't be necessary (also for immersion reasons). (also see comment at the bottom replying to wendi wu for more reasoning on this)
Maybe it should still be tied in to the FW mechanic, that only members of opposing militias (maybe even only with -5 r worse?) are flagged as valid targets for everyone with +5 or better standing? This would not throw off the whole status quo, but open possibilities for those outside FW with bad standing towards Caldari to go to Jita (or generally to roam freely in high-sec), while stiff providing enough of a deterrent for FW members to enter enemy space. It would allow for a generic/normal PVP fits instead of the runaway-from-faction-navies setups needed otherwise.
Wendi Wu wrote:I don't think removing NPC navies is a good idea for three reasons: GÇó It makes absolutely no sense. It's bad enough that the NPCs let war targets dock in their stations, now they can't even be bothered to patrol their own supposedly-high-security space? [...] Remember the Factions themselves are not (officially) at war with each other, they just used to be and there is lingering resentment (or something). The fleet war mechanic is meant to be sort of underground movement, only unofficially sponsored somewhat by the empires, which is why it at least started in low-sec... Also they don't need to patrol their own space, it's "subcontracted" if you will to Concord. A neutral police force enforcing law, not shooting all people the local mayor doesn't like (yes, it's a metaphor, deal with it ). They provide security just fine, as you'll notice if you shoot someone you have no right to shoot, making this high-security. Tying in to what I wrote in the paragraph above the quote, while concord won't shoot people who fight against a faction in this underground war themselves, it may allow members of that faction (or people in high regard) to shoot them, similar to the way you're allowed to shoot someone who steals from you. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:48:00 -
[275] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote: i was talking about the variety of people posting in here vs the number of active (pvp) pilots flying around.
Ahh, gotcha. Yeah, I fully expected at some point there'd be jocks at the top of the killboard who would question my right to an opinion :) Despite the silly carebear accusations, I've only ever lived in lowsec and been involved with the FW community full time since I began playing 2 years ago. Lately I primarily fly Logistics, am happy to skip a killmail if its not safe to aggress and ***** on it. I rarely solo PvP, and don't really care about being "teh best" For me, the fun is all about teamwork with friends, I think its sad that the only thing FW has to offer at the moment is a giant 3p33n kill race that pits militia corps against each other even within the same faction, and sparks a lot of general asshattery amongst the elite militia pilots. Certainly we can do better than that with fixes that bring back objective-based gameplay.
A lot of the top PvPers are those that only log on to pew, get several hours of killing in a day, and do nothing else in the game. While this is awesome, and demonstrates talent worthy of respect, many of them feel this makes their opinion more valid than others - even though killboards show only one dimension of what each pilot brings to the community.
I'm thinking of corps like Huang Yinlong - whose bravery and pilot skill are top notch, despite low levels of activity.
I encourage everyone that has been involved in the FW scene or who is an active part of a FW corp to speak up and share your mind - whether your killboard has a hundred kills or 10,000. Maybe you just provide Industry support for your militia corp, maybe you spend most of your time doing recruiting, or sorting out intra-corp disputes and keeping everyone happy. Maybe you just have a full-time job and don't have much time to play as others. Maybe you're just starting to accumulate kills in a FW corp, or are still learning to PvP. Whatever the reason, whatever your activity level, if you have a good idea now is the time to speak up. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:39:00 -
[276] - 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.
|
Chaniqua TicTic
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:19:00 -
[277] - Quote
I don't advocate a removal of all NPCs, I would however, advocate a removal of Concord guards/patrols and program the individual faction NPCs to fill the role that CONCORD does now (ie: a player attacks another player of good standing in 1.0 Amarr space, an Amarr defense fleet will warp in to defend the player, but if your faction standing is poor enough, the Amarr guards will not warp in to defend the player.) It allows for a little more fluidity and versatility in play style. It also doesn't stomp on the carebears much at all. They just have to know what NPCs like them and stay there.
What I'm advocating is more focused on the rp/rvr side of NPC factions: Considering some ideas for NPC faction alignment (also includes ideas for Faction Warfare) |
Kuan Yida
Huang Yinglong
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:25:00 -
[278] - Quote
Lots of good stuff here, and lots of ideas I don't agree with. Rather than summarizing and trying to remembers all the main points, I'll just be lazy and re-use what I wrote for Shalee's Sov Wars blog. Essentially, I have 3 main recommendations, all of which should be implementation using existing frameworks of modules within the EvE architecture.
Make killing WTs more rewarding
While killing enemy ships has a sporadic LP reward (which, by the way, should be divided among all combatants and not just top damage dealer) there should also be a bounty placed by our government on enemy pod pilots. Possibly by the rank of the enemy pilot. This would help offset the large cost of losing ships in PvP. Again, the bounty shouldnGÇÖt be just to the final blow dealer, but like missions and rats, divided among all participants on the combat grid.
Make plexing more rewarding
Plexing is boring as hell. If we could see how much capturing added or removed to the status of a system (like in Incursions) then we could motivate people to plex more. And, there should be monetary rewards and loyalty points involved, they donGÇÖt have to be large but any little bit helps. And maybe our navies donGÇÖt have to be quite so dumb? They could be more like SanshasGǪ
Make captured systems have some real consequence
IGÇÖm not sure on the details of this one. Maybe we add local navy GÇÿratsGÇÖ to captured systems? Maybe there is some sort of home field bonus to killing enemies in captured systems (to both sides) in an ISK reward? IGÇÖd also have a large monetary boost and LP reward to those pilots who capture a bunker. And IGÇÖd make a miltia-wide broadcast to both militias when a system has gone vulnerable. Or, over time if a system is captured the friendly rats get tougher/smarter, or maybe it becomes more and more difficult to reclaim the system?
And IGÇÖd create a huge reward in ISK and LP to any militia that actually winsGǪ that is, capturing all systems and holding them over time. Medals, LP and ISK rewards militia wide when this happens, and rewarded again maybe for each day that the militia hangs onto all enemy systems. |
Covert Kitty
SRS Industries SRS.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:29:00 -
[279] - Quote
Quote:One thing we might be able to do very easily is remove the faction NPCs, letting you freely travel in other factions space.
Agree completely |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Retribution
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:59:00 -
[280] - Quote
Covert Kitty wrote:Quote:One thing we might be able to do very easily is remove the faction NPCs, letting you freely travel in other factions space. Agree completely
nah increase NPCs in highsec you should be owned if you go into enemy highsec, and you should be able to take conquer enemy highsec. |
|
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:04:00 -
[281] - Quote
My views on the fixes go like this:
Simple things able to be put in for the Winter Patch that most of us would like: 1. Fix the simple bugs like, -5 Repping, Being able to see Allied Militia, Post Downtime Plex Spawning, Mission Balancing, Empire Standing once you leave Militia etc. 2. Add a simple Graphical Interface that gives Intel for just how contested a system is and what plexes are open etc. 3. Add a Simple thing such as Station(Specifically Station) Guns to fire on opposing Militia when a System is uncontested(when it is contested guns do not fire)or half contested or a way that it will be the most balanced. 4. Decrease Rewards for Missions and increase their difficulty "SLIGHTLY" while instituting rewards towards Plexing and making PvP kills slightly more substantial so theres more PvP and less Carebearing. 5. Create more LP Items or decrease the ISK/LP cost for creating certain items so that things besides Navy Scorps become more profitable and the market will become more balanced.
Things that might be applicable for future patches: 1. Changing the Sov Mechanic in more significant ways 2. Changing the Way LP is earned 3. Changing the way FW effects High,Low and Null Sec 4. Provide an easier way for players new to militia to find Corporations in milita and vice versa.
Things that we will most likely get from CCP 1. Fix the bugs(From my basic understanding of coding this should take them all of a week at the MOST.) 2. Change Missioning in some way.
Now for me describing things I don't want. Alliances SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN FACTION WARFARE. Think about it for two seconds. Yes we wish they could join and we could get more numbers and thus more fights(More Likely Blobs but I'm going on what the people who support this idea seem to be thinking).
What happens then? Instead of Alliances hanging out in 0.0 protecting their Miners and Missioning Hubs and Tech moons and fighting over sov, they will hang out in Low Sec protecting their missioning alts and plexing hubs and fight over Occupancy changes. Low Sec will come to appear more like 0.0 and that is not what, I at least, want to happen. Yes they do drop us on occasion(with the exception of PL who either moved out of 0.0 or got kicked out, not sure which and therefore have started dropping us a lot) but the fact is they do not LIVE here they have no reason besides lulz to come and blob us and so they do not do it a whole lot (From my own perspective not sure how things are on the Minnie-Amarr front). I currently have little fear in most of my gangs that I will be out blobbed by a 0.0 alliance unsure if the case is different in Amarr-Minnie space but *shrug*.
And being able to enter a plex is not an entirely valid way of balancing out a blob. A number blob is almost the exact same thing as a Ship Size or Shiny blob. The Caldari and Gallente side of FW consists mainly of roaming gangs(Outside of Plexes) imo so I'm not sure how different this is from your view Hans. Small Corps will have to join an alliance, die or leave faction warfare. You either deal with the blob fests that are sure to come. Or weather it out like a lot of FW pilots have since the beginning and wait for a change and grab the tiniest tidbit of small gang PvP that they can get. Or you leave because you can't handle it.
I love being able to take a 20 man BC gang out and expect a reasonable fight with an equally sized and skilled opponent just for the sake of fighting. I love the small corp mentality that FW breeds and the fact that the intake of players brand new to EVE and players who are 5 EVE years old is happening in Militia.(I am one of the recruited noobs btw). With the inclusion of Alliance participation in FW small scale PvP as (I at least) know it will either become so sparse as to be insignifiant or die altogether. Keep the 0.0 blob Alliances out in Null sec fighting over ways to make isk. I want to be able to actually have my decisions and skills matter while in a fleet.
For the removing of NPC's from Highsec... I have seen a lone harbinger in a 0.5 system tank the Navy with absolute ease making it easier for people to have fights in highsec is not the way to go. Its already happening(We killed the Harbi btw).
For removing missions altogether or forcing PvP in them. I can expect that the majority of people who support this measure do not use FW missions as their primary source of income. When the likes of me and Hans are out missioning we do not WANT to PvP we want to carebear, whether for personal or monetary reasons. If we wanted to PvP we would be in a PvP ship looking for a fight. Balance the missions so that all FW missions are of equal quality and difficulty. Make it so that a Level 4 can not be solo'd in a bomber without extreme difficulty(Thus forcing people to fly Cloaky Drakes, Tengus, and Cerbs for missioning runs at least in Caldari FW anyway). Increase the LP Reward for PvP Kills by a decent amount, and provide a reward for plexing to reduce the need for Carebearing and increasing the reward of PvP.
If you take away FW missions you will see a loss in PvP because while I could have earned enough money to buy a Drake in an hour with FW missions I'm in high sec or a wormhole carebearing it up so that I can PvP. One thing I haven't seen all to much is a suggestion for a direct link between PvP and your agent standings. Missions still affect your standing up to a point. But lets say the Standings degrade over time. The Higher the standing the faster it degrades. So that without PvP you can't comfortably do Level 3's with a whoring alt. Do this by providing a more Significant change in standings when you blow up an enemy FW person or an enemy FW person blows up you. Distribute standing and fleet accordingly. The specifics of this are myriad and complex but you get the picture.
Hope CCP listens for once. Thanks for Reading. See you Starside ~Simyaldee |
Trillian Stargazer
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:28:00 -
[282] - Quote
Johnny Punisher wrote:
2) no standing loss in remote repping friendly militia member who is pirate/gcc
Sec Stat is dictated by Concord thats why you get one.
Logistics ships should gain aggression when RR. |
Johnny Punisher
Wolfsbrigade
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:42:00 -
[283] - Quote
Trillian Stargazer wrote:
Sec Stat is dictated by Concord thats why you get one.
Logistics ships should gain aggression when RR.
You didn't understand. Standings have nothing to do with sec status/concord.
And I agree that you should still lose sec status / gain gcc by RR'ing outlaws/gcc's. I also agree that you should gain aggression if you use any remote aiding module on someone (RR/tracking/remote sebos etc). |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:45:00 -
[284] - Quote
Yeah what Johnny said. You lose FACTION standings with the RR bug. |
Axl Borlara
T.R.I.A.D
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 17:17:00 -
[285] - Quote
Simple change (which has been mentioned already) which just seems common sense.
Militia owned stations: shoot at opposing militia ships (definitely) deny docking rights to opposing militia ships (possibly)
It will provide a useful test without the possibility of breaking everything in one go. Run that for a while, review, and maybe expand the idea later.
Other ideas:
Tie system occupancy to ownership of the stations. For example, Minnies claim occupancy of a system, some (but not all) stations change ownership to Tribal Liberation Force and a variety of other Minmatar npc corps. This will give some tangible reason to occupy a system without (hopefully) completely ruining the balance.
High sec NPC navies should remain pretty much as they are. You can still go raiding in the opposing militia's high sec areas if you want to now, so I don't see much reason for taking them away. It just makes sense that the 'real' military will try to control their own high sec space. Several other good reasons for keeping them have been raised already. If you really want to try it out, start by reducing the strength of the NPCs rather than removing them completely.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 17:58:00 -
[286] - Quote
Axl Borlara wrote:Simple change (which has been mentioned already) which just seems common sense.
Militia owned stations: shoot at opposing militia ships (definitely) deny docking rights to opposing militia ships (possibly)
It will provide a useful test without the possibility of breaking everything in one go. Run that for a while, review, and maybe expand the idea later.
Other ideas:
Tie system occupancy to ownership of the stations. For example, Minnies claim occupancy of a system, some (but not all) stations change ownership to Tribal Liberation Force and a variety of other Minmatar npc corps. This will give some tangible reason to occupy a system without (hopefully) completely ruining the balance.
High sec NPC navies should remain pretty much as they are. You can still go raiding in the opposing militia's high sec areas if you want to now, so I don't see much reason for taking them away. It just makes sense that the 'real' military will try to control their own high sec space. Several other good reasons for keeping them have been raised already. If you really want to try it out, start by reducing the strength of the NPCs rather than removing them completely.
As alternative to denying docking rights completely you should consider just limiting the things hostile entities can do while docked. At the minimum denying hostile entities access to station services should be considered and it could go as far as denying access to items and ships completely in the occupied systems or just prevent them from restocking their assets there. Point being it doesn't have to be all or nothing with docking rights and it might even be preferable and more interesting, if you use less blunt instruments to bring more meaning to occupancy. |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 17:59:00 -
[287] - Quote
Docking rights to hostile stations should be removed right away tbfh, there is no logical reason why you would accept that ppl you are war with to dock in your stations
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:01:00 -
[288] - Quote
Destination SkillQueue wrote:Axl Borlara wrote:Simple change (which has been mentioned already) which just seems common sense.
Militia owned stations: shoot at opposing militia ships (definitely) deny docking rights to opposing militia ships (possibly)
It will provide a useful test without the possibility of breaking everything in one go. Run that for a while, review, and maybe expand the idea later.
Other ideas:
Tie system occupancy to ownership of the stations. For example, Minnies claim occupancy of a system, some (but not all) stations change ownership to Tribal Liberation Force and a variety of other Minmatar npc corps. This will give some tangible reason to occupy a system without (hopefully) completely ruining the balance.
High sec NPC navies should remain pretty much as they are. You can still go raiding in the opposing militia's high sec areas if you want to now, so I don't see much reason for taking them away. It just makes sense that the 'real' military will try to control their own high sec space. Several other good reasons for keeping them have been raised already. If you really want to try it out, start by reducing the strength of the NPCs rather than removing them completely.
As alternative to denying docking rights completely you should consider just limiting the things hostile entities can do while docked. At the minimum denying hostile entities access to station services should be considered and it could go as far as denying access to items and ships completely in the occupied systems or just prevent them from restocking their assets there. Point being it doesn't have to be all or nothing with docking rights and it might even be preferable and more interesting, if you use a less blunt instruments to bring more meaning to occupancy.
I just want to point out again, to whoever may be reading this (wink wink devs) that any sov changes that you think about or read here will only be feasable if you remove post dt plexing spawns.
|
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:02:00 -
[289] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Docking rights to hostile stations should be removed right away tbfh, there is no logical reason why you would accept that ppl you are war with to dock in your stations
bribes? pay to dock maybe? |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
86
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:33:00 -
[290] - 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). |
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:37:00 -
[291] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Docking rights to hostile stations should be removed right away tbfh, there is no logical reason why you would accept that ppl you are war with to dock in your stations
Yeah I agree. However this is not going accomplish much. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:44:00 -
[292] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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).
This thread is getting ambiguous.
1) you have the 4 actual fw corps 24th imperial crusade etc. 2) You have the corps that are members of a faction like boundless creation is a member of the minmatar faction. 3) You have stations in an area that is in a system occupied by one faction or another.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:52:00 -
[293] - 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. |
mkint
201
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:07:00 -
[294] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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. 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. |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
122
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:33:00 -
[295] - Quote
OK, Guard, here's how it is:
To make Factional Warfare work as something other than free PvP (which is obviously your intention, otherwise it would just be free PvP), you must give territory control consequences that matter to the PvPers.
If Gallente systems are taken, you need to make that matter to the entire militia, not just the plexers. In essence, you must - read, MUST - eliminate the differentiation between "plexers" and "PvPers". PvPers shouldn't help plexers because they happen to feel like it - in the new FW, PvPers should help plexers because bad things will happen to them if they don't. You need to:
a. make the new territory control mechanic fun and interesting b. make sure that if you're in the militia, you need to be involved in it
Make every militia member responsible for and instrumental in the defence of home territory and the capture of enemy territory, reward all of them for success and hold all of them responsible for failure.
My suggestions are as follows:
1. Reward everything, and reward everyone. I don't know exactly what rewards and punishments should be levied for capturing, holding or losing enemy territory or defending or losing home territory. But you need to have them, and they need to apply to everyone, so that there's no reason to be in the militia if you're not committed to it.
2. Make defending your own territory easy but cheap and capturing enemy territory difficult but rewarding. Currently it's way too easy for one side to force the other into a constant cycle of spending so much time defending their own space that they don't have the opportunity to attack enemy space. Make it very easy to defend your own space but comparitively unrewarding - by the same token, make it difficult to capture and occupy enemy systems, but make that investiture of time and effort worth the while in the rewards it gives.
3. Success should be harder and harder to repeat, but more and more rewarding. As you capture and hold more and more territory, it should be harder to capture the rest, but the rewards for doing so should increase in equal measure. On the flipside, this means that the more of their territory is occupied, the easier it is for the underdog to make a comeback - this means the losing side is never caught in a situation where there's no point in trying to fight back, which, I think everyone will admit, is just not fun.
4. Restore the EVE in-world news service. We like hearing about the consequences are actions are having. Weekly or even daily news articles from the four factions please.
5. Balance, Balance, Balance. For this to work, everything needs to be balanced perfectly. Make sure that absolutely nothing is timezone dependent. If there are NPCs, make sure they all move, tank, DPS and ECM the same across all races. If one side has a total or online player advantage, find a fair way to offset it. Make sure each race has strengths and weaknesses that can be exploited by all the other races.
6. Make us feel like our effort matters. Give us the feeling that our struggles are not in vain. Make real changes happen if we put in the work.
7. Let us destroy that goddamn Titan. Seriously CCP, do not put a thing there that has 100% resists, and then tell us we can destroy it - that's a **** move. Let us destroy the Leviathan, end the occupation and give some real storyline weight to the Gallente-Caldari struggle again.
8. In fact, fix the whole storyline. Yeah, seriously. The storyline for FW is full of holes. We really need to fix that.
9. More drastic changes. I'm not expecting all or even many of my suggestions to be picked up by CCP, and especially not in the first update to FW, but in the unlikely event they want to hear some of my more drastic ideas, here's some tasters:
- Remove CONCORD. Like, completely. Forever. Put rapid-response in hi-sec in the hands of the factions. - FW live events and direct interaction with important factional NPCs. - Faction-locked ships. - Mercenary involvement. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:36:00 -
[296] - Quote
Cearain wrote:ArmyOfMe wrote:Docking rights to hostile stations should be removed right away tbfh, there is no logical reason why you would accept that ppl you are war with to dock in your stations Yeah I agree. However this is not going accomplish much. it will accomplish that if you do venture into hostile space, then you better be ready to fight if hostiles show up, rather then just docking up. At least with the changes to log off mechanismes.
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:56:00 -
[297] - 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. |
mkint
202
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:22:00 -
[298] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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.
mkint wrote: With a little world shaping to make sure it's balanced
I figured it wouldn't be balanced out the door. Perhaps CCP could do some FW live events to allow factions to conquer and/or liberate a couple no-agent stations in hostile territory, then do some world shaping to make the live event matter. That would also give a RP kickoff as to why they would close down stations to hostile forces.
I've said before though, I've never done FW. But FWers have been asking for a reason for occupancy to matter, and docking rights does indeed seem like a good way to make occupancy matter, as long as the field is balanced. (my reason for not doing FW have and will always be because it requires a full employment commitment, day trippers need not apply.) |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:40:00 -
[299] - Quote
Denying docking rights or services to enemy NPC stations would effectively kill small gang combat, as people would no longer be able to repair heat damage or effect repairs.
This is NOT a good idea at all.
Just make sov loss raise the costs of repairing. That's all. Nothing too dramatic, but a noticeable change. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
75
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:07:00 -
[300] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Denying docking rights or services to enemy NPC stations would effectively kill small gang combat, as people would no longer be able to repair heat damage or effect repairs.
Ahem. Why exactly? Because it sure as hell does not have this effect in nullsec, where dockingrights are far from certain. |
|
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
353
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 23:01:00 -
[301] - Quote
Don't have time to read the whole thread but will post this idea in case no one else has.
I know the winter release was originally going to redo the narcotics/contraband system and I'd hate to see that abandoned just because Incarna's being selved. So...
* Expand the contraband lists to reflect the laws of the various empires (even if this means making new items for contraband). Give faction warriors the ability to legally destroy ships with contraband in their empire. Have new high sec smuggling agents that give missions to haul contraband behind the lines of opposing empires. Maybe even have gates alert faction warriors when contraband passes through. Would make for an awesome game of cat and mouse! |
BoneEater
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 02:18:00 -
[302] - Quote
Blog please? |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 02:54:00 -
[303] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:Denying docking rights or services to enemy NPC stations would effectively kill small gang combat, as people would no longer be able to repair heat damage or effect repairs. Ahem. Why exactly? Because it sure as hell does not have this effect in nullsec, where dockingrights are far from certain. I agree, but FW is not nullsec. The area is smaller and has quite different mechanics (gate guns, no bubbles or bombs etc). I don't think that aspect of nullsec sov, i.e. docking rights, would be good for the game. FW combat is easier on those who play casually, and should remain so, or at least I think so.
TL;DR, TBH I've only ever docked up in WT space on very few occaions and the chance of this happening isn't that bad for me personally, but I'm worried that people will start getting even more risk shy than they currently are and that FW numbers will drop. |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 03:11:00 -
[304] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:Denying docking rights or services to enemy NPC stations would effectively kill small gang combat, as people would no longer be able to repair heat damage or effect repairs. Ahem. Why exactly? Because it sure as hell does not have this effect in nullsec, where dockingrights are far from certain. I agree, but FW is not nullsec. The area is smaller and has quite different mechanics (gate guns, no bubbles or bombs etc). I don't think that aspect of nullsec sov, i.e. docking rights, would be good for the game. FW combat is easier on those who play casually, and should remain so, or at least I think so. TL;DR, TBH I've only ever docked up in WT space on very few occaions and the chance of this happening isn't that bad for me personally, but I'm worried that people will start getting even more risk shy than they currently are and that FW numbers will drop.
Making enemies unable to dock in STRICTLY ENEMY MILITIA stations might not be a bad idea. If enemy engages you on your station you're guarenteed no docking games. Might be interesting, there are plenty of other stations out there
Regardless, the focus needs to be on:
-resolving the FW mission problem (namely frigs soloing lvl4s) -resolving the remote rep problem -implementing a real pvp/reward incentive for killing the enemy -adjusting complex spawns to balance through out the day -adjusting system capture mechanics and effects
At least do small changes to these things, counterbalances until something more epic and sweeping can be done in a later expansion.
This "remove high sec NPCs" crap is just the type of feigned offering no one wants that ppl get pissed about. -"Hey guys! How about we do this!!!" -'wtf is this guy talking about, is he on the same plane of reality as we are??'
not to be overly personal. the issues are known, small adjustments could be made. either tackle the problems at hand or don't do anything at all. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 11:09:00 -
[305] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Cearain wrote:ArmyOfMe wrote:Docking rights to hostile stations should be removed right away tbfh, there is no logical reason why you would accept that ppl you are war with to dock in your stations Yeah I agree. However this is not going accomplish much. it will accomplish that if you do venture into hostile space, then you better be ready to fight if hostiles show up, rather then just docking up. At least with the changes to log off mechanismes.
What do you mean by "hostile space"?
again:
This thread is getting ambiguous.
1) you have the 4 actual fw corps 24th imperial crusade etc. 2) You have the corps that are members of a faction like boundless creation is a member of the minmatar faction. 3) You have stations in an area that is in a system occupied by one faction or another.
Ill add
4) You have space owned by your ally and the enemy of your ally apply these questions to Minmatar v Caldari and Amarr v Gallente.
What are we talking about because the effect it will have will be different.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Zoe Alarhun
The Proactive Reappropriation Corporation
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 12:40:00 -
[306] - Quote
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). |
Creat Posudol
True Knights Templar Pegasus Coalition
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:39:00 -
[307] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:This "remove high sec NPCs" crap is just the type of feigned offering no one wants that ppl get pissed about. -"Hey guys! How about we do this!!!" -'wtf is this guy talking about, is he on the same plane of reality as we are??'
not to be overly personal. the issues are known, small adjustments could be made. either tackle the problems at hand or don't do anything at all.
1st of all, it's not about all highsec NPCs, just the navies. Secondly I'd love to see this change happen, as I think it has wonderful potential as I've stated many times as well. There are others who also have clearly come out in favor of this and I think the numbers for and against aren't far apart but roughly balanced. It would require a much more detailed proposal to actually form a definitive opinion on this.
About the whole docking-at-enemy-stations mechanic currently being discussed: It seems only logical to limit docking rights in stations belonging to the opposing militia (directly) or their allied militia. Not the entire opposing faction, if anything that might be somehow controlled by standings IF (and only if) they ever get an overhaul. Also denying docking right can of course be reduced to denying specific services. It could also mean denying docking rights only if there is an aggression timer on you against the specific corp you're trying to dock with (the 15 min timer obviously, not the 1 minute one)... |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:40:00 -
[308] - 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.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:47:00 -
[309] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote: 1st of all, it's not about all highsec NPCs, just the navies. Secondly I'd love to see this change happen, as I think it has wonderful potential as I've stated many times as well. There are others who also have clearly come out in favor of this and I think the numbers for and against aren't far apart but roughly balanced. It would require a much more detailed proposal to actually form a definitive opinion on this.
About the whole docking-at-enemy-stations mechanic currently being discussed: It seems only logical to limit docking rights in stations belonging to the opposing militia (directly) or their allied militia. Not the entire opposing faction, if anything that might be somehow controlled by standings IF (and only if) they ever get an overhaul. Also denying docking right can of course be reduced to denying specific services. It could also mean denying docking rights only if there is an aggression timer on you against the specific corp you're trying to dock with (the 15 min timer obviously, not the 1 minute one)...
Yes, I realized it wasn't all NPCs, I just didn't make that clear enough
I can see why the navies being gone could be attractive... however (my humble opinion) from both a RP standpoint and a 'home turf advantage' for your last place to seek refuge I think they should stay. Without them why keep the fight to low sec? (outside of system occupation which i'm sure ccp will give us ~soon~ *hopefully skeptical*) We'd just have ppl camping Amarr/Rens. Also, if the navies go.... do we regain the ability to cloak in enemy empire high sec???
Really, I could swing either way, but I think we could probably both agree that it's at the bottom of the list for issues in FW that need addressing.
As for the docking penalties.... I see potential for a 'feature' in system occupation. I still think you should have access to non-FW-enemy-militia stations... but what if in captured systems/enemy controlled systems it held the 15minute timer? I dunno, this is also at the ass bottom of my list for stuff to do.
Good stuff to toss around though. |
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 14:04:00 -
[310] - Quote
Alirght,
-There should be no edge for anyone if your fighting in a captured system, or I will never take step into Amarr occupied space again
-Take Faction Standing Hit for repping GCC players away - most important issue
- Give LP for capturing plexes and or an occasional faction drop of the oppsite miltia, for example. I am Minmatar and I run a Amarr Minor Outpost, make it have a chance of dropping a Small Imperial Neutrilizer, and vice versa for the other miltia's
-Take ECM away for Caladari Rats and take away missles from Caldari and Minmatar Rats
-When we leave miltia we are burden with -10 standing towards the oppsoing faction, for example, I am Gallente and I decide I have enough of FW, I will still get attacked by Caldari Police even though im not in militia.
-Do not give LP for killing Wt's, Or i will get two alt's to shoot each other all day long and rake in ISK.
-Allow Faction ships to enter plexes, A good pilot with good mates can counter them easily
-Increase agression timer from 1minute to 2 and a half minutes if you are camping an oppsing factions station, For example, I am camper in Huola and I shoot an Amarr, instead of docking up in 1minute and trolling people, I will die for being a camper or unless I have the skill to get away or tank for 2 and a half minutes
|
|
Igniskhin
Veyr The Veyr Collective
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 19:16:00 -
[311] - Quote
A coworker and I kicked around a couple ideas on what game changes could be made to keep moms and titans out of low sec and this was the "simplest" way we could think of with out going thru and manual changing all FW systems.
Super caps out of low |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 20:12:00 -
[312] - Quote
1. who need alliances really in fw? 2. Super caps has never disturbed occupancy war, most of plexes do not let those in anyway. 3. there is no reason to make pvp on stations any harder than now, penalties hardly work. 4. plexes itself are not a problem.
There is couple things that have made FW plex warfare unplayable.
Plex spawning balance, if you want to conquer system it takes several weeks, but it can be captured back in 2 hours. This is current balance. So what this mean is that defending your original systems is waste of time because you can take those back easier than defend.
Current plex spawning mechanic is not good, if you start plexing attack from another end of region and go through whole region to another end, if some defends on starting systems it help attack on last systems, so best thing on massive attack like this is to do nothing, if you can stop plexers and kill them is only thing that helps.
These two thing practically causes that there is no point to defence plex at all.
Another thing is that dominion expansion boosted pirate factions ships and because plexes have some ship restrictions those are now too overpower ship in plexes. Fact that you have to pvp against pirate factions ships means that plexing is not for new players.
It could be good to make some meaning for occupancy so it would make players to fight for systems but how to do it is question.
Maybe giving some power as plexing commander if you are weeks top10 plexer and commander could example spawn couple plexes / day on any system he wants. So commanders could do defense or attack fleets who really can do something on important systems. Possibility to be some special member of militia could make some internal competition for plexing to get that status. Maybe commander status could go for CEOs of top 10 plexing corporations. |
arcca jeth
Dark Alliance Dark Empire Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 20:35:00 -
[313] - Quote
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.
check out my recent post
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=26770&find=unread |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 20:36:00 -
[314] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote: 2. Super caps has never disturbed occupancy war, most of plexes do not let those in anyway.
lol. It's less about SC's in plexes and more about them hotdropping whenever we have a sizable fleet out and about. So yes, they kinda do disturb 'occupancy war' quite a bit. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Daiyu Tzu
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 20:42:00 -
[315] - Quote
Saw this accidentally... Long time since left FW... It was nice. I liked it :) So I would like to give my 5 cents :)
I was too lazy to read all this stuff so sorry if I will double somebody else:
1. Make occupancy matter 1a. Logistical way - only occupying militia members should be able dock in station in system. 1b. Financial way - ermmm... have no idea :) think something :)
2. FW mission must die (removed) - they does not contribute to war any way, form or shape. They are just PVE isk printer.
3. Multiply LP for killing enemy militia members. Currently for titan there is 14000 LP. So if You will manage somehow to kill Titan SOLO then You get less that 10% of Faction BS ?!?! Seriously?!? Very minimal minimum for killing titan is to give that militia member multiple BS, so it should be no less than 2, that means 300'000 LP for kiling titan is absolute minimum (it fact it should be more). That goes for other ships as well (and then there will be no need for those stupid FW missions).
4. There was proposition to stop faction navies from attacking opposing militia members in high sec. Well... nice idea! Yes it might be scary to somebody since there will be no safe place anymore, BUT if opposing militia member will be denied docking in enemy territory then militia members will have advantage in their own territory, but enemies will have to be careful and will not be able constantly live in enemy space, they will have to do raids into it and then go home and they will do gods blessed work of removal high sec mission runners from militia.
5. Some voting system to remove known spies would be good as well (it is very annoying when they follow fleets).
P.S. Also one thing I would like to ask devs - couple years ago when that "distinguished blade" medal was issued, there was many people who where wronged. It would be nice if would You fix that now. Matter of problem was such - after caldari took occupation of all gallente systems, some people left to other FW front/null sec/ whatever. And when after significant pause CCP issued that medal it was given only to those who was in militia about week before and after fall of last system so all those who was fighting for many months and left after couple days when job was done did not got that medal (but as it is well know many gallente spy alts got it, that was ridiculous). Could You please fix that and gave it to those who deserved it but did not got it, after all it is only NPC medal at moment so it is nice thing to have especially if You honestly earned it. |
Baron vonDoom
Scorn.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 20:49:00 -
[316] - Quote
It's been a while since I've tried FW, but the thing ticking me off the most was docking rights and service access at hostile stations in systems with enemy occupancy.
All militia stations should be a generic type (probably with some new models looking like hybrids between Amarr/Minmatar and Gallente/Caldari stations to reflect changing occupancy and rebuilds during times of hostile occupation) that flip ownership and hence docking rights as well as agents with occupancy.
Things wouldn't become too lopsided as there are plenty of non-militia stations around that would still be accessible.
|
Morar Santee
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 21:28:00 -
[317] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote: 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.
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 ********. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 21:35:00 -
[318] - 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.
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 21:36:00 -
[319] - Quote
Precisely what he said.
Anyhow, we have tons of systems in FW low sec that is barely used because there is little point into going to them. If plexing was made worthwhile, then that'd force more pvp all over the war zone.
I think the key to fixing FW is to fix the plexing aspect of it. Make plexing matter, give a good reward for doing it, balance the NPCs in the plexes, and make it so that there are plexes that only tech 1 ships can go in, and for god's sakes have the plexes spawn throughout the day instead of mostly just downtime, then FW will be heaps better.
Fixing the plexing mechanics will benefit everyone, the rpers, the plexers, the pvpers, and the carebears. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 21:38:00 -
[320] - 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.
|
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 21:50:00 -
[321] - Quote
Yeah if they were to do that, the only way to make it work is to remove docking rights at the enemy's stations and have station guns firing on the war targets. I absolutely agree with that, Gallentius. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Bischopt
Ice Fire Warriors
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 21:55:00 -
[322] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:Precisely what he said.
Anyhow, we have tons of systems in FW low sec that is barely used because there is little point into going to them. If plexing was made worthwhile, then that'd force more pvp all over the war zone.
I think the key to fixing FW is to fix the plexing aspect of it. Make plexing matter, give a good reward for doing it, balance the NPCs in the plexes, and make it so that there are plexes that only tech 1 ships can go in, and for god's sakes have the plexes spawn throughout the day instead of mostly just downtime, then FW will be heaps better.
Fixing the plexing mechanics will benefit everyone, the rpers, the plexers, the pvpers, and the carebears.
I'm gonna have to agree with Shalee here.
I'd just like to add that it would be great to see a reward for pvp outside of plexing as well. Currently there are some lp rewards which, frankly, are a joke. You can solo a wartarget battleship in a t1 frigate and get less lp than you would get from a single mission. Which reminds me, the missions should maybe get a little nerf. FW is absolutely full of people who just run missions and do nothing pvp/plex related. Maybe introduce a system where you HAVE to do pvp or plex before you can run fw missions. Something like 1 mission per kill/plex. By rewarding people for pvp there may also be a chance to encourage solo/small gangs. Simply share all pvp rewards between the people who participated in a kill. This way a blob killing a single target barely gets any reward while a small gang gets a little something. Just an idea.
And if this has already been suggested I apologize, I havent read the entire thread and honestly I'm quite spent right now as I'm typing this. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
402
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 22:09:00 -
[323] - Quote
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?
I don't really see this being discussed....but it seems to me to be a crucial problem created by such a "fix".
I personally think that enemy sov stations should simply gate gun you, as if you were GCC. They could also deny all ship services, such as repair. This would provide a disincentive to loiter and station camp the opposing militia's home turf, while not resulting in catastrophic ship loss every time a system switch sovereignty.
I just hate to see a scenario where everyone spends half their day moving their personal fleets around because they anticipate a lockdown of a system, and thus, a lockdown of their assets. Or, players losing ships they own because they had RL issues that kept them from the game, and lost everything they owned while they were away.
Thoughts? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
402
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 22:12:00 -
[324] - Quote
Again, to play devil's advocate for a common "fix" I seeing discussed here, regarding the interest in LP payouts for player kills:
Assuming an LP reward for kills is implemented, what is to stop me and Shalee Lianne from agreeing to blow each other up back and forth, to farm LP?
Or a player and their alt in the opposing militia?
Not saying this idea won't work, only that there needs to be a disincentive to farm, and only an incentive towards hard-fought, legitimate, kills. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 22:14:00 -
[325] - Quote
You'd have to contract your stuff over to an alt to move out? I don't know. I'm not too bothered either way that issue goes tbh.
I do think it could be interesting having to move your stuff around like that, and also plexing would become hard core then because people would want to force occupancy changes. Imagine forcing pilots of Huola or Auga to relocate. That'd be kinda awesome actually. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
402
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 22:32:00 -
[326] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:You'd have to contract your stuff over to an alt to move out? I don't know. I'm not too bothered either way that issue goes tbh.
I do think it could be interesting having to move your stuff around like that, and also plexing would become hard core then because people would want to force occupancy changes. Imagine forcing pilots of Huola or Auga to relocate. That'd be kinda awesome actually.
The problem I see with this is that it penalizes the new players who want to join FW to learn how to PvP. Newer players typically only have a single account, and forcing them to train up hauling alts (the only way to safely solo transport your ships in lowsec is with a cloaky transport). The frustration of someone working hard to buy a bunch of ships, and losing them overnight when they werent even playing, will kill the morale and enthusiasm from someone relatively new to EvE.
I personally know FW pilots who wanted to go to nullsec for a change of pace, and lost all their ships this way, and were so demoralized they fled back to FW to start over. Great for us, sad that a single move killed their interest in a region and its gameplay.
Most of us established players could handle this change just fine, its more that I think most of us want to get FW back to a place where it encourages enlistment, and provides fun PvP for people of all skill levels, including noobs. The perfect FW scenario in my opinion is one where your actions are relevant whether you're in rifter gangs seizing small plexes, or battleship fleets with logi capping large plexes. There should be something meaningful for people of all skill levels to engage in.
We could certainly ask for FW to be transformed into a nullsec scenario with station lockouts, etc, but I think it might be catering to the crowd that FW has now, rather than the crowd we want FW to attract once its fixed and working again.
I'm totally open to reflection and feedback though, just because I see problems with this particular fix doesn't mean someone else doesn't have a better way of implementing it. |
Daiyu Tzu
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 22:35:00 -
[327] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 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?
I don't really see this being discussed....but it seems to me to be a crucial problem created by such a "fix".
No problem at all just lack of careful planing by You that results in lost stuff.... usual thing at war. That will teach You to be more careful next time. Besides Your stuff is not lost, eventually You will get to it when station will be recaptured.
"Working as intended" (c) Blizzard |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 23:50:00 -
[328] - Quote
Ohhhhhh. No, I wouldn't want stations to lock people out completely. I thought it was more like a penalty thing where you get shot at by the station and you aren't allowed to use the services or something.
I kind of don't like that at all, I have ships scattered all over the warzone. But if it happened that way, you're right, those of us who have been there forever will adapt as per usual.
The new guys would be forced to join corporations and make contacts etc, so it still wouldn't be a horrible thing really. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hershman
G-Weezy
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:17:00 -
[329] - Quote
I don't agree with #1. I really don't want alliances in fw. I can't imagine why anyone would want #1. You contradict this by then saying fw is for small gang pvp (I agree.) Player owned alliance pvp = large scale. Fw =\= large scale pvp.
Faction warfare means faction alliance. Other than that your suggestions seem cool. Will post more later. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
402
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:58:00 -
[330] - Quote
Daiyu Tzu wrote:No problem at all just lack of careful planing by You that results in lost stuff.... usual thing at war. That will teach You to be more careful next time. Besides Your stuff is not lost, eventually You will get to it when station will be recaptured. "Working as intended" (c) Blizzard
I dont think you quite read my statement - If you have assets in a station, and I have a busy few days with school/work and can't make it online, and get locked out of a station, that has absolutely nothing to do with lack of planning or not being careful. It would just penalize you for not being online 24/7. Thats my personal objection.
Shalee, sounds like we're on the same page than.
I know some in here are advocating COMPLETE station lockout, meaning no docking, and thus no access to your stuffs. Nothing wrong with suggesting that, I'm just making sure we all think about and discuss the consequences is all.
|
|
Hershman
G-Weezy
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:03:00 -
[331] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:[quote=Daiyu Tzu]
I know some in here are advocating COMPLETE station lockout, meaning no docking, and thus no access to your stuffs. Nothing wrong with suggesting that, I'm just making sure we all think about and discuss the consequences is all.
My god, that is the worst idea ever. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
402
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:17:00 -
[332] - Quote
Hershman wrote:I don't agree with #1. I really don't want alliances in fw. I can't imagine why anyone would want #1. You contradict this by then saying fw is for small gang pvp (I agree.) Player owned alliance pvp = large scale. Fw =\= large scale pvp.
Faction warfare means faction alliance. Other than that your suggestions seem cool. Will post more later.
I think people commonly misunderstand me on this one. It's not the Alliance itself I want in Faction Warfare, its the people in them.
I think when everyone thinks Alliance, they immediately assume Supercap blobs. They don't have to go hand in hand. I would in no way advocate Alliance admission to FW, unless the mechanics are fixed to discourage / eliminate Supercaps from FW, either by fixing plexes enough that we all fight there, and not on the gates, or by locking Supers from lowsec entirely.
But lets assume for a minute that they fix plexes, they give payouts, or system consequences, and 90% of the fights between miliitas starts happening in the plexes again like it used to....in a case like that, with no supers involved, why than penalize player groups wanting to join FW because they belong to an alliance?
Any group of corps can form an Alliance even if they have no supercaps, and any Alliance with supercaps can come fight militia fleets on gates, just like they do now. It's the supercap presence that everyone objects to.
My point is that the Alliances fight in FW battles right now - they get batphoned in by FC's on both sides (I was there when the Amarr were losing a cap fight and summoned a dozen AAA Nyxs), and they take up presence in our warzone whether we like it or not. This has nothing to do with whether they are flying under a militia flag or not.
And before PL came to town, we most certainly had large fleet battles - It was fairly common to have 50 vs 50 BS fleets, or carrier battles, between militias.
Assuming we fix the supercap presence issue, than all thats left are large numbers of pilots in the same ships we militia corps fight in every day - what is the harm in letting them join in that scenario?
Again, I understand the initial freakout when people read this, but I'm trying to clarify that I have the exact same objection as you do - I just see an alternative solution.
If fleet size is the issue, than lets fix the fleet size issue - but fleet size really has nothing to do with whether you belong to a militia corp or Alliance - its where and when and how the fights take place. Move em back to the plexes, and we're all on the same level again, militia or alliance member alike.
|
Hershman
G-Weezy
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:32:00 -
[333] - Quote
Ok good points.
I have not been a part of FW for as long as you, so I could be wrong.
I just fear super blob alliance gameplay. Now that's boring. And really supercaps have no place in low sec.
But isn't Corps inside Alliances inside Factions redundant? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
403
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:02:00 -
[334] - Quote
Hershman wrote: I just fear super blob alliance gameplay. Now that's boring. And really supercaps have no place in low sec.
But isn't Corps inside Alliances inside Factions redundant?
Yeah, kinda redundant. I just think we've all grown bigger and fly bigger ships now, so the old argument of "if we let alliances in, they'll just blob everything" died out for me when the militias themselves started fielding blobs and capitals. Now, its just a matter of fleet size and mecanics the way I see it, so blocking alliance members from militia membership just seems really arbitrary.
I don't know what the answer is exactly (other than I know I want supers outta lowsec), I just want FW to restore the numbers it used to have, so i'd love to see broader miliita membership, even if it means tapping alliances. Like I said, they're here anyways, might as well pick a side.
|
Liamn
Atrum Deus Vult
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:35:00 -
[335] - Quote
Morar Santee wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote: 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.
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 ********.
Agree (bad idea) Removing the Navy from high sec will result in: - FW low-sec systems being more empty (I thought the general concensus was that low-sec systems are uninhabited as it is). - New players will leave / not join FW because it takes away a safety net afforded to every other player. - Veteran players will leave because it takes away sources of income, which is needed to fuel FW losses (missions, jita scamming, etc) |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
63
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:22:00 -
[336] - Quote
I have read through a number of various posts and have the following comments/suggestions.
Firstly, I would like to tackle the discussion of removing navies from high sec. I am 100% AGAINST this suggestion. My reasons are as follows
1) The factions are at war. Why would they not have their navy defending their empire space? The militia is a capsuleer force that supports a given empire. As such, their enemies MUST treat you as hostile and intercept you for the sake of FW making any sense from a Universe/RP perspective (I am not a full RP person, but I still acknowledge FW is based on a premise).
2) High sec should not be 100% safe for a FW member, but home turf should be somewhat safer. People should be able to do non-FW activities with a FW character in their own/allied empire space. Be this mission, incursion or move some ships around knowing that the navy mechanic is in place (which still leaves an element of risk)
3) The trade hubs will be camped 23.5/7 and low sec loses it meaning as people will be in high sec all the time. CCP wants people to move out of high sec to low/null. This change gives them a way to be in FW AND stay in high sec.
4) New players who join FW will be targets 100% of the time with no option to withdraw from the warzone (i.e. low sec) to skill up a bit, earn isk etc... without being ganked. Current navy mechanics mean that they still could be killed, but the person has to be skilled at evading the navy to do it which is better for all concerned.
5) The navy also is used to keep people out that have actively prosecuted missions against that empire. Eve is about risk/reward AND consequences. A carebare that runs mission for amarr/caldari is engaged by the navy because they have blown up so many ships belonging to that faction. Is Soundwave really going to remove the navy as we know it from EVERY aspect of the game?
Some comments on some of the (IMHO stupid) ideas/comments that have been made:
1) People have said to remove concord. The navy and concord serve DIFFERENT roles. Players should not be performing the role of concord.
2) People have said standings should determine who is allowed to engage other players. This should have nothing to do with it; otherwise you end up having non-FW people getting ganked and/or neutral alts getting into FW fights. This is bad in so many ways.
The following are some of my thoughts/suggestions (many which I have made a number of times and seen others post as well)
1) Captains Quarters - Shows details on the screens of what is going on with reports and updates. There should also be Intel for people to see how contested a system is so they know if they should push on it to flip it vs. try to defend if more.
2) RR mechanics for FW. Repping someone in your militia should not impact FACTION standings in any way, shape or form. Sec status hits are a separate issue. That being said, I should not get shot by gate/station gun for repping a -5 allied militia pilot who has NOT gone GCC and is engaging an opposition he has legit aggression rights on due to a (permanent) war dec.
3) Off-colour allies not showing as allies (caldari/amarr + gal/minnies). Perhaps shooting them should not incur a faction penalty, but I should at least be able to quickly tell they are militia vs. random neutrals in low sec some way besides going "Show Info" on them.
4) Plex spawn mechanics. This has been specified a million times. Plexes should be available (based on a seeding mechanic that does give some variation) all throughout the day, not just post DT.
5) Offensive plexing should require the attacking militia to blow up the NPCs for timer to run down.
6) Plexes should escalate like exploration plexes. If you complete an escalated plex, the original starting location should get a boost/reduction to contestion as well as the one you just did. Perhaps an escalation mechanic that chains a few together could even see all systems in a constellation get a slight change to their sov... The other thing that is required for escalation is to have offensive AND defensive plexes. Meaning if I do a defensive one with my fleet, and it escalates to an offensive one, we have to go and run that. This means fleets are moving around trying to force sov changes = more pvp and not just locked to one system and the ones next door as is the current case
7) Adjust missions so that they cannot be done solo in a SB as well as balance overall faction NPCs
8) Pirate ships are OP as previously mentioned - faction ships should be the highest level for a tier OR there should be a split tier system such that some allow pirate ships and some don't (i.e. best you can use is faction). People need to remember the changes coming to destroyers as well!!!
9) Super Caps SHOULD be allowed in low sec - the nerf and new tier 3 BC will allow us to counter them more effectively
10) Missions should be more objective based and less "blow up xyz"... I should be running the missions to influence the war zone, not because an agent has sent me there to shoot some scripted NPC engagement...
Quote:The FW missions need balancing amongst the factions. Minnie and Caldari missions need to be made easier or Amarr and gallente more difficult. The later is probably easier to implement and with all FW missions requiring robust ships and/or teams of players to do it would encourage fights, which is what FW is about. We need to be VERY careful about this - are we saying the Amarr missions vs. Minnie NPCs need to be harder, or the Minnie missions VS Amarr NPCS need to be harder???
11) Friendly NPCs should NOT shoot a member of their militia with low faction standings in missions/plexes - I am on your side. If I don't shoot the navy, they should not be shooting me. I'm trying to help. If I shoot you, well of course you can shoot back...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
63
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:23:00 -
[337] - Quote
12) Friendly NPCs should NOT shoot a member of their militia with low faction standings in missions/plexes - I am on your side. If I don't shoot the navy, they should not be shooting me. I'm trying to help. If I shoot you, well of course you can shoot back...
13) Alliances in FW. Just to throw it out there (considering they are supposed to be RP alliances) could it be setup such that CVA has a perm , mutual, non-retractable war vs. minnies (and gal), UK vs. Amarr (and cal) etc...??? This is something that would require CCP to implement, so as to keep 99% of alliances out. End result is that FW can interfere with them (read shoot at the) and vice versa, but they are not actually part of FW per se... The idea of having high alliance faction standings could be the driver. CVA can "ally" with Amarr FW and shoot minnies/cal, but only if they keep their Amarr standings high enough. Or we could just say alliances can join as long as they have the faction standings like corps can - just make the alliance standings even higher so only the most dedicated can achieve this...
14) Sov should have some meaning. If a system loses its native sov, no FW missions should be available (e.g. 24th won't give missions when Minnies hold that system...). Also, perhaps something could be done with PI as well? Sov is required to run PI for FW people. Perhaps even non-FW capsuleers cannot do PI in FW low sec??? (This idea probably needs a bit more thought, but putting it out there as a discussion point... Flame on!!!)
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:49:00 -
[338] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: 2. Super caps has never disturbed occupancy war, most of plexes do not let those in anyway.
lol. It's less about SC's in plexes and more about them hotdropping whenever we have a sizable fleet out and about. So yes, they kinda do disturb 'occupancy war' quite a bit.
If you put you fleet in plex there is no point to hot drop supers because they can not engage your fleet in there. If you are doing something else than plexing you are not actually playing FW, you are just doing pvp and then it is all right to have hot dropped by supers. Plexes are originally intended to make possible to have fair fight with ship limitations, now you want to make whole lowsec as limited plex.
Anyway i think that super nerf that CCP has proposed can be enough to nerf those hotdrops a bit.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 04:02:00 -
[339] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Yeah what Johnny said. You lose FACTION standings with the RR bug.
You can always make petition and ask standings back lost by bug.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 04:12:00 -
[340] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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!
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
|
|
Marrak Taron
Almost Epic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 04:42:00 -
[341] - Quote
Another idea, based on the news of the winter expansion is to make the Custom Offices in FW space owned by the controlling faction of the system. For example if Minmatar occupies a system, then all the Custom Offices in that system are owned by the Minmatar. As such they will only allow faction members access to it, and a low - non existent tax on it.
However, also create a plex that is linked to it, and control of the plex by the enemy faction will offline the custom office (and lock the plex) for 6 hours. When the plex is under attack though, there will be a warning system in place to alert the controlling militia to come defend it.
Then to hopefully, further entice people to care about the planet, increase the raw materials on the planet, more to null sec standards. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 05:58:00 -
[342] - 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.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 06:11:00 -
[343] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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.
So you mean that is is good for fw that 1 or 2 guys will make system near to vulnerable in 3 weeks without any pvp, then they have to face whole enemy militia. Does not sound like small scale pvp to me. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 06:58:00 -
[344] - Quote
I think it would be good to tell about PERVS fw history here and why they quitted. It could clear out current plexing flaws bit more.
When PERVS joined FW we were bit inactive as corporation, i personally joined several big fleets that general militia had, those were 100+ fleets and got fight every day against gallente blob.
Then i started to explore what fw plexes could bring, i did some defence plexing, then some other guys joined those plexing operations and we got some pvp in there. FOOM was capturing northern blackrise and had quite efficient system on.
Then we thought that if we move our operational HQ to Ladistier and start plexing in that systems we would get more fights because it was close to Villore. And we did we got lot of good fight in plexes. Finally we got Ladistier and then we took vifrevaert.
Then we helped to capture Verge Vendor region and pushed on Essence. But finally Gallente learned that PERVS in plex ment almost sure ship losses and they started to avoid us.
Half way on capturing last gallente region, Placid, gallente stopped defend almost totally, their idea was to take systems back after we have taken all and left militia. That is what happened to some FW corps, no pvp = no reason to be in militia.
But gallente did not realize that we had already plans ready for alt defense plexers who did boring orbit the button phase, if those alt got killed too often we sent PERVS gank squad to secure area, that caused that gallente stop trying to get systems back.
We hold all systems about half year, not much pvp involved on that.
Then we decided to start capturin minmatar area using all legit standing alts etc tricks to make it fast. We did got some fights at beginning but finally minmatar adopted same policy than gallente passive resistance, make us bored so we go away. At the same time CCP has changed plex spawning mechanics on captured systems so that defending with alts would be so big effort that systems will flip. This affected minmatar systems as well and systems started flip back to minmatar faster than we could take them with efficient tricks. We packed our stuff and moved back to Ladistier, FW was generally over.
Balance ?. Yea right.
Later on we changed to Amarr militia and stated to plex in minmatar staging systems, we got some fight at start but after crushing minmatar fleets with 6 people against 30+ and minmatar had no chance mostly because of overpower pirate faction ships. They announced that 'take all systems, we do not care'. So no pvp again. Time to disband corp so everyone could seek something else to do.
So conclusion is that several little changes have made FW plexing unplayable as whole, defensing against attacker was waste of time because taking systems back was easier. Because there is no penalty or gain to have systems it leads to situation where is no reason to fight for plexes because you will lose you ships for nothing And experienced wealthy players had overpower tools (pirate faction ships) to fight in plexes.
I know that this sound bit stupid argument because militia want to blob fight every day without reason and lose ships.
So only change FW needs is to ensure that you will get some sort of pvp in plexes every day, after that all little bugs etc has no major role. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
404
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 07:06:00 -
[345] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Yeah what Johnny said. You lose FACTION standings with the RR bug. You can always make petition and ask standings back lost by bug.
Still, its a bug, I'm sure it can be fixed.
Also, great points Har, thanks for your perspective!
And yes, as much as I could just be away with the supercaps, I admit I'm curious to see how the nerf and BC's work at taking them down. Could be a lot of fun ;) |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 07:44:00 -
[346] - 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. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 07:59:00 -
[347] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
Try to understand, super carriers has nothing to do with actual FW.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 08:24:00 -
[348] - Quote
Main reason why i liked to be FW was that there was always something to do when you logged in, you went to plex.
if you were alone you took smaller goals and wen people joined your fleet you took bigger goals, Our fleets were on long perioids people joined and leaved when they wanted, we used mainly small ships that could move in lowsec without getting caught easily.
Main reason was not to do plexing itself, it was to possibly get pvp on those, you were kind of baiting people to engage you.
Also FW had no any 'must do' things if you did not feel to head out and plex it did not matter anything, you could not lose anything but also you did not gain much. So basically it was quite stress free prosess. Okay i might taken it quite seriously couple times .
So FW plexing was easily adjustable action depending your fleet size. If you had enough people you could do some other stuff also like tank highsec navy and gank people in highsec. |
Axl Borlara
T.R.I.A.D
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 10:48:00 -
[349] - Quote
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. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
90
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:01:00 -
[350] - 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? |
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
347
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:23:00 -
[351] - 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. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:30:00 -
[352] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
What are they doing to destroyers?
Minor plexes are already thrashers online. This will surely make things worse. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:37:00 -
[353] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote: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
Or you will have an alt in a transport ship get yoru stuff out. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 11:54:00 -
[354] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:1. There is couple things that have made FW plex warfare unplayable.......
You missed the main reason. Plexing with no notification to the enemy milita is mainly a pve activity.
People figured out that through hide and seek plexing faction warriors like ank could do over a hundred plexes in a week without a single pvp kill. This is what makes plexing silly to most people in fw. This is why faction war is ridiculed by the wider eve community.
If CCP continures to make plexing a pve activity they won't really create that much needed small gang pvp mechanic. The only way people will do thme is if they give huge isk/lp payouts. But then its just making "the war" into carebearing. People will stop doing missions and grind plexes for isk. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
405
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 14:20:00 -
[355] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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?
Yeah, I think if you had a choice between docking at a station where your ship was 100% safe, and a station that you could be locked out of the next day through no fault of your own, no one would ever dock at the militia stations. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 15:29:00 -
[356] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:1. There is couple things that have made FW plex warfare unplayable....... You missed the main reason. Plexing with no notification to the enemy milita is mainly a pve activity. People figured out that through hide and seek plexing faction warriors like ank could do over a hundred plexes in a week without a single pvp kill. This is what makes plexing silly to most people in fw. This is why faction war is ridiculed by the wider eve community. If CCP continures to make plexing a pve activity they won't really create that much needed small gang pvp mechanic. The only way people will do thme is if they give huge isk/lp payouts. But then its just making "the war" into carebearing. People will stop doing missions and grind plexes for isk.
Sad part is that ankh quitted plexing because we forced her to pvp. |
Red Countess
Spiritus Draconis
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 15:53:00 -
[357] - Quote
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!CCP READ THIS:)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A:Reworking of Faction Complex Beacons:
-Small plexes can now accept not only t1 frigs and destroyers but t2 as well, it makes little sense that faction frigs can enter one but t2 cant, simple change for more fun all around similar to the way sisi frig beacon rules were changed. -Capping plex gives gives fixed ammount of Loyalty Points based on size of it. LP's are spread between all the players that capture it. -Rework of agro mechanics of plex rats, so that capping large plex isnt as simple as having one speedy frig kiteing while other player caps the plex. That way both smaller and larger ships will be useful for there own size of plex and players would actually need to engage rats in order to get plex.
Reason for change: this gives incentive for players to actually bother with plex capping and system flopping, reward for whole day of plexing still wont be anywhere near what player can gain from doing missions but at least there is push to pvp all over low sec and not just in few active systems. Numbers are optional and can be tweaked but still there should be some kind of reward for it. Example player can gain 1 billion isk from full day of farming FW missions or 15-20k LP's from doing the same with plex pvp.
B: Systems Owned and Player Rank
-Possible rework of militia ranks so that they are gained through pvp rather then pve, that way focus is pushed towards pvp and militia is more aligned with its true purpose rather then it being ISK farming ground for non pvp players. -Number of systems gives monthly reward of LP's based on ones militia rank. The more systems that faction owns and higher the rank of character the better the reward. Since there are around 100 systems (101 is it?) that can be split between 2 faction this could be done in such a way that every system owned above 50 gives +x amount of LP after each month spent in militia. Reward wouldn't be to great but it would push players to pvp, grind that max rank and fight for each system since on end of the day that is free LP's. -Rats on gates belong to militia that owns the system, small change that adds a bit realism to the game.
Reason for change: This pushes players more towards engaging in militia type pvp rather then random lets blow what ever comes our way (pirating) type of play that is predominant now and contradictory to original idea of faction warfare . With actual reason to bother flopping the system players now gain palpable rewards, but due to new militia ranking based on pvp one wont gain it just by passively putting "noob" character into militia but one will have to actually participate if one is to gain his monthly "salary".
C: Killing Opposing Militia Ships and Reward
-This now gives a better LP reward, I know that this mechanic is in some form in the game but if I go with my frigate and manage to get 5 solo kills that shouldn't give me pathetic 10 LP's or what ever it is, obviously there was effort in that which is harder to pull off then killing NPC rats in mission so some kind of palpable reward should be in place. Again nothing like missions but still few hundred for such achievement wouldn't hurt. -This LP gain works on similar system as points on http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/. Meaning that ship size of both partys is taken into consideration as well as number of targets on the kill, obviously blobbing and solo pvp are not same thing. NPC damage on kill shouldn't count as extra ship. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
63
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 16:41:00 -
[358] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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. I once had a conversation with a SC pilot - he told me the one ship he really fears in low sec in a bhalgorn. Why is that you ask. Because with a full rack of neuts, 2-3 cycles and he cannot jump out as he lacks the cap... So if there is some neuts applied post nerf, I think we should be ok...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 21:12:00 -
[359] - Quote
Faction Warfare Mission are too farmable and way to rich iskwise. Even as a Stealth Bombing Missioner myself I see this. Plexing is broken and provides little reward besides occasional spurts of PvP and maybe tags and some standing and the Occupancy System is useless as well. Small PvP is to be encouraged with most if not all of the changes to FW. There are several bugs in FW that CCP can fix with about a weeks worth of work TOPS.
My Proposed Solution: 1. FIX THE FREAKING BUGS
Balance Missions so they are the same difficulty all across the board. Make them more difficult so that Lvl 4's cannot be solo'd in a bomber. Reduce their LP output slightly. Simultaneously increase LP bounties and Agent Standing increases(explained later) for FW enemy PvP kills in a way that makes it unprofitable to farm an alt but so that those who PvP get a good bonus. (Say if i solo a BS in a T1 Frig i get about a half of that ships value of that ship in LP so about 10-30,000 LP, have these rewards decrease accordingly with the higher type of ship that you were in and the lower type of ship the enemy was in.) Also introduce some sort of LP reward for Plexing and increase the Agent Standing increase(instead of Tags being turned in for Store items maybe they convert straight to LP) Once again so that this process makes it more profitable for people to plex and reduces the importance of missions but discourages plex farming.
Missions should still be the primary way for FW people to earn a living. However to reduce farming we could initiate a system where FW agent standings (not faction standings) degrade over time. Lets say 0.05 per day or whatever would be the most balanced. Missions still earn you decent standings increase(lets say up to level 2 Missions standing equivalent). But the standings increase decreases as you go upwards. However with a large increase in Standing Increases for PvP kills as well as plexing this increase the importance of plexing and PvP and reduces farming.
Increase the amount of importance of plexing in occupancy with the introduction of LP rewards and standings increase for plexing and change the Occupancy system to affect Gameplay to some degree(While still leaving room for PvP. Station guns firing when a person holds complete occupancy is a good way to do this. It limits the effectiveness of Station Camping by WTS, encourages plexing, and PvP won't really decrease because most PvP doesn't happen on station anyway). Increase the frequency of plex PvP by introducing more reliable intel for plexs. Such as an absolute value for occupancy and something as simple as a warning that says "PLEX OPEN IN INSERT_SYSTEM_NAME_HERE". Change the plexing system so that noobs in T1 Frigs can fight other noobs in T1 frigs.
Minor changes such as a way that FW Corporations could recruit more effectively from General Militia.
The only way I would want alliance members to join militia is if their was some way to limit the amount of people who could join so that the blob warfare(Supercap or not) does not become a reality.
The hopeful results of these changes(Even though most likely CCP will only fix the bugs and not change the current system to much). Are that with the Standings changes farming alts are reduced, Pirate activity(and thus PvP) increase because of the larger amount of shinies roaming the pipes to do missions. Plexing PvP encourages small gang warfare that more people will be involved in due to the rewards and penalties. More people will join FW and their will be much rejoicing. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 21:56:00 -
[360] - 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. |
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 07:16:00 -
[361] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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.
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. |
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 08:51:00 -
[362] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare. This was disallowed initially because while Faction Warfare was designed to be PvP lite, this no longer accurately describes the scene. First you say you enjoy small gang pvp and that you want CCP to protect it
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: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. And then you complain that you cant continue flying large gangs |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 09:06:00 -
[363] - Quote
Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.
FW Missions are fine, incursions are easier isk anyway and involves less risk and effort.
Super carriers etc are not problem if fights happen in plexes.
Plex ship restrictions should be adjusted properly to put pirate faction ships to same category as same size T2 ships.
Plex spawning should be adjusted so that plexes spawn on all time zones making plex warfare 23/7 process.
Downtimes should not affect plex spawning in any way and capturing systems or recapturing those back should take approx same amount of time or effort.
Passivity should not be best tactics to defend, it should be pvp action that makes it possible take or defend systems. So make it worth for bigger fleets to participate plexing efforts, transfer those daily blob fights happen to in plexes on some way.
Make some reason to die on plex fight so you do not die for nothing. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 09:14:00 -
[364] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare. This was disallowed initially because while Faction Warfare was designed to be PvP lite, this no longer accurately describes the scene. First you say you enjoy small gang pvp and that you want CCP to protect it Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: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. And then you complain that you cant continue flying large gangs Seems to me the problem isnt the rules of the game, but instead the way the players are choosing to play it. If your enemy is forming up fleets to gank your 100+ man battleships, then start forming up fleets to counter theirs? Start getting tricky, bombing them, picking off their stragglers. Waiting for their fleetwarp off a gate and then bubble the 2 or 3 idiots who didnt align? There are hundreds of ways to **** with larger fleets. Pick one. And yes, giving all your space up and waiting until your enemy gets bored and leaves = really dumb, and a great way to lose your pvp players.
Those are valid tactics in 0.0 , but in lowsec you can not use bomb or bubles.
I do agree that people just do not know how to play and handle super caps so they ask CCP to help. I do not see any problems now on militia mechanics and supercaps, i think incoming super nerf could little bit help lowsec too. Super carrier can not **** sub caps fleets so easily but those can engage capital support of sub caps, so i think this will be enough to make it work. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 09:53:00 -
[365] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference..
2 ships speed tank is ok? So completely turn it into fw missions with a speed tank alt???
So long as we have npcs in plexes plexxing will be a pve activity. Notifiy the militia players when where and how their militiary complexes are being taken and let them fight for them if they wish.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 10:30:00 -
[366] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.. 2 ships speed tank is ok? So completely turn it into fw missions with a speed tank alt??? So long as we have npcs in plexes plexxing will be a pve activity. Notifiy the militia players when where and how their militiary complexes are being taken and let them fight for them if they wish.
Notifying does not really help anything, i can spam those notify messages with my alts in other systems when i really take another plex somewhere else.
Do your scouting and find where enemy is. Map tells it anyway if you know how to use it. |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 11:57:00 -
[367] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.
FW Missions are fine, incursions are easier isk anyway and involves less risk and effort.
Super carriers etc are not problem if fights happen in plexes.
Plex ship restrictions should be adjusted properly to put pirate faction ships to same category as same size T2 ships.
Plex spawning should be adjusted so that plexes spawn on all time zones making plex warfare 23/7 process.
Downtimes should not affect plex spawning in any way and capturing systems or recapturing those back should take approx same amount of time or effort.
Passivity should not be best tactics to defend, it should be pvp action that makes it possible take or defend systems. So make it worth for bigger fleets to participate plexing efforts, transfer those daily blob fights happen to in plexes on some way.
Make some reason to die on plex fight so you do not die for nothing.
The mission are only fine if you not in FW with your main, and using them to make easy isk with an alt or two.
PVE being in FW at all, is not fine.
|
Hacra
Cosmodynamics
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 12:12:00 -
[368] - Quote
I did not go through all the pages here, but i must say one thing as "outside" observer.
If big alliance are denied their super cap fleets in lowsec it will make moving them around nearly impossible.
Also, nothing stops PL or anyone else dropping 100+ carriers on top of you which has pretty much same effect, if you're not willing to counter that, whimper in corner or muster forces big enough to counter it (Yes, it's hard). |
El 1974
Bendebeukers Green Rhino
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 12:28:00 -
[369] - Quote
I don't do FW and never have, so I look at this from an outsiders perspective. I've looked at it and decided that it wasn't something I'd do as a new player and later it just wasn't worth it ruining my faction standings for. FW isn't something you can just explore for a bit and switch to something else once you've had enough of it. It's a choice that will affect your character for the rest of your life in Eve. This sets FW apart. I can go into lowsec and 0.0. I can build stuff, mine, do missions, incursions, complexes, etc. I won't do FW. Most players will never touch it and as such until this is somehow fixed I think it's not something CCP should put a lot of development effort in.
What remains is a lot of development that will affect FW on the sidelines. FW doesn't seem to be forgotten (you do get a discount on CO BPCs), but new expansions will only improve FW as a side-effect. The supercap nerf is a good example. FW players should pay attention to those developments and make sure their views from the FW point-of-view is heared and taken into account.
Standing restoration Standing restoration is often complained about, not only in relation to FW. When people join my corporation, people who have been doing missions in other faction's space often have to grind lvl 1 missions for weeks at a time before they can do missions where we live. Once they reach -2 they can suddenly do any mission for every corp they have sufficient standing for. I'd prefer a more gradual approach: at -4 you can do lvl II, at -2 lvl III, at -1 lvl IV and for lvl V you need >0 standing. That means you will have more achievements to work for than currently and more variation in missions.
Custom Offices, Dust It amazes me that so little has been said in this thread about Dust and custom offices. I read that Dust PvE in highsec will be somehow tied in with FW rather than normal missions. Although I have seen no mentioning of this recently. Custom Offices are another thing worth mentioning. Player owned COs could play a role in the new SOV mechanics which will probably use some form of descriptive ownership. The news that players will be able to erect those offices in lowsec is a hint at a similar change for FW SOV mechanics.
In the discussions about what should happen to 0.0 it was mentioned that faction standings should matter. Actions should have consequences. What if NPCs could function similar to faction police and only aggress those that have poor standing with them from 'ratting'. Or if factions could refuse them from docking. That last thing could also be the case in empire space and thus affect FW.
I like the idea of bringing FW to highsec, although I think this should be limitted to the less secure systems in hisec (0.5, maybe 0.6). The most secure systems should continue to be relatively safe for friendly FW players. Players should be able to take out the 'criminals' that venture into enemy territory. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 13:34:00 -
[370] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.
FW Missions are fine, incursions are easier isk anyway and involves less risk and effort.
Super carriers etc are not problem if fights happen in plexes.
Plex ship restrictions should be adjusted properly to put pirate faction ships to same category as same size T2 ships.
Plex spawning should be adjusted so that plexes spawn on all time zones making plex warfare 23/7 process.
Downtimes should not affect plex spawning in any way and capturing systems or recapturing those back should take approx same amount of time or effort.
Passivity should not be best tactics to defend, it should be pvp action that makes it possible take or defend systems. So make it worth for bigger fleets to participate plexing efforts, transfer those daily blob fights happen to in plexes on some way.
Make some reason to die on plex fight so you do not die for nothing. The mission are only fine if you not in FW with your main, and using them to make easy isk with an alt or two. PVE being in FW at all, is not fine.
So you want to nerf mission because you do not want to share wealth, it is same than nerffng 0.0 rats because everyone can kill those. |
|
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 13:55:00 -
[371] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.
FW Missions are fine, incursions are easier isk anyway and involves less risk and effort.
Super carriers etc are not problem if fights happen in plexes.
Plex ship restrictions should be adjusted properly to put pirate faction ships to same category as same size T2 ships.
Plex spawning should be adjusted so that plexes spawn on all time zones making plex warfare 23/7 process.
Downtimes should not affect plex spawning in any way and capturing systems or recapturing those back should take approx same amount of time or effort.
Passivity should not be best tactics to defend, it should be pvp action that makes it possible take or defend systems. So make it worth for bigger fleets to participate plexing efforts, transfer those daily blob fights happen to in plexes on some way.
Make some reason to die on plex fight so you do not die for nothing. The mission are only fine if you not in FW with your main, and using them to make easy isk with an alt or two. PVE being in FW at all, is not fine. So you want to nerf mission because you do not want to share wealth, it is same than nerffng 0.0 rats because everyone can kill those.
Not nurf FW missions - get rid of them entirely. Or if not that then make them something you can't do in any stealth ship. Currently you can run FW missions (Amarr and Gallente especially due to no missiles) in a single Stealth Bomber. Come over to Bleak Lands and count the number of Purifiers and Hounds you see (or not see but see jumping) and you will see the problem.
If there is a PvE element to FW - it has to be a lot more integrated. As it is now, its not about sharing wealth, its about FW becoming another Motsu style cash cow.
|
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 13:57:00 -
[372] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.
FW Missions are fine, incursions are easier isk anyway and involves less risk and effort.
Super carriers etc are not problem if fights happen in plexes.
Plex ship restrictions should be adjusted properly to put pirate faction ships to same category as same size T2 ships.
Plex spawning should be adjusted so that plexes spawn on all time zones making plex warfare 23/7 process.
Downtimes should not affect plex spawning in any way and capturing systems or recapturing those back should take approx same amount of time or effort.
Passivity should not be best tactics to defend, it should be pvp action that makes it possible take or defend systems. So make it worth for bigger fleets to participate plexing efforts, transfer those daily blob fights happen to in plexes on some way.
Make some reason to die on plex fight so you do not die for nothing. The mission are only fine if you not in FW with your main, and using them to make easy isk with an alt or two. PVE being in FW at all, is not fine. So you want to nerf mission because you do not want to share wealth, it is same than nerffng 0.0 rats because everyone can kill those.
NERF??? No, remove forever YES.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 14:14:00 -
[373] - Quote
Ruah Piskonit wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.
FW Missions are fine, incursions are easier isk anyway and involves less risk and effort.
Super carriers etc are not problem if fights happen in plexes.
Plex ship restrictions should be adjusted properly to put pirate faction ships to same category as same size T2 ships.
Plex spawning should be adjusted so that plexes spawn on all time zones making plex warfare 23/7 process.
Downtimes should not affect plex spawning in any way and capturing systems or recapturing those back should take approx same amount of time or effort.
Passivity should not be best tactics to defend, it should be pvp action that makes it possible take or defend systems. So make it worth for bigger fleets to participate plexing efforts, transfer those daily blob fights happen to in plexes on some way.
Make some reason to die on plex fight so you do not die for nothing. The mission are only fine if you not in FW with your main, and using them to make easy isk with an alt or two. PVE being in FW at all, is not fine. So you want to nerf mission because you do not want to share wealth, it is same than nerffng 0.0 rats because everyone can kill those. Not nurf FW missions - get rid of them entirely. Or if not that then make them something you can't do in any stealth ship. Currently you can run FW missions (Amarr and Gallente especially due to no missiles) in a single Stealth Bomber. Come over to Bleak Lands and count the number of Purifiers and Hounds you see (or not see but see jumping) and you will see the problem. If there is a PvE element to FW - it has to be a lot more integrated. As it is now, its not about sharing wealth, its about FW becoming another Motsu style cash cow.
And those bombers are problem for why and why it is wrong to grind isk and why it is more wrong to grind isk in FW?
CCP can say that all players have to participate 0.0 sov warfare, all other action will be removed from game.
People will just quit and do something else. If you remove mission it does not bring those guys to pvp.
I do not know why people are pissed of about others doing when they do not themself participate FW warfare, How much you have points from plexing? |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 15:08:00 -
[374] - 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 -
[375] - 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. |
Arachidamia
Matari People's Front
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:29:00 -
[376] - Quote
As someone who has done a fair bit of faction warfare, all I have to add is that changing high sec empire NPC's to not fire at enemy militia would totally ruin FW.
As it stands right now the great bonus of FW is that PVP is there for you any time you want it, but at the same time you have (relatively) safe space in which to trade/mission/shop etc. Sure high sec raids can be done, but they require some planning and whatnot. This means people can make isk and generally enjoy the benefits of high sec while still being able to head to the front when they want to. This makes PVP easily accessible. This is a good thing.
By opening up enemy high sec this entirely disappears, and it just becomes a typical war dec but without the cost. People will ignore low sec and just camp enemy trade hubs. FW players will be forced to get alts to do the everyday things they can do now. Do we really need yet another area of eve that requires alts?
All the casual FW people without alts will leave. All the combat will get spread out around high sec trading hubs, with the usual station games and abuse of mechanics that go with it. Any real feeling of enemy territory will disappear. It will just turn into a farce.
I don't want to use an alt to make isk. I don't want to play station games in amarr/jita/rens etc. If faction NPC's stopped firing at enemy militia I'd simply leave FW and do something else for PVP.
|
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 17:50:00 -
[377] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Ruah Piskonit wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.
FW Missions are fine, incursions are easier isk anyway and involves less risk and effort.
Super carriers etc are not problem if fights happen in plexes.
Plex ship restrictions should be adjusted properly to put pirate faction ships to same category as same size T2 ships.
Plex spawning should be adjusted so that plexes spawn on all time zones making plex warfare 23/7 process.
Downtimes should not affect plex spawning in any way and capturing systems or recapturing those back should take approx same amount of time or effort.
Passivity should not be best tactics to defend, it should be pvp action that makes it possible take or defend systems. So make it worth for bigger fleets to participate plexing efforts, transfer those daily blob fights happen to in plexes on some way.
Make some reason to die on plex fight so you do not die for nothing. The mission are only fine if you not in FW with your main, and using them to make easy isk with an alt or two. PVE being in FW at all, is not fine. So you want to nerf mission because you do not want to share wealth, it is same than nerffng 0.0 rats because everyone can kill those. Not nurf FW missions - get rid of them entirely. Or if not that then make them something you can't do in any stealth ship. Currently you can run FW missions (Amarr and Gallente especially due to no missiles) in a single Stealth Bomber. Come over to Bleak Lands and count the number of Purifiers and Hounds you see (or not see but see jumping) and you will see the problem. If there is a PvE element to FW - it has to be a lot more integrated. As it is now, its not about sharing wealth, its about FW becoming another Motsu style cash cow. And those bombers are problem for why and why it is wrong to grind isk and why it is more wrong to grind isk in FW? CCP can say that all players have to participate 0.0 sov warfare, all other action will be removed from game. People will just quit and do something else. If you remove mission it does not bring those guys to pvp. I do not know why people are pissed of about others doing when they do not themself participate FW warfare, How much you have points from plexing?
If removing mission from FW brings the number of people in FW from the 1000s to the 100s I will be more than happy with that. Everyone knows most of the 1000s are alts grinding missions or just no longer in the game. Their are other ways to give FW guys LP to earn isk. Mission are not the best for that. I will happily way away all those Bombers with a smile on my face if they remove the missions. If that means on paper I only have 140 guys to kill instead of 5000, then the paper will have finally gotten a better idea of just how many people are really in FW. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:07:00 -
[378] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:
If removing mission from FW brings the number of people in FW from the 1000s to the 100s I will be more than happy with that. Everyone knows most of the 1000s are alts grinding missions or just no longer in the game. Their are other ways to give FW guys LP to earn isk. Mission are not the best for that. I will happily way away all those Bombers with a smile on my face if they remove the missions. If that means on paper I only have 140 guys to kill instead of 5000, then the paper will have finally gotten a better idea of just how many people are really in FW.
Kicking those 1000 alts are 1000 targets less for militia, i know couple guys who has killed a lot of mission runners. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:47:00 -
[379] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.. 2 ships speed tank is ok? So completely turn it into fw missions with a speed tank alt??? So long as we have npcs in plexes plexxing will be a pve activity. Notifiy the militia players when where and how their militiary complexes are being taken and let them fight for them if they wish. Notifying does not really help anything, i can spam those notify messages with my alts in other systems when i really take another plex somewhere else..
The militia will be notified where you and any alts are trying to capture plexes. Its not like this will be hard to follow. The messages will just say when/where and ship type when someone enters or exits a plex.
If these military complexes are so important its hard to understand why the militia is not informed when they are attacked.
Bad Messenger wrote: Do your scouting and find where enemy is. Map tells it anyway if you know how to use it.
Nobody wants to go scouting for your hide and seek alts. They should just inform us when and where military complexes are being attacked so we can get on with the fighting.
I think you know very well that a simple notification channel would cause problems for your alt brigade. That may be why you don't like the idea.
The map crashes my cient about 50% of the time. Also I do not think it tells me where people are entering complexes.
BTW: I do agree with your other points on fw. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
134
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 18:50:00 -
[380] - Quote
>Draketrain pretending they care about anything in FW that doesn't let them win Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 19:12:00 -
[381] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Removing npc from plexes is not solution, it just adds possibility swarm alts and cap plexes afk, only change needed is to ensure that npc attacks all who can capture that plex. Some balance maybe needed for npc to make it fair for all militias, npc should be so powerfull that afk 60k skillpoint alts cant handle those. Doing co-operation with two guys or more with smaller ships to speed tank those npc:s should be possible as it is now. Maybe change npc agro only if you touch timer, then you can snipe afk defending alts without npc interference.. 2 ships speed tank is ok? So completely turn it into fw missions with a speed tank alt??? So long as we have npcs in plexes plexxing will be a pve activity. Notifiy the militia players when where and how their militiary complexes are being taken and let them fight for them if they wish. Notifying does not really help anything, i can spam those notify messages with my alts in other systems when i really take another plex somewhere else.. The militia will be notified where you and any alts are trying to capture plexes. Its not like this will be hard to follow. The messages will just say when/where and ship type when someone enters or exits a plex. If these military complexes are so important its hard to understand why the militia is not informed when they are attacked. Bad Messenger wrote: Do your scouting and find where enemy is. Map tells it anyway if you know how to use it.
Nobody wants to go scouting for your hide and seek alts. They should just inform us when and where military complexes are being attacked so we can get on with the fighting. I think you know very well that a simple notification channel would cause problems for your alt brigade. That may be why you don't like the idea. The map crashes my cient about 50% of the time. Also I do not think it tells me where people are entering complexes. BTW: I do agree with your other points on fw.
Those alts were my notification channel
Anyway you want that CCP does the most important part of EVE game play automatically. We did not have any problems to follow who was plexing and where he currently was, we hunted him down until he quit plexing. It is all about creating player network or organization who can achieve something.
You just want easy ganks. |
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 19:23:00 -
[382] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote: If removing mission from FW brings the number of people in FW from the 1000s to the 100s I will be more than happy with that. Everyone knows most of the 1000s are alts grinding missions or just no longer in the game. Their are other ways to give FW guys LP to earn isk. Mission are not the best for that. I will happily way away all those Bombers with a smile on my face if they remove the missions. If that means on paper I only have 140 guys to kill instead of 5000, then the paper will have finally gotten a better idea of just how many people are really in FW.
What ways to earn LP are you talking about exactly? You increase LP Bounties on PvP kills it just encourages people to have the same if not MORE alts to farm for it. You institute LP rewards for plexing, your just turning all the Bombers into Griffins(Read Ramad) and the problem isn't solved. Missions are an easy way for small scale PvP pilots such as myself and even Hans to make enough ISK to fuel our PvP addiction. People in Highsec don't PvP and people in Lowsec have Sanctums, Rats and all other forms of money intake that are protected by their Alliance and whatnot. If you take away missions im not going to pretend like its the end of the world. PvP and FW will go on but there will be less of it then before. Because instead of spending a day FW missioning people like me and Hans need to spend three days doing other ways of making ISK.
The trick is to make it easy for people who ACTUALLY are active in FW PvP and/or Plexing to do missions while making it significantly harder for farming alts. Nobody has embraced this idea I think except for me yet, but i will continue to push it. Use the AGENT STANDINGS as a weapon against farming alts. Have agent standings degrade over time and have PvP Kills and losses count towards them significantly, same thing with capping Plexes. Make Missions increase standing but by a significantly decreased amount.
This along with stuff like removing tags from the store list and just have them be turned in for LP, and a slightly increased PvP bounty and a slightly decreased LP reward for missions will decrease the amount of Farming alts IMMENSELY. Besides balancing issues for the amount of standings increase/decrease I cannot see any downside to my idea. Yes some of the alts may just start whoring on kills and/or plexes. But it is still the best way to keep FW missions while discouraging Farming alts. IMO anyway |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 19:29:00 -
[383] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:
Do your scouting and find where enemy is. Map tells it anyway if you know how to use it.
Nobody wants to go scouting for your hide and seek alts. They should just inform us when and where military complexes are being attacked so we can get on with the fighting. I think you know very well that a simple notification channel would cause problems for your alt brigade. That may be why you don't like the idea. The map crashes my cient about 50% of the time. Also I do not think it tells me where people are entering complexes. BTW: I do agree with your other points on fw. Those alts were my notification channel Anyway you want that CCP does the most important part of EVE game play automatically. We did not have any problems to follow who was plexing and where he currently was, we hunted him down until he quit plexing. It is all about creating player network or organization who can achieve something. You just want easy ganks.
I don't want easy ganks I just want to fight in a war. The mechanics do not even come close to resembling anything like a war. "Welcome to the militia now go wandering around to find something to shoot at." I want to fight people in plexes with same restrictions I am under. IGÇÖm not sure this will be easy.
You may think having alt scouts is "the most important part of eve" but I don't really like it. Dual/triple boxing with alts scouting around ruins the immersion of the game and is not fun at all for me. So I, of course, will not be in favor of mechanics that require people to do this.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
410
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 20:26:00 -
[384] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote: If removing mission from FW brings the number of people in FW from the 1000s to the 100s I will be more than happy with that. Everyone knows most of the 1000s are alts grinding missions or just no longer in the game. Their are other ways to give FW guys LP to earn isk. Mission are not the best for that. I will happily way away all those Bombers with a smile on my face if they remove the missions. If that means on paper I only have 140 guys to kill instead of 5000, then the paper will have finally gotten a better idea of just how many people are really in FW.
I understand its easy to believe that all FW mission runners are alts, but there are still plenty of legitimate FW pilots farming their missions not for the sake of getting rich, but for the sake of making sure they have plenty of ships to sustain everyday PvP. What is wrong with this scenario?
And yes, those farming missions can most certainly provide PvP targets for militia members on both sides. At least running FW missions, you are placing a giant target on your head and begging people to come gank you in the process. Fix the AI so that bombers are no longer viable, and you'll see plenty of PvP surrounding the missions again as designed. I guarantee it.
We are usually quite proficient at detecting who's out running missions in an alt only to take the isk out of the FW community, and who actually PvP's with the income they make with them. Plenty of intra-militia wardecs have cropped up when a corp or individual is abusing this system.
I'm fine with FW income being shifted elsewhere, but thats just it, it has to be shifted, NOT simply eliminated. Otherwise you're just creating an unsustainable system where FW pilots are expected to hang around their warzone constantly and be active in fleets, but don't have a local source of income to replace losses.
|
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 20:53:00 -
[385] - Quote
I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
95
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 20:59:00 -
[386] - 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. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 00:38:00 -
[387] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's.
Sync I agre with you completely. CCP needs to have this as the goal.
The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered.
Once they change the plexing system to no longer be another pve system then I'm with you. Until then they are just playing a shell game, switcihg out red xes in missions with red xs in plexes. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Kuan Yida
Huang Yinglong
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 02:48:00 -
[388] - Quote
Here is an example of why it would be nice not to have supercaps mucking about in low sec:
http://www.minmatar-militia.org/kb/?a=kill_related&kll_id=220392
Amarr FC calls in PL...
Susan Black's excellent write up of the whole evening:
http://www.gamerchick.net/2011/10/revenge-of-nerf-herders.html |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
411
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 03:06:00 -
[389] - Quote
Agreed. FW gameplay is in no way helped by having a good game back and forth between Amarr and Minmatar being swiftly ended by a buzzkill like a PL hot drop.
I'd argue with those that say that This just keeps capitals out of FW, and keeps gangs small, but they don't restrict their drops to simply cap fleets. This isn't even the best example of supercap abuse in lowsec.
The same gang of 12 nyxes and titan has been used to gatecamp Amamake, and has been dropped on BC's before as well. There isn't any limit to what its dropped on as long as PL knows they wont be opposed fairly.
Without nullsec territory to produce their own supercaps in any number, the militia is simply defenseless against this kind of threat. Now, anyone losing a cap to a hot drop is certainly responsible for this loss, because we all know its a threat. But that being said, I hardly see how these kinds of "game over" moments are good for the ongoing pew opportunities for the various militias.
It also has been used to simply take out POS's without opposition as well. If PL wanted to, they could simply dismantle every militia owned POS that ever existed. There just simple is not the firepower to oppose this.
Supercap nerfs may change this, time will tell. But this isn't fun for anyone that actually belongs to FW. |
Demon View
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 03:58:00 -
[390] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Agreed. FW gameplay is in no way helped by having a good game back and forth between Amarr and Minmatar being swiftly ended by a buzzkill like a PL hot drop.
- PL doesn't need supers to do this. It's not like their members are incapable of flying anything else.
- Any alliance with the numbers and the interest any can do this. "Oh, a militia fight, *splat*."
So you're annoyed with PL, which is merely an alliance that has decided to do things like this: jump in with overwhelming firepower and spoil Hans Jagerblitzen's chosen play. These damned single-shard servers, they let just anyone decide on their own to live in Amamake!
But don't worry, if only supers were banned from lowsec, certainly nobody would apply any other method to achieve the same end!
But don't worry, if only PL were paid to go away, certainly nobody else would ever decide to live in Amamake!
But don't worry, if only we can destroy Amamake, certainly ]nobody else will decide to live in Auga instead! (obvious fake suggestion.)
But don't worry, if only ... certainly nobody ...
No. FW isn't a feature running on its own server. This is bunk. Especially when so much of PL's wickedness consists of "yeah, you want us to come in? Really? OK!" What devils.
Quote:Without nullsec territory to produce their own supercaps in any number, the militia is simply defenseless against this kind of threat.
Actually, you can buy supercaps. You know, like you buy all the other stuff you don't produce yourself. The main reason to expect FW to not have them is because militias are populated by the sort of people who joined the militia instead of a nullsec alliance - likewise there aren't a lot of FW hulks doing mining ops in militia space, even if defending ops like that might be fun.
So the militias aren't 'defenseless'; they're 'undefended'. But there are lots of things they're undefended against. For instance, suppose a large alliance decided on its own to 'invade' FW space. Camp all the gates, all the stations. Sweep through constellations in fleets that militia can't beat simply because they're horribly outnumbered. What would you want to nerf in this case? The ability of non-militia to use stargates in FW space? What? What?
Rather than continue in this vein, here's the basic problem with your suggestions: you have a patient sick with the flu, and you're terribly excited by - and wanting to fix - all kinds of random-ass symptoms that he has. His palms are sweaty : REMOVE HIS SWEATGLANDS. He just coughed hard : BIND HIS CHEST, STOP THAT **** RIGTH NOW. If FW were vibrant and active and not sick, PL would be counter-dropped. Hypothetical camp-everything giant alliance would be run out. Amamake would be under siege.
You have some good ideas about FW. Run with those, and drop this, because this is bad, it won't happen, it wouldn't begin to solve anything if it happened. |
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
99
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 05:26:00 -
[391] - Quote
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). |
Demon View
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 06:18:00 -
[392] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:- Don't want supers influencing low-sec at all (I fall in this group), since you can't produce them
Can't produce pirate frigs with just Empire. Can't produce T2 with just highsec. Can't produce T3 with just k-space. This is a nonsense argument that sounds good only until you think about it. "Can be produced in" has nothing at all to do with "can be used in".
Quote:You are right though, they don't need supers because they have infinite ISK
Or, in plain words, "they're really tough". They're tougher than both militias over here.
So some brave lowsec PvPers are arguing that supers should be from banned from lowsec because
1. of a transparently unserious argument that would suggest that Dramiels shouldn't be seen outside of Curse, or something; and because
2. The militias shouldn't be exposed to forces more powerful than they.
It's fine to say "getting dropped by PL sucks", but this doesn't follow from it. This is bad and dumb and I refuse to consider that some CCP EasilyConvinced will burst into a meeting and successfully sell this proposal without anyone raising the question of "How will this make Eve better?", to be followed by CCP EasilyConvinced's rendition of #1 and #2 above, to be followed by awkward, embarrassed silence.
FW isn't a feature in its own server. We don't own lowsec. It's not evough to say that we find something irritating. Why shouldn't other people have their Avatars in lowsec? If I'm expressing my opposition with some vehemence, it's largely because it seems to me that Hans and others are so clearly in love with the ludicrous arguments above that no serious, there-are-other-people-on-this-server arguments will be forthcoming. You're not even trying to make good arguments for this proposal, and that you keep pushing it just sabotages anything else you come up with, both because you're talking about this proposal instead of a potentially good one, and because when you do talk about a good one people will need to first get over having associated you with this bad one. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
99
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 06:35:00 -
[393] - 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" |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 06:42:00 -
[394] - Quote
Cearain wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. Sync I agree with you completely. CCP needs to have this as the goal. The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered. Once they change the plexing system to no longer be another pve system then I'm with you. Until then they are just playing a shell game, switcihg out red xes in missions with red xs in plexes.
You are clearly guy who have no idea what FW plexing is, go and try to get systems back that minmatar has taken, and i am sure you will find that PVE is not only thing that prevents you.
|
Demon View
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 06:44:00 -
[395] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:PS: If you want to have a grown-up discussion then you need to stop using FOX News trademark "selective reasoning/quoting/reading"
Yep. Cutting the quote down, when your original is RIGHT ******* HERE, so that I can clearly respond to parts of what you say at a time (while clearly ignoring **** that even you are embarrassed by, such as "are you a PL alt?"), is really just me being a terrible mean child. If I'd quoted everything you said and then awkwardly connected those separate replies below it, why, I'd have said something substantially different. Whole sentences would be different. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 06:46:00 -
[396] - Quote
And how this is related to FW? You have been fought on pos, Poses has nothing to do with FW.
Some people use FW to achieve goals that are not really part of FW.
Asking that remove supercaps because of it ruins FW has nothing to do with this battlereport. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 06:54:00 -
[397] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's.
You do not really get it do you. Removing FW missions do not increase pvp in lowsec or in FW. It will make less people in lowsec or FW to shoot at.
Removing FW missions does not solve anything, transferring lp gain to plexing does not help either. CCP can not make PVP that produces direct income, it could be too big change on game mechanics causing unwanted effects.
Removing FW missions only transfer people to do highsec incursions, if some carebearing has to nerf is highsec incursions direct isk gain. FW mission income is cutting down all the time because isk/lp is going lower. |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 07:23:00 -
[398] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. You do not really get it do you. Removing FW missions do not increase pvp in lowsec or in FW. It will make less people in lowsec or FW to shoot at. Removing FW missions does not solve anything, transferring lp gain to plexing does not help either. CCP can not make PVP that produces direct income, it could be too big change on game mechanics causing unwanted effects. Removing FW missions only transfer people to do highsec incursions, if some carebearing has to nerf is highsec incursions direct isk gain. FW mission income is cutting down all the time because isk/lp is going lower.
You seem to miss the point where I DON'T care if 6900 of the 7000 people in militia leave for high sec. Most of the active players won't care either cause we never see most of those players anyway. FW and you should know this having been in it, its the same faces fighting the same faces everyday. The odd people leave, the odd number come in, but mostly its the same people.
If losing the missions means that 6900 of the 7000 members of any militia pack up and run high sec mission or incursion then about god damn time. It will basically mean FW numbers will at last be showing us true numbers. I would happily trade 7000s members on paper for 80 on 80, where I know 80 people are actively fighting.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 07:36:00 -
[399] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. You do not really get it do you. Removing FW missions do not increase pvp in lowsec or in FW. It will make less people in lowsec or FW to shoot at. Removing FW missions does not solve anything, transferring lp gain to plexing does not help either. CCP can not make PVP that produces direct income, it could be too big change on game mechanics causing unwanted effects. Removing FW missions only transfer people to do highsec incursions, if some carebearing has to nerf is highsec incursions direct isk gain. FW mission income is cutting down all the time because isk/lp is going lower. You seem to miss the point where I DON'T care if 6900 of the 7000 people in militia leave for high sec. Most of the active players won't care either cause we never see most of those players anyway. FW and you should know this having been in it, its the same faces fighting the same faces everyday. The odd people leave, the odd number come in, but mostly its the same people.
If losing the missions means that 6900 of the 7000 members of any militia pack up and run high sec mission or incursion then about god damn time. It will basically mean FW numbers will at last be showing us true numbers. I would happily trade 7000s members on paper for 80 on 80, where I know 80 people are actively fighting.
I do not care about players like you either, you do not participate plex warfare, you goals are something else that capturing systems, you are useless for FW, go away ! |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 07:51:00 -
[400] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. You do not really get it do you. Removing FW missions do not increase pvp in lowsec or in FW. It will make less people in lowsec or FW to shoot at. Removing FW missions does not solve anything, transferring lp gain to plexing does not help either. CCP can not make PVP that produces direct income, it could be too big change on game mechanics causing unwanted effects. Removing FW missions only transfer people to do highsec incursions, if some carebearing has to nerf is highsec incursions direct isk gain. FW mission income is cutting down all the time because isk/lp is going lower. You seem to miss the point where I DON'T care if 6900 of the 7000 people in militia leave for high sec. Most of the active players won't care either cause we never see most of those players anyway. FW and you should know this having been in it, its the same faces fighting the same faces everyday. The odd people leave, the odd number come in, but mostly its the same people.
If losing the missions means that 6900 of the 7000 members of any militia pack up and run high sec mission or incursion then about god damn time. It will basically mean FW numbers will at last be showing us true numbers. I would happily trade 7000s members on paper for 80 on 80, where I know 80 people are actively fighting. I do not care about players like you either, you do not participate plex warfare, you goals are something else that capturing systems, you are useless for FW, go away !
Nice arguement, only you forgot the reason so few plex. Its totally worthless and does nothing for the game at all. Make it meaningful and I would happily kill people while doing it.
However you seem to be lowering debate to levels of children, so before it gets worse then "You don't do this go away" (wtf) Lets pause and wait for the dev blog. At this point they should have an idea of how those of us in FW feel. After that we can argue some more.
|
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 07:53:00 -
[401] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. You do not really get it do you. Removing FW missions do not increase pvp in lowsec or in FW. It will make less people in lowsec or FW to shoot at. Removing FW missions does not solve anything, transferring lp gain to plexing does not help either. CCP can not make PVP that produces direct income, it could be too big change on game mechanics causing unwanted effects. Removing FW missions only transfer people to do highsec incursions, if some carebearing has to nerf is highsec incursions direct isk gain. FW mission income is cutting down all the time because isk/lp is going lower. You seem to miss the point where I DON'T care if 6900 of the 7000 people in militia leave for high sec. Most of the active players won't care either cause we never see most of those players anyway. FW and you should know this having been in it, its the same faces fighting the same faces everyday. The odd people leave, the odd number come in, but mostly its the same people.
If losing the missions means that 6900 of the 7000 members of any militia pack up and run high sec mission or incursion then about god damn time. It will basically mean FW numbers will at last be showing us true numbers. I would happily trade 7000s members on paper for 80 on 80, where I know 80 people are actively fighting. I do not care about players like you either, you do not participate plex warfare, you goals are something else that capturing systems, you are useless for FW, go away ! Nice arguement, only you forgot the reason so few plex. Its totally worthless and does nothing for the game at all. Make it meaningful and I would happily kill people while doing it.
However you seem to be lowering debate to levels of children, so before it gets worse then "You don't do this go away" (wtf) Lets pause and wait for the dev blog. At this point they should have an idea of how those of us in FW feel. After that we can argue some more.
And how your current doing in FW has some meaning?
Edit: and you started to throw people out who did not do like you want. |
Montmazar
Autocannons Anonymous
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 07:57:00 -
[402] - Quote
Cearain wrote:
The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered.
This, combined with consequences for gaining or losing a system, would make for fantastic gameplay. Imagine hearing on the militia chat "we're about to lose vard. everyone x up!"
But, how to make people care about occupancy? I've seen it proposed before that when a system flips, so do the mission agents in that system. So if the Amarr manage to take Dal, the Tribal Liberation Force Station become Occupied Reclamation Facility and instead of it's previous 4 TLF agents, has 4 agents from the 24th. So Amarr get mission agents closer to the frontline, and Minmatar lose a source of income. That is something that would inspire people to fight. Real, game world impact as a station flips, and real player impact as losers lose isk making opportunities and winners win it.
People would care, occupancy would matter, and people would fight over it. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 08:00:00 -
[403] - Quote
Montmazar wrote:Cearain wrote:
The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered.
This, combined with consequences for gaining or losing a system, would make for fantastic gameplay. Imagine hearing on the militia chat "we're about to lose vard. everyone x up!" But, how to make people care about occupancy? I've seen it proposed before that when a system flips, so do the mission agents in that system. So if the Amarr manage to take Dal, the Tribal Liberation Force Station become Occupied Reclamation Facility and instead of it's previous 4 TLF agents, has 4 agents from the 24th. So Amarr get mission agents closer to the frontline, and Minmatar lose a source of income. That is something that would inspire people to fight. Real, game world impact as a station flips, and real player impact as losers lose isk making opportunities and winners win it. People would care, occupancy would matter, and people would fight over it.
When other side has taken all systems people just makes alts to other side to grind isk. People goes always over fence where it is lowest.
|
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 09:23:00 -
[404] - Quote
Removing missions is a pretty ******** idea i'll admit. The value of FW rewards is constantly dropping, and i'm sure everyone that wants FW missions removed just want to fight people who can only afford frigate sized ships. If too many people farm the missions, they become less and less profitable (meaning less people will farm them, it's a feedback system that will be self correcting). The whole point of FW missions was for people to spend less time bearing (with more risk, of course) and more time pewing, so now you want to make FW a "pvp" activity by removing the most profitable "pve" activity? This change would have the opposite of the "desired" effect. People would spend more time doing "pve" to get the same amount of isk than spending time participating in "pvp".
Also, plex fighting is probably one of the more unique mechanics in the game. It gives opportunities to more than just who has the biggest BS blob and who can batphone friends in. The rats are dispatched fairly easy (minus some of the BS/Elite cruisers in majors) but for the most part plexes can be soloed, and NPCs dispatched fast enough (major plexes aside) that you can still pvp when a target comes along. The issue with plexing to say, the average joe, is that there is no feeling of progression/accomplishment. An incursion-like progression bar would be nice (because most people are unable to look at the map >.>)
Systems are captured too slowly (it takes months of effort, which under the current mechanics the other militia can take it back easily with a few "unscheduled" downtimes in a day if the sovreignty (not to be confused with occupancy) is their own. This is due to a high amount of plexes being spawned after every downtime in one system if the occupancy and sovriengty are not the same. This needs to be addressed, PERVS are no longer in FW, so revert this mechanic CCP. Taking a system back should be proportional to the effort that those who took it from you put forth.
The other issue with plexing is more issues with the spawning mechanics. Plexes do not spawn regularly so after the initial "DT rush" of plexes the available amount of plexes to fight over (say, in a constellation that is being targeted) is reduced significantly, so as there is nothing to do for about 20 hours out of the day is to mindlessly roam and kill eachother on gates. Plexes should be spawning at regular intervals so there is actually something to fight over throughout the day (and a sense of progression) |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:06:00 -
[405] - Quote
Bad Messanger - you use the ord 'kick out of FW' a lot.
No one is being kicked out - those who are in it for the easy isk will leave and go back to Motsu. The people who are left are the ones who want to actually do FW. Running missions is not part of FW, it is the incentive to get players to do FW.
Now I am not against a way to make some isk in FW - but it has to be directly integrated into the mechanic - like FW standing. AND it cannot be exploited by a group of people who play the two sides for a profit.
But I am sure you and everyone here agrees that the current system is broken, that FW numbers do not represent anything. The reason Mini and Caldari have the highest numbers of FW members is not because more people are fighting for them, its because Amarr and Gallente npcs don't use missiles.
But ultimately we are back to the same spot - because even a compromise to the total elimination of FW missions would involve making them 1) gang, 2) multi room, 3) difficult and time consuming 4) broadcasted. And this would have nearly the same effect to those who want easy money.
So do you see FW as some high reward, low risk farming mechanic with RP flavor? Cuz that's how you are coming through here. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:23:00 -
[406] - Quote
Ruah Piskonit wrote:Bad Messanger - you use the ord 'kick out of FW' a lot.
No one is being kicked out - those who are in it for the easy isk will leave and go back to Motsu. The people who are left are the ones who want to actually do FW. Running missions is not part of FW, it is the incentive to get players to do FW.
Now I am not against a way to make some isk in FW - but it has to be directly integrated into the mechanic - like FW standing. AND it cannot be exploited by a group of people who play the two sides for a profit.
But I am sure you and everyone here agrees that the current system is broken, that FW numbers do not represent anything. The reason Mini and Caldari have the highest numbers of FW members is not because more people are fighting for them, its because Amarr and Gallente npcs don't use missiles.
But ultimately we are back to the same spot - because even a compromise to the total elimination of FW missions would involve making them 1) gang, 2) multi room, 3) difficult and time consuming 4) broadcasted. And this would have nearly the same effect to those who want easy money.
So do you see FW as some high reward, low risk farming mechanic with RP flavor? Cuz that's how you are coming through here.
Maybe we should remove pvp rights from fw people generally, only places where you allowed to fight is FW mission and FW plexes. Problem solved and everyone are happy.
|
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:26:00 -
[407] - Quote
I think I should make it clear cause some people seem to be missing it, I don't want to lower the LP rewards at all. If fact I want to increase them. I just want them given to people for Plexing and system fliping instead of mission farming.
I dont think mission are bad, but they are not for FW. LPs for PVP and meaningful system flipping would be more in tune with FW.
Just figured I would clear that up as some people dont appear to be getting it. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:38:00 -
[408] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:I think I should make it clear cause some people seem to be missing it, I don't want to lower the LP rewards at all. If fact I want to increase them. I just want them given to people for Plexing and system fliping instead of mission farming.
I dont think mission are bad, but they are not for FW. LPs for PVP and meaningful system flipping would be more in tune with FW.
Just figured I would clear that up as some people dont appear to be getting it.
Yes, you do not get it. CCP can not make pvp to give direct profits from it, it would break fundamentals of whole game.
|
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:43:00 -
[409] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I think I should make it clear cause some people seem to be missing it, I don't want to lower the LP rewards at all. If fact I want to increase them. I just want them given to people for Plexing and system fliping instead of mission farming.
I dont think mission are bad, but they are not for FW. LPs for PVP and meaningful system flipping would be more in tune with FW.
Just figured I would clear that up as some people dont appear to be getting it. Yes, you do not get it. CCP can not make pvp to give direct profits from it, it would break fundamentals of whole game.
I get lp for killing people now, so thats not true at all. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:43:00 -
[410] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. Sync I agree with you completely. CCP needs to have this as the goal. The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered. Once they change the plexing system to no longer be another pve system then I'm with you. Until then they are just playing a shell game, switcihg out red xes in missions with red xs in plexes. You are clearly guy who have no idea what FW plexing is, go and try to get systems back that minmatar has taken, and i am sure you will find that PVE is not only thing that prevents you.
Well I don't play rigt after downtime so it may be somewhat different in that 1 hour of time.
But other than that I do go in plexes allot. That way I don't get blobbed by supercaps. I just don't actually run them because of the npcs. And yes its only the npcs that prevents this. Most times i think my ship is safer there than if I docked. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:46:00 -
[411] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. Sync I agree with you completely. CCP needs to have this as the goal. The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered. Once they change the plexing system to no longer be another pve system then I'm with you. Until then they are just playing a shell game, switcihg out red xes in missions with red xs in plexes. You are clearly guy who have no idea what FW plexing is, go and try to get systems back that minmatar has taken, and i am sure you will find that PVE is not only thing that prevents you. Well I don't play rigt after downtime so it may be somewhat different in that 1 hour of time. But other than that I do go in plexes allot. That way I don't get blobbed by supercaps. I just don't actually run them because of the npcs. And yes its only the npcs that prevents this. Most times i think my ship is safer there than if I docked.
No one bother to hunt you down because you do not make any threat in system occupancy war.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:57:00 -
[412] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I think I should make it clear cause some people seem to be missing it, I don't want to lower the LP rewards at all. If fact I want to increase them. I just want them given to people for Plexing and system fliping instead of mission farming.
I dont think mission are bad, but they are not for FW. LPs for PVP and meaningful system flipping would be more in tune with FW.
Just figured I would clear that up as some people dont appear to be getting it. Yes, you do not get it. CCP can not make pvp to give direct profits from it, it would break fundamentals of whole game. I get lp for killing people now, so thats not true at all.
lp you will get in kills is only symbolic amount, i would not call it profitable business.
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 12:58:00 -
[413] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:sYnc Vir wrote:I've only ever done 4 FW missions, and while I don't have massive stacks of Shinny ships. I earn enough.
Mission and PVE are not for FW as its has spawn farmers. I would rather have a Major plex give out everyone thats run it the same LP as a Level 4 mission. This at lease gives pvp fleets rewards rather then PVE. As for groups of giffins, so what? Learn to deal with ECM, I heard ECM ships have been used before, pretty sure I killed a few.
Simply not wanting to lose mission because it kills your easy isk, doesn't make that the best thing for FW. Whats best for FW is PVP focus area, reward that and you'll soon forget you use to grind. The moment you get pvp players having to jump into pve ships you're losing a great part of the game.
Eve has plenty of other pve areas, I would just like FW to reward people that undock and shoot their enemies rather then red x's. Sync I agree with you completely. CCP needs to have this as the goal. The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered. Once they change the plexing system to no longer be another pve system then I'm with you. Until then they are just playing a shell game, switcihg out red xes in missions with red xs in plexes. You are clearly guy who have no idea what FW plexing is, go and try to get systems back that minmatar has taken, and i am sure you will find that PVE is not only thing that prevents you. Well I don't play rigt after downtime so it may be somewhat different in that 1 hour of time. But other than that I do go in plexes allot. That way I don't get blobbed by supercaps. I just don't actually run them because of the npcs. And yes its only the npcs that prevents this. Most times i think my ship is safer there than if I docked. No one bother to hunt you down because you do not make any threat in system occupancy war.
Very few people bother to hunt anyone down because the system occupancy war is a silly pve mechanic. Out of the current 300k accounts how many do you think are *really* working at fw occupancy? 20? 40?
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 13:05:00 -
[414] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Very few people bother to hunt anyone down because the system occupancy war is a silly pve mechanic. Out of the current 300k accounts how many do you think are *really* working at fw occupancy? 20? 40?
Something like that, so if we think we could end whole FW, it has been dead for a long time. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 13:10:00 -
[415] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote: Very few people bother to hunt anyone down because the system occupancy war is a silly pve mechanic. Out of the current 300k accounts how many do you think are *really* working at fw occupancy? 20? 40?
Something like that, so if we think we could end whole FW, it has been dead for a long time.
Or make it so its not a silly pve mechanic. That way new eden would finally have a small scale pvp mecanic that works. I think allot of eve players would like that. More importantly for ccp I think allot of people who left eve would come back, have a blast, and new players would start subbing. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Montmazar
Autocannons Anonymous
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 13:59:00 -
[416] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Montmazar wrote:Cearain wrote:
The problem is that the current plexing is mostly pve. the question is how can ccp make it so that it is pvp centered? I have supported an idea that was raised long ago in my signature. Namely remove the npcs and give the players a notification system when plex is entered.
This, combined with consequences for gaining or losing a system, would make for fantastic gameplay. Imagine hearing on the militia chat "we're about to lose vard. everyone x up!" But, how to make people care about occupancy? I've seen it proposed before that when a system flips, so do the mission agents in that system. So if the Amarr manage to take Dal, the Tribal Liberation Force Station become Occupied Reclamation Facility and instead of it's previous 4 TLF agents, has 4 agents from the 24th. So Amarr get mission agents closer to the frontline, and Minmatar lose a source of income. That is something that would inspire people to fight. Real, game world impact as a station flips, and real player impact as losers lose isk making opportunities and winners win it. People would care, occupancy would matter, and people would fight over it. When other side has taken all systems people just makes alts to other side to grind isk. People goes always over fence where it is lowest.
Every militia currently has multiple highsec (and thus unconquerable) FW agents. The thing they would be fighting for is the convenience of agents near their mission destinations. Enough convenience to fight for, but losing everything still does not remove gameplay.
And besides - the fewer people run missions for that faction's militia, the more those militia LP are worth. Not enough to balance out the inconvenience of having to get all one's missions from highsec, but certainly enough to offset wanting to leave militia entirely. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 14:00:00 -
[417] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote: Very few people bother to hunt anyone down because the system occupancy war is a silly pve mechanic. Out of the current 300k accounts how many do you think are *really* working at fw occupancy? 20? 40?
Something like that, so if we think we could end whole FW, it has been dead for a long time. Or make it so its not a silly pve mechanic. That way new eden would finally have a small scale pvp mecanic that works. I think allot of eve players would like that. More importantly for ccp I think allot of people who left eve would come back, have a blast, and new players would start subbing.
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. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 14:16:00 -
[418] - 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 -
[419] - Quote
meh, the forum mechanics are stupid, not me! Nerf the forums! |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
348
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 17:33:00 -
[420] - 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. |
|
Amro One
One.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 19:04:00 -
[421] - Quote
Can FW be moved to 0.0 also?
That be so amazing. Well we are at it, can Sansha get in on the FW so we can gank Incursions runners?
|
Hrett
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 19:19:00 -
[422] - Quote
Bengal Bob wrote:Distribute plex spawns throughout the day. Have the same NPC spawn for every factions plexes - easy fix and balances them out remove ECM from NPC, this is just silly. Increase the number of different levels of plexes. Faction ships are overpowered against T1 ships, and the newer players no longer plex as they are insta popped by older players in Drams, Daredevils, Cynabals, Vigilants that also have a neutral booster in system.
eg: T1 Frigate Minor plex Minor plex as existing T1 Cruiser Plex Medium as existing T1 Major plex Major as existing
You can expect a flood of people coming back to see if FW is fun again, don't fail to keep it moving forward again.
Also, fix FW and I will redo my portrait so you don't have to keep looking at my shaven testicle.
Many good ideas, but I wanted to highlight these by bengal bob. They seem extremely simple, and will fix many problems.
Just changing the plexes as suggested will open up FW to many more people - new blood. The pimped out faction ships are really discouraging for newbies.
|
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 20:06:00 -
[423] - Quote
Hrett wrote:Bengal Bob wrote:Distribute plex spawns throughout the day. Have the same NPC spawn for every factions plexes - easy fix and balances them out remove ECM from NPC, this is just silly. Increase the number of different levels of plexes. Faction ships are overpowered against T1 ships, and the newer players no longer plex as they are insta popped by older players in Drams, Daredevils, Cynabals, Vigilants that also have a neutral booster in system.
eg: T1 Frigate Minor plex Minor plex as existing T1 Cruiser Plex Medium as existing T1 Major plex Major as existing
You can expect a flood of people coming back to see if FW is fun again, don't fail to keep it moving forward again.
Also, fix FW and I will redo my portrait so you don't have to keep looking at my shaven testicle. Many good ideas, but I wanted to highlight these by bengal bob. They seem extremely simple, and will fix many problems. Just changing the plexes as suggested will open up FW to many more people - new blood. The pimped out faction ships are really discouraging for newbies. A nice change to the whole game would be to have boosters, neutral or not, only boosting when they are on the same grid as the people they're boosting. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 20:10:00 -
[424] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:A nice change to the whole game would be to have boosters, neutral or not, only boosting when they are on the same grid as the people they're boosting.
This. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
414
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:43:00 -
[425] - Quote
It's about time the developers checked back in with us and shared their thoughts, there's lots of great ideas bouncing around in here!!
Soundwave?? Thoughts? Is FW still being worked on? |
BoneEater
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:59:00 -
[426] - Quote
Blog Please? |
Telegram Sam
The Drones Club
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:41:00 -
[427] - Quote
Dehlandrae wrote:Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed. +1 on this /\ |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:04:00 -
[428] - Quote
Three days of posts to catch up on! Oi! http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Andre Vauban
Quantum Cats Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:36:00 -
[429] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida 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).
I agree, we need to address the root problem not the symptom. The root problem is that PL can farm moon goo in every single region in the game and live in low sec at the same time while being mobile enough to defend any of their far flung moons in minutes. CCP needs to totally nerf moon mining. There should be no such thing as passive isk faucets or passive resource ( moon goo )faucets. Make a new mining ship that needs to sit on a moon and be defended. You want to get rich in space? Then you should have to physically live there. Something also needs to be done about capital mobility and Titan bridges.
If PL want to come to low sec and curb stomb, then they should be able to. However, it should be a fairly big commitment from them that makes it very very hard to farm 0.0 resources at the same time. |
Demon View
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:37:00 -
[430] - Quote
Wonderful. I flubbed the select-all copy and then the Preview button ate my post. Abbreviated version:
Andre Vauban wrote:we need to address the root problem not the symptom. The root problem is that PL can farm moon goo in every single region in the game and live in low sec at the same time while being mobile enough to defend any of their far flung moons in minutes.
This is a problem; it is not FW's problem, and solving it will not help FW. FW had problems before PL moved in, would have these same problems if PL moved out tomorrow, will have them after the super nerf -- will have them even if Providence, which you can reach from the core of Amarr FW space with only two highsec jumps, were taken over by hostiles with PL's same habits.
(People also tell me that there's a Caldari/Gallente front that this has even less bearing on, but I don't believe them.)
This is all a distraction. A frankly shameful distraction, insofar as it's a move to make lowsec a bully-free zone.
Quote:CCP needs to totally nerf moon mining. There should be no such thing as passive isk faucets or passive resource ( moon goo )faucets. Make a new mining ship that needs to sit on a moon and be defended. You want to get rich in space? Then you should have to physically live there. Something also needs to be done about capital mobility and Titan bridges.
If PL want to come to low sec and curb stomb, then they should be able to. However, it should be a fairly big commitment from them that makes it very very hard to farm 0.0 resources at the same time.
Sure, I'd be pretty happy with a gankable alternative to a moon harvesting array. Please repost this where there will be no implication that, should CCP deliver on it, that they can put a bright green checkmark next to Factional Warfare for this winter. |
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
64
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:10:00 -
[431] - Quote
OK - I made a massively detailed post a few pages back, with a lot of thought and perspective in it (unlike some of the other posts...) and there is not a blue post in sight to tell me that someone at CCP has even READ it or the other decent posts that have been put up since Soundwave dropped in, chucked his hand grenade and left again.
The more I think about it, the more I think Soundwave and CCP were trolling us...
"Sorry for taking so long to get back to you guys. By the way, there are some great ideas here. Unfortunately we didn't get them into the Winter build as we missed the feature cut off deadline, so FW won't be touched in this expansion. But don't worry - we'll TOTALLY be there to listen to you at fan fest in a few months time... There's a big round table out in the car park especially for you guys..."
@CCP - You have people like myself, Hans, Rod and others who have been posting regularly and often in FW threads. At least do us the courtousy of giving us a $%#$ liason dev to discuss this all with... Surely there is SOMEONE who likes FW there enough to do this. After all, Tallest WANTED to do the ship rebalances (btw - nighthawk buff, cough powergrid issues cough...).
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:32:00 -
[432] - Quote
Sov Wars - I did a poll about taking away the navy NPC's in high sec. Pretty interesting responses so far.
http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
64
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:13:00 -
[433] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:Sov Wars - I did a poll about taking away the navy NPC's in high sec. Pretty interesting responses so far. Yes, I have read over these responses. I think a number of them are missing some fundamental issues that the change will bring 1) It removes the whole RP explanation for the FW game mechanic - we might as well be RvB without the navy. 2) FW WILL be forever changed by the introduction of trade hub station camps. I once saw ARETR doing this in Gallente high sec when I was a new character and I was doing the SoE arc - this was before I joined ARETR, but I did know of them. What made what they were doing so impressive was that they had to tank the navy and any Gallante that were actually trying to pvp them to be able to kill the careless FW pilots who undocked thinking they were safe. This element will be forever lost AND new players will have to deal with 23.5/7 camps, rather then these special raids which are not sustainable. 3) It remove the need to be in low sec to pvp. This will mean the small gang roams will not occur, the plex fights will not occur and the epic fights that sometimes happen will not as people will be in high sec, not low...
However +1 Internets to Shalee for fostering the debate...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:47:00 -
[434] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:It's about time the developers checked back in with us and shared their thoughts, there's lots of great ideas bouncing around in here!!
Soundwave?? Thoughts? Is FW still being worked on?
I do not see any GOOD ideas here. I can not even myself say what do to make FW work.
All i see here is that people who are not willing to improve or change methods they use, are crying CCP to nerf those who are not playing like they want.
All problems in FW started when CCP started to listen players ( Ankh mostly ) there is not many players who actually know how fw really works or play actual fw. Most just use it as free wardec.
When people start to present ideas that do not include any nerfs i think we start to get GOOD ideas. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
64
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 06:13:00 -
[435] - Quote
Nerf <> rebalance.
Saying things like the missions/NPCs should be balanced is NOT a nerf as such.
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Demon View
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 06:51:00 -
[436] - Quote
This is what I figure happened:
CCP Triage: So, next is... FW. FW. FW guy, what do you have?
CCP Working On FW All This Time: (all kinds of awesome stuff, with alternatives and options and thoughtfulness and everything)
CCP Triage: Wow, that's awesome.
CCP Triage: But you're only going to have one-fifth of one developer. What can you do with that?
CCP Working On FW All This Time: oh... um... let me get back to you.
So, please do this above all else:
Super Chair wrote:(snip)
Systems are captured too slowly (it takes months of effort, which under the current mechanics the other militia can take it back easily with a few "unscheduled" downtimes in a day if the sovreignty (not to be confused with occupancy) is their own. This is due to a high amount of plexes being spawned after every downtime in one system if the occupancy and sovriengty are not the same. This needs to be addressed, PERVS are no longer in FW, so revert this mechanic CCP. Taking a system back should be proportional to the effort that those who took it from you put forth.
The other issue with plexing is more issues with the spawning mechanics. Plexes do not spawn regularly so after the initial "DT rush" of plexes the available amount of plexes to fight over (say, in a constellation that is being targeted) is reduced significantly, so as there is nothing to do for about 20 hours out of the day is to mindlessly roam and kill eachother on gates. Plexes should be spawning at regular intervals so there is actually something to fight over throughout the day (and a sense of progression)
, remove faction hits that shouldn't be there (RR, mate dies in your bubble), and make FW acceleration gates treat faction ships as T2.
If the remaining portion of the one-fifth of a developer can make station guns fire on enemy militia, fix some exploits, make the presence of rats on the grid halt a hostile contest, tie LP rewards to occupied systems somehow, etc., or be able to put up a first iteration of a more grandiose improvement that is an improvement, then winter can only be better. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
416
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 07:07:00 -
[437] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote: I do not see any GOOD ideas here. I can not even myself say what do to make FW work.
When people start to present ideas that do not include any nerfs i think we start to get GOOD ideas.
I guess I just don't understand why you're posting in here at all. Are you simply trying to troll the militia? If you don't think any ideas are good, and you don't know how to fix FW, and you just think everyone in here is complaining, that I please ask that you keep your comments to only contructive suggestions. You can't give a few reasons why your corp tried FW and gave it up, but than say no in here is actually playing FW.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:23:00 -
[438] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: I do not see any GOOD ideas here. I can not even myself say what do to make FW work.
When people start to present ideas that do not include any nerfs i think we start to get GOOD ideas.
I guess I just don't understand why you're posting in here at all. Are you simply trying to troll the militia? If you don't think any ideas are good, and you don't know how to fix FW, and you just think everyone in here is complaining, that I please ask that you keep your comments to only contructive suggestions. You can't give a few reasons why your corp tried FW and gave it up, but than say no in here is actually playing FW.
How many plexing points you have? |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:24:00 -
[439] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: I do not see any GOOD ideas here. I can not even myself say what do to make FW work.
When people start to present ideas that do not include any nerfs i think we start to get GOOD ideas.
I guess I just don't understand why you're posting in here at all. Are you simply trying to troll the militia? If you don't think any ideas are good, and you don't know how to fix FW, and you just think everyone in here is complaining, that I please ask that you keep your comments to only contructive suggestions. You can't give a few reasons why your corp tried FW and gave it up, but than say no in here is actually playing FW.
No he has two alts still in FW running missions for isk, which is why hes so against their removal. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:30:00 -
[440] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: I do not see any GOOD ideas here. I can not even myself say what do to make FW work.
When people start to present ideas that do not include any nerfs i think we start to get GOOD ideas.
I guess I just don't understand why you're posting in here at all. Are you simply trying to troll the militia? If you don't think any ideas are good, and you don't know how to fix FW, and you just think everyone in here is complaining, that I please ask that you keep your comments to only contructive suggestions. You can't give a few reasons why your corp tried FW and gave it up, but than say no in here is actually playing FW. No he has two alts still in FW running missions for isk, which is why hes so against their removal.
Your intel is false, i do have alts in every militia, so that makes it more than 2.
|
|
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:19:00 -
[441] - Quote
What would make FW work? Sort out the problems. How about making FW mechanics work properly and fairly across all time zones and factions?
PROBLEM: Plexes that spawn in systems with the wrong occupation status are reshuffled using a down-time script to systems with the correct occupation status SOLUTION: New programming of plex spawn so that reshuffle occurs as soon as it spawns in illegal system PRIORITY: High EFFORT: ?, Probably high due to reuse of old code.
PROBLEM: Faction standing loss on remote repping faction ally SOLUTION: Change the standing programming PRIORITY: High EFFORT: ?, Probably high due to reuse of old code.
PROBLEM: Amarr/Gallente complexes can captured by speed tanking SOLUTION: Change plex _capture_ programming to make it so that the timer doesn't run down whilst navy spawn is alive. Defence programming stays the same. PRIORITY: Medium EFFORT: I don't know of any other game feature that uses a similar mechanic. So, it should be easier.
However, the more I look at it the less sure I am of how low-hanging any of this fruit is. We need CCP to tell us what is easy to fix; rather than telling us what is easy to do, even if its not a fix.
Doesn't look there'll be many FW pressies under the tree this winter. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:17:00 -
[442] - Quote
Kade Jeekin wrote:What would make FW work? Sort out the problems. How about making FW mechanics work properly and fairly across all time zones and factions?
PROBLEM: Plexes that spawn in systems with the wrong occupation status are reshuffled using a down-time script to systems with the correct occupation status SOLUTION: New programming of plex spawn so that reshuffle occurs as soon as it spawns in illegal system PRIORITY: High EFFORT: ?, Probably high due to reuse of old code.
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
Kade Jeekin wrote: PROBLEM: Faction standing loss on remote repping faction ally SOLUTION: Change the standing programming PRIORITY: High EFFORT: ?, Probably high due to reuse of old code.
Yes, probably a pain, hopefully not. All those petitions are a waste of everyone's time. It seems like it has to be a simple code error though. You don't get a faction loss when pirates (non fw) rep each other. Thus it has to be a sign of agression against your own militia members for some reason, should be easy to fix.
Kade Jeekin wrote: PROBLEM: Amarr/Gallente complexes can captured by speed tanking SOLUTION: Change plex _capture_ programming to make it so that the timer doesn't run down whilst navy spawn is alive. Defence programming stays the same. PRIORITY: Medium EFFORT: I don't know of any other game feature that uses a similar mechanic. So, it should be easier.
This is actually an EXTREMELY high priority, because it nerfs the mission runners as well. If these are rebalanced, then caldari and matar won't be able to run missions solo in a sb.
All of this should be low hanging fruit b/c it requires no overhaul of the system. If they can't deliver we should at least know why |
Black Dranzer
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:05:00 -
[443] - Quote
I'm not terribly experienced in FW, so I won't think too much about how to "fix" it, but rather how I would envision FW in an ideal situation.
The biggest thing is you need incentive. Mission access isn't enough. Faction Warfare should be primarily or even entirely a PvP thing. Simply saying "here's a license to kill some guys" isn't enough either. You need a catalyst for conflict.
So you needs incentive. To hell with missions. Capturing territory should grant you LP. Killing enemy faction pilots should grant you LP. Defending territory should grant you LP. Territory should fall easily and quicky, no long ass timers. Factions are big enough that there should always be people online and fighting. Capturing territory close to your faction's space should be faster/easier than capturing far away territory, so that if the frontlines are pushed to your doorstep there's an incentive to push them back again. The faucet of the faction LP stores should be countered by the massive sink that the war would generate.
I haven't read the whole thread. Those ideas have probably been repeated. But I'm repeating them again, just in case. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:43:00 -
[444] - 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.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
417
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:22:00 -
[445] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:
Your intel is false, i do have alts in every militia, so that makes it more than 2.
Well, at least I can respect honesty.
As for you calling out my lack of plexing points, I'd hardly say that makes me uninvolved with Faction Warfare. You may see FW as a plexing system mechanic, I think most of us in this thread see FW as a community of players. You're right, its a static wardec. And that static wardec is far more interesting than the plexing mechanic. That's why we're offering suggestions for improvement. It shouldn't be just players treating it as a wardec, there should be some interesting reasons to fight over the plexes. As it stands right now, reclaiming a system is completely irrelevant, and does not drive players to participate.
Warping frigs around to orbit a button is extremely boring gameplay, and just because many of us don't do that doesn't mean we're "not really doing FW" Those of us treating FW as a static wardec for fun and PvP purposes are a lot more involved than those who simply plant alts in the militia so they can farm missions, take the money elsewhere, and than sit back and say the militias don't know what they're talking about when it comes to FW. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:42:00 -
[446] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:
Your intel is false, i do have alts in every militia, so that makes it more than 2.
Well, at least I can respect honesty. As for you calling out my lack of plexing points, I'd hardly say that makes me uninvolved with Faction Warfare. You may see FW as a plexing system mechanic, I think most of us in this thread see FW as a community of players. You're right, its a static wardec. And that static wardec is far more interesting than the plexing mechanic. That's why we're offering suggestions for improvement. It shouldn't be just players treating it as a wardec, there should be some interesting reasons to fight over the plexes. As it stands right now, reclaiming a system is completely irrelevant, and does not drive players to participate. Warping frigs around to orbit a button is extremely boring gameplay, and just because many of us don't do that doesn't mean we're "not really doing FW" Those of us treating FW as a static wardec for fun and PvP purposes are a lot more involved than those who simply plant alts in the militia so they can farm missions, take the money elsewhere, and than sit back and say the militias don't know what they're talking about when it comes to FW.
It seems that RvB is right place for you. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
417
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:27:00 -
[447] - Quote
Bad messenger is a simple troll guys, don't bother responding back and forth. Clearly he's here to make sure that his mission income is protected, or to see that FW is done away with completely, either way he's not here to help make useful suggestions so I wouldn't keep wasting your time back and forth.
I regret taking the bait up till this point. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:29:00 -
[448] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
Crap. Well ty for educating me on this. |
Demon View
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:36:00 -
[449] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad messenger is a simple troll guys, don't bother responding back and forth. Clearly he's here to make sure that his mission income is protected, or to see that FW is done away with completely, either way he's not here to help make useful suggestions so I wouldn't keep wasting your time back and forth.
I regret taking the bait up till this point.
This is such a pathetic response, I'll just show you how it's done:
Bad, looks like you stopped reading halfway through my (Hans') first paragraph, and then scanned through the rest. I don't plex because it's broken. I would plex if it weren't. Hope that clears things up. Although I've said almost nothing about the FW's core mechanic, instead focusing on 'problems' that could indeed be solved directly with an RvB-style solution, I do care about the whole picture of liberating systems from the Amarr. It's just... it's been a while for everyone, it's easy to forget what the actual point of this exercise is, when the point's been blunted all this time. I appreciate the reminder.
Eh, and sorry about that 'troll' stuff. Sebiestor mothers have many wonderful attributes, but they don't teach their children how to argue properly, or even what the actual point of argumentation is. This is all kind of a haze of status-seeking, ego-protecting, social-happy-fun-time for me, with any accumulated truthful conclusions as only a useful accident. Clash of cultures. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:42:00 -
[450] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad messenger is a simple troll guys, don't bother responding back and forth. Clearly he's here to make sure that his mission income is protected, or to see that FW is done away with completely, either way he's not here to help make useful suggestions so I wouldn't keep wasting your time back and forth.
I regret taking the bait up till this point.
Okay, lets check again you original ideas to make FW better.
Quote:1.)Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare
Okay seems fine idea, so all RP alliances can join too, but then
Quote: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,
alliances usually have lot of supercaps , and what if they ban super caps from lowsec? I am quite sure that PL could own your fleets anytime with supcaps too, so you want alliances but not all alliances (example PL) but you want only RP alliances to join.
At least is see your idea that way.
Quote:3.) Give sovereignty consequences.... One simple fix would be to enable station guns to fire on the opposing faction, as if they were GCC....
So what is point on this? after your great idea it is harder to be in militia than just pirate.
Quote:4.)Make plexing a PvP exercise, not a PvE exercise.
Yea this might be something to work on, but you have no clear view what plexing even is, if you start to take systems you will find out that pvp is there, but you have never tried because there is NPC which can shoot. You are victim of anti-plexing propaganda
So if i say your ideas are not good, i do not understand why you get mad about my opinion because you do not have any really good ideas.
If you join RvB there is no super caps, outsiders can not usually be 3th party on fights, there is no npc grinding. Only pvp and nice community which plays under rules. |
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:21:00 -
[451] - Quote
I would like to see the VP's for plexing replaced with LP. That would make plexing a little more bearable, at the very least. Currently you can go out and plex or spend that time running missions. Most players are going to choose missions simply because it helps fund their pvp.
Anyhow, 'bout time someone from CCP chimes in on this thread again. There are tons of great ideas floating around, it'd be nice to know that someone is paying attention? http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
427
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:35:00 -
[452] - Quote
We'll see, Shalee. I had a moment of clarity turned-into-frustration, and kinda threw down the gauntlet and double dog dared them to come clean about where FW stands in the development progress, if it is indeed being developed at all.
I know, I broke my usual level-headed approach to most topics, but I just read some various articles about the history of FW and all the pieces fell into place in the worst possible way. I simply had to ask those questions again, lest I continue asking others to follow me on a fool's errand with this feedback thread.
I'm still hoping I'm wrong in feeling so hopeless all of a sudden, I want to believe in CCP this time, given their refocus on EvE. All they have to do is come forth and tell us the truth. Is Faction Warfare being actively developed? or are you just gathering ideas from us for the sake of gathering ideas? |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:42:00 -
[453] - Quote
Perhaps the VP should be a form of non-tradeable currency (for want of a better term). Every time you want to run a FW mission, you lose some VP points. This way you HAVE to be active in FW to mission in FW. I know some people will complain about this suggestion, but it was an idea I was kicking over with some people (minnies would you believe it!!!!) in Shalee's channel as one way to fix farming.
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:00:00 -
[454] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Perhaps the VP should be a form of non-tradeable currency (for want of a better term). Every time you want to run a FW mission, you lose some VP points. This way you HAVE to be active in FW to mission in FW. I know some people will complain about this suggestion, but it was an idea I was kicking over with some people (minnies would you believe it!!!!) in Shalee's channel as one way to fix farming.
best fix to farming is removing the farm and replacing it with a pvp driven highway.
OR remove NPC corps that way ceos of active corps can remove the farmers themselves. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
428
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:25:00 -
[455] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Perhaps the VP should be a form of non-tradeable currency (for want of a better term). Every time you want to run a FW mission, you lose some VP points. This way you HAVE to be active in FW to mission in FW. I know some people will complain about this suggestion, but it was an idea I was kicking over with some people (minnies would you believe it!!!!) in Shalee's channel as one way to fix farming.
This should go without saying, but I thought I'd add that this system should only be implemented if the plexing system itself is made more interesting than "orbit a button and wait".
Otherwise, all you're doing is forcing people to do something everyone's already complaining about.
But yes, if the plexes are fun and challenging to fight in, than I'd certainly be fine with making VP a requirement for the missions and subsequent rewards. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:36:00 -
[456] - Quote
I really like that idea, a lot actually. That would cut down on the farming, and force more people into the plexes. More people in the plexes = more pvp. Everybody wins. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:36:00 -
[457] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:A nice change to the whole game would be to have boosters, neutral or not, only boosting when they are on the same grid as the people they're boosting. This. This
Now that they are boosting the boosters every fleet will need an alt booster. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 02:40:00 -
[458] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Har Harrison wrote:Perhaps the VP should be a form of non-tradeable currency (for want of a better term). Every time you want to run a FW mission, you lose some VP points. This way you HAVE to be active in FW to mission in FW. I know some people will complain about this suggestion, but it was an idea I was kicking over with some people (minnies would you believe it!!!!) in Shalee's channel as one way to fix farming. best fix to farming is removing the farm and replacing it with a pvp driven highway.
OR remove NPC corps that way ceos of active corps can remove the farmers themselves. Except that removing the NPC corps has the following issues
1) The farmers will form farming corps and you are in the same place
2) You have now lost your introduction to FW corp that people who want to test the waters use before moving onto a proper FW ..corp if they like it
It comes down to the fact that missions should be available to FW for us to get cheaper faction equipment and to make money.... However the missions should be available to people who are there for FW, not because it is an ISK faucet. Its the same with incursions - once the Mom has been "spotted", you shouldn't be able to keep farming for a week. You should have 12-24 hours to kill it or the incursion ends anyway...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:56:00 -
[459] - Quote
You do not still have any good ideas how to make fw better.
You are stuck on idea that nerfing missions solve something or forcing people to do something.
Ideas has to be so cool that everyone want to plex after those and without rewards. Then you have something. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 19:57:00 -
[460] - Quote
There are plenty of good ideas here Mister Monocle. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
437
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 20:19:00 -
[461] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote: You are stuck on idea that nerfing missions solve something
His agenda couldn't be any more obvious :) How do you guys think he afforded that monocle? With the alts he has in every militia, to farm the missions he doesnt want nerfed, of course.
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 20:29:00 -
[462] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: You are stuck on idea that nerfing missions solve something
His agenda couldn't be any more obvious :) How do you guys think he afforded that monocle? With the alts he has in every militia, to farm the missions he doesnt want nerfed, of course.
In fact i stopped farming FW mission after dominion patch, i have still several millions unused lp, so removing mission would benefit me more, still it is not any solution to make FW any better |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
437
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 20:58:00 -
[463] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: You are stuck on idea that nerfing missions solve something
His agenda couldn't be any more obvious :) How do you guys think he afforded that monocle? With the alts he has in every militia, to farm the missions he doesnt want nerfed, of course. In fact i stopped farming FW mission after dominion patch, i have still several millions unused lp, so removing mission would benefit me more, still it is not any solution to make FW any better
So really, you're just here to troll. You're not offering any suggestions yourself, just saying "these ideas suck". Seriously, stop posting in this thread unless you have something useful to say.
/blocked bad messenger for irrelevancy. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 21:41:00 -
[464] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: You are stuck on idea that nerfing missions solve something
His agenda couldn't be any more obvious :) How do you guys think he afforded that monocle? With the alts he has in every militia, to farm the missions he doesnt want nerfed, of course. In fact i stopped farming FW mission after dominion patch, i have still several millions unused lp, so removing mission would benefit me more, still it is not any solution to make FW any better So really, you're just here to troll. You're not offering any suggestions yourself, just saying "these ideas suck". Seriously, stop posting in this thread unless you have something useful to say. /blocked bad messenger for irrelevancy.
I have pointed out in several post why your ideas are not really good and working ideas, but still you insist that i am troll.
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.
|
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 01:12:00 -
[465] - Quote
Update on FW: I have contacted the CSM about the FW review and they say it is one of the subjects that will be a topic at the december summit. That means it will most likely not appear in the winter patch, but shortly afterwards (hopefully with the AF 4th bonus). |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 03:59:00 -
[466] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Update on FW: I have contacted the CSM about the FW review and they say it is one of the subjects that will be a topic at the december summit. That means it will most likely not appear in the winter patch, but shortly afterwards (hopefully with the AF 4th bonus).
Did anyone from csm indicate they had any position on what they would like in fw? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 04:32:00 -
[467] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:You do not still have any good ideas how to make fw better.
You are stuck on idea that nerfing missions solve something or forcing people to do something.
Ideas has to be so cool that everyone want to plex after those and without rewards. Then you have something. Please stop posting and leave this thread... You are adding NOTHING of value. All you are doing is filling up the thread with noise which means you can go for 1-2 pages with noise from you and people responding to you without anything meaningful being discussed.
I have posted a number of things that are worth discussing, but the thread moves on 4-5 pages before people see them because of the dribble coming from people such as yourself. And of course, more will come since you will HAVE to respond to this post... Other people have also said similar things.
The majority of the calls about missions is the BALANCE them (as opposed to nerfing them). This could be done by making them all easier, or all harder or some easier and some harder to strike the balance... You also seem to believe that FW missions should be an entitlement for people in FW. I am arguing that they should be the reward for participating in FW activities (PvP and plexing etc...), rather then the ONLY form of FW activity that the farmers perform...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 04:55:00 -
[468] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:Update on FW: I have contacted the CSM about the FW review and they say it is one of the subjects that will be a topic at the december summit. That means it will most likely not appear in the winter patch, but shortly afterwards (hopefully with the AF 4th bonus). Did anyone from csm indicate they had any position on what they would like in fw?
why would they - they are all null sec. . .
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 07:50:00 -
[469] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:You do not still have any good ideas how to make fw better.
You are stuck on idea that nerfing missions solve something or forcing people to do something.
Ideas has to be so cool that everyone want to plex after those and without rewards. Then you have something. Please stop posting and leave this thread... You are adding NOTHING of value. All you are doing is filling up the thread with noise which means you can go for 1-2 pages with noise from you and people responding to you without anything meaningful being discussed. I have posted a number of things that are worth discussing, but the thread moves on 4-5 pages before people see them because of the dribble coming from people such as yourself. And of course, more will come since you will HAVE to respond to this post... Other people have also said similar things. The majority of the calls about missions is the BALANCE them (as opposed to nerfing them). This could be done by making them all easier, or all harder or some easier and some harder to strike the balance... You also seem to believe that FW missions should be an entitlement for people in FW. I am arguing that they should be the reward for participating in FW activities (PvP and plexing etc...), rather then the ONLY form of FW activity that the farmers perform...
Yes i have to respond.
EVE has 4 different races players can choose, all those have different kind of playing experience, but if you choose some race you can train another race skills or even use another race agents and do missions for them. So if you feel that some other faction has easier to play you can always change to that side.
Now you want again that CCP should nerf or blance something because you have made choices that are not easiest one.
And if they balance FW mission npc next they should make all normal lvl4 missions having same npc too.
So your idea could be fair but still it breaks all fundamentals of EVE and makes it worse not better.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 08:59:00 -
[470] - 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). |
|
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:13:00 -
[471] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:Update on FW: I have contacted the CSM about the FW review and they say it is one of the subjects that will be a topic at the december summit. That means it will most likely not appear in the winter patch, but shortly afterwards (hopefully with the AF 4th bonus). Did anyone from csm indicate they had any position on what they would like in fw? Nope. I strongly suggest you post in the CSM thread on FHC that I started and get their positions, because it's entirely possible, seeing that the current CSM is mostly made up of nullsec people, that they will just gloss over whatever CCP comes up with and rubber stampt it. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:14:00 -
[472] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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 jobThe 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).
FW missions have been there from the beginning. but people started to do those after that buff, main reason why people did not do those before was that if you did not complete mission you will lose faction standing, so penalty was too high to take risk for most especially when you have only 12 hours to complete those missions.
Because Ankh cried that people should get good rewards being in FW , CCP removed standing penalty and boosted LP shop. Still people are not willing to do boring plexing, even thou CCP made all changes they asked for to make good income on militia career. You got your paycheck but you do not still want to do your job.
You proposal could work but if it contains any possible exploitable elements some one will abuse those.
How i see you change will go is that some dedicated group will get all boost for lp and rest are just crying CCP to nerf them. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:20:00 -
[473] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: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 jobThe 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). FW missions have been there from the beginning. but people started to do those after that buff, main reason why people did not do those before was that if you did not complete mission you will lose faction standing, so penalty was too high to take risk for most especially when you have only 12 hours to complete those missions. Because Ankh cried that people should get good rewards being in FW , CCP removed standing penalty and boosted LP shop. Still people are not willing to do boring plexing, even thou CCP made all changes they asked for to make good income on militia career. You got your paycheck but you do not still want to do your job. You proposal could work but if it contains any possible exploitable elements some one will abuse those. How i see you change will go is that some dedicated group will get all boost for lp and rest are just crying CCP to nerf them.
Fair enough, how about this change then.
Give missions victory points (*Edit: and by VP i mean missions can flip sov). If this was done, make sure that if a system was occupied that no missions could be given by militia agents in the occupied systems. Give all missions the poison pill idea proposed by gallantus (name?) So that it was easy to shut missions down. How does that sound? |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:32:00 -
[474] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote: Fair enough, how about this change then.
Give missions victory points (*Edit: and by VP i mean missions can flip sov). If this was done, make sure that if a system was occupied that no missions could be given by militia agents in the occupied systems. Give all missions the poison pill idea proposed by gallantus (name?) So that it was easy to shut missions down. How does that sound?
One more reason to make mission alt for every militia
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
356
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:43:00 -
[475] - 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. |
Causalitii Eullon
C.A.S. Assisted Living
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:14:00 -
[476] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote: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.
This is what I was gonna say but instead of typing it myself I'm just gonna quote someone else. Buff FW ffs
Maybe if enough people ***** about not getting fixes to FW then maybe ccp will listen? Yea proby not lol
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:19:00 -
[477] - Quote
Ruah Piskonit wrote:Cearain wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:Update on FW: I have contacted the CSM about the FW review and they say it is one of the subjects that will be a topic at the december summit. That means it will most likely not appear in the winter patch, but shortly afterwards (hopefully with the AF 4th bonus). Did anyone from csm indicate they had any position on what they would like in fw? why would they - they are all null sec. . .
Thats sort of the concern. Just like many wormhole players think it would be great if the rest of eve was like wormholes, I'm afraid these guys would think fw would be great if it was like null sec.
That said a Elise Randolf has expressed an interest. He indicated he had been in FW and had a great time. But on the whole I don't see what the point of the summit will be. People on the csm tend to be very hard core players. People in fw tend to be a bit more casual about the game yet still want lots of pvp. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hwong Jian
SniggWaffe
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:02:00 -
[478] - Quote
It seems that quite a few of you are either misinformed or down-right ignorant. So, allow me to clean up the discussion about Faction Warfare just a little bit.
FW MISSIONS ARE NOT AN ISK FAUCET IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.
I know many of you are preparing your arguments for that fact, but stop. Just stop it.
After running 16 FW missions (8 level 3s and 8 level 4s) my wallet increases by about 25-30 million isk. That is one hell of a faucet, right?
Again, your argument is in the process of forming, or you've already managed to blurt out the "but LP" portion of whatever malformed inane ramblings you are about to spew blindly into the aether in the hopes that it will make you sound like you're not a driveling imbecile. Again, stop.
Loyalty points are the reward you get for completing any mission. In Faction Warfare, you get a significant amount more than a non-FW mission. I know you think that might not be fair, but look at risk vs. reward: every FW mission is a shining beacon that anyone (friend, foe, pirate or neut) can warp to or camp until they get bored. The ability for any and every person in the system to harass an FW mission runner is there. It is bordering on pathological to expect CCP to punish FW mission runners because people aren't taking advantage of that mechanic.
Now, your reasoning is probably going to say the following: an FW mission runner can amass 150k LPs in under two hours, and then sell a tier 1 faction BC for 300mil isk. That is a huge faucet that CCP needs to limit! (I've heard that argument numerous times, and even the skeleton of it in this very thread.)
To that argument, I can merely say: No. Stop it. You are confusing lumping any method of making money into the category of "faucet". Stop it. The only thing that selling loot from the FW LP store does is move existing currency from one player to another. At most, the "faucet" would be the 20-30mil isk the player is given, spawned out of nowhere, for completing the mission.
Gathering 1.5 million LPs, enough to sell 10 faction tier 1 battleships, could earn an militiaman more than 2 billion isk, yes. That is true. But, 95% or more of that isk was already in the game.
So, let me sum this up. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the payouts of FW missions, and the risk vs. reward balances out. No significant amount of isk is added to the economy by running FW missions, and you can not hold it against FW mission runners that other players aren't harassing FW mission runners more often.
So, stop it. Stop bleating and neighing about nerfing FW missions. If you have a problem with their ease, CCP has provided you with the easiest method in the world of making it more difficult: by telling you that the mission is there and letting you swing by to say hello. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
444
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 17:34:00 -
[479] - Quote
I've written a letter to the CSM, providing them with links to these threads, and the Sov Wars blog where they can read up on the state of activities within the Faction Warfare scene. I encourage all of you to write them as well, the more voices they hear asking for a response on FW, the better. They may not see it as a signficant development issue, if no one is speaking up and asking for some love. Thanks for everyone's ongoing support! The FW has some of the classiest pilots around, I appreciate those on both sides of the war that have been advocates for improving the scene. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
444
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 17:48:00 -
[480] - Quote
Hwong Jian wrote: A bunch of yappity stuff.
I don't think you've really been reading this thread at all. Allow me to clean up you're understanding of what the debate is about.
The argument is not that FW missions some how act as an isk faucet and affects the economy. The frustration over mission rewards is that they are easily farmable - meaning people join Faction Warfare only for the LP, and not for the PvP fights and fleet opportunities. The count of pilots who are actually active in PvP and the total number of alt toons enrolled in FW is very muddled.
Those farming LP to take elsewhere don't contribute anything to FW, except for providing bomber killmails.
I agree with your assessment that the challenge is making the mission public, and I don't oppose missions being either public (on the overview) or lucrative. The problem is when they are only farmable in a bomber, instead of small gangs.
If you'd been following the thread, you'd realize that most are not asking for a nerf, they're asking for the payouts to be moved to the completion of PvP objectives, or for the mission challenge to be stepped up so that they encourage gang work, not solo bomber work. Gangs of non-cloaky ships running missions means way more dynamic pew pew than the slicers chasing hounds you see every day.
Please take the time to read about what actually matters to the community, instead of acting arrogant like you know so much better than all of us.
This discussion is in no way about adding too much isk as a faucet. Its about FW being a farm for LP, instead of a framework to encourage fleet gang warfare. LP rewards and their sale are how we stay equipped and geared for our PvP battles, so when outsiders farm the items and water down the market, the people actually using the rewards for FW pew pew are hurt in the process.
Think of someone who wanted to live in nullsec alliance space and run sanctums all day, but always logged off the minute there was a call to arms - how welcome would such a pilot be after long?
|
|
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:05:00 -
[481] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Update on FW: I have contacted the CSM about the FW review and they say it is one of the subjects that will be a topic at the december summit. That means it will most likely not appear in the winter patch, but shortly afterwards (hopefully with the AF 4th bonus).
{Can't resist} Oh please don't throw the AF bonus in the same bin as fixing FW, I want to actually get the AF bonus this year! :) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
444
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:08:00 -
[482] - Quote
Manssell wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:Update on FW: I have contacted the CSM about the FW review and they say it is one of the subjects that will be a topic at the december summit. That means it will most likely not appear in the winter patch, but shortly afterwards (hopefully with the AF 4th bonus). {Can't resist} Oh please don't throw the AF bonus in the same bin as fixing FW, I want to actually get the AF bonus this year! :)
To be fair, the FHC thread said FW *might* be a topic at the summit. Hardly encouraging. Also, Bomberlove - why'd you have to start out with the "we're not worthy" grovelling?? Show some PRIDE!!! There's no need to apologize for being a FW pilot or to apologize for bringing it up with the CSM - thats what they're there for. FW has been trolled historically in the past, but it now has some of the best PvP pilots in the game - whether the rest of New Eden has caught on to that yet or not. There's no need to reinforce outdated stereotypes.
But I really do appreciate you getting the discussion going there, too. I'm having trouble retrieving my login information for the site, otherwise I would spoken up there as well. Thanks for spreading the word, and being a voice for the community! It's people like you that are helping get stuff done. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:36:00 -
[483] - Quote
Can I get a link to that other discussion please? http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
444
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:40:00 -
[484] - Quote
Probably not, Shalee. The reason being that apparently CCP censors any mention of Failheap Challenge in the forums here, and apparently removes links and such. But go ahead and message me, i'll get you the link. Bomber could as well, I haven't even posted there. Having login issues and such.
awww what the hell. I'll just try it.
http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?4348-Can-CSM-get-status-on-promised-FW-review |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:43:00 -
[485] - Quote
FW is the ONLY source of CASUAL organized PVP. let's see...people who like to casually pvp....that's at least 50% of eve's population.
for ****'s sake, FW should be the first on the priority list. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
445
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:31:00 -
[486] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:FW is the ONLY source of CASUAL organized PVP. let's see...people who like to casually pvp....that's at least 50% of eve's population.
for ****'s sake, FW should be the first on the priority list.
Agreed, though I want to clarify one thing - Those unfamiliar with the FW crowd shouldn't confuse "casual" with "noobish"....in fact, the only people left in FW these days are the hardcore group that lives for juicy killmails and is out losing ships on a near daily basis, constantly improving.
When we say casual, we mean readily available, in a convenient location, without the drama of alliance politics. As for the pilots themselves, casual doesnt begin to describe them as many are very cutthroat and competitive when it comes to gang warfare. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 09:31:00 -
[487] - 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! |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 12:01:00 -
[488] - Quote
all of these changes linking lp to vp or plexing sounds good if *and only if* plexing stops being another carebear activity where you shoot red crosses in a different deadspace.
Hint: let the players know when a plex is entered and remove the npcs. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 12:12:00 -
[489] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:..... It seems that RvB is right place for you.
RvB corps used to get more kills than any other corp in eve.
RvB proves that there are allot of people who want decent small scale pvp opportunities that the current eve mechanics don't offer.
RvB will never be as good as something ccp could make because it is based on artificial rules. The players who designed it did a very good job considering they can't effect any mechanics. In the end it becomes too artifical and you can't really push the game. If you could push the game and still get the action you could get in rvb eve would grow huge.
Only ccp can change these mechanics. Only ccp can make plexes spawn. Only ccp can decide what effect that will have. Only ccp can decide if they will puke npcs everywhere forcing people to use pve fits so they can't pvp if someone else shows up. Only ccp can decide if they will let militias know when complexes are taken so they can actually fight for them instead of having people orbitting buttons all alone in low sec back waters.
If the players who designed rvb were given the tools to tweak fw I'm sure fw would be allot better. And EVE would have allot more subs. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Caldain Morrow
The Reavers Externus Hostis
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 12:16:00 -
[490] - Quote
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.
Except for the new players, who don't have alts that they can shift hi sec activities to. They'll stop joining FW altogether (or quit after losing some ships in PvP, and then losing their PvE ships as they try to recoup their losses). And FW will continue to stagnate with the same old faces.
If you want to give FW systems where they can fight without having to deal with pirates/caps/outside actors, then maybe remove NPCs from some border systems, but doing so from all hi sec strikes me as a bad idea.
Exactly why I ended up leaving last time. I'd burned through my latest batch of rifters doing PvP and was trying to run some missions to recoup. LvL 3s don't pay as well as lvl4s (which is all I had standing for) and SCUM set up camp at the choke point at Hof and was there any time I was online. I lost several mission ships so I retired to my hi-sec mission ground to run some lvl4s for the fleet and recover from my FW missioning losses...... got ganked in my PVE Maelstrom. (my dumb TBH) and was left with less than 100k in my account by the time I'd refitted a new Maelstrom. And that was with NPC police running around. Lose the NPCs and this little tail will play out a lot more. For this reason along I'm a'gin it.
From a philosophical perspective: Why, exactly, would police forces NOT be shooting at you if you are the enemy? It's all well and good that the US wasn't arresting Russian civilians during the cold war, but you'd better believe the first russian paratrooper that landed in Arkansas was going to get shot on sight. Nevermind the fact that we're talking about a war in FW that has gone beyond posturing and seeing who has the bigger bomb. |
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 12:25:00 -
[491] - Quote
Cearain wrote:... Only ccp can decide if they will puke npcs everywhere forcing people to use pve fits so they can't pvp if someone else shows up. Only ccp can decide if they will let militias know when complexes are taken so they can actually fight for them instead of having people orbitting buttons all alone in low sec back waters.
I do not know what you are talking about, we took all systems and i we were using only pvp fitted ships.
We did not have any problems to know where plexes were or who did those and when.
If you will send notification you have to still wait enemy to show up. And if you are too power full it will take several hours for militia to form up something that can beat people in plex.
10min 15min and 20min are not enough to make 15 jumps with proper sized ships, so if you want to take systems you have to keep some kind of control in area all the time.
You need organisation that can handle all this, intel, plexing, pvp, logistics etc...
We even told several time to gallente where we were plexing, but most of times they just did not show up. So notification hardly does not solve anything.
|
Johnny Punisher
Wolfsbrigade
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:46:00 -
[492] - Quote
Because missions have been discussed here so often, I thought I give my 2 cents:
Making isk with fw missions has nothing to do with the pvp part of faction warfare. And I don't think there should be any system where you get isk with pvp, too exploitable :)
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. They teach new players the lowsec "game zone" and basics of how to use cov ops ship (at least bombers are not used outside null that much) + give isk to pvp. Also mission runners sometime give nice intel while missioning in remote lowsec areas.
The main problem here I think is "how ccp would get me to do plexing" and to be honest I don't have good answer to that... |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:48:00 -
[493] - 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. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:24:00 -
[494] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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.
So you want to nerf missions because balancing mechanism that limits income if those are farmed too much is working?
All you want to do is to protect your own income on system that is open for all who have faction standing 0.5+.
Good luck on that. |
Johnny Punisher
Wolfsbrigade
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:30:00 -
[495] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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.
FW missions are my only income as I don't have alts (eve the hardcore way), so farmers make me a sad panda. But that's how market in eve goes...
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... |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:42:00 -
[496] - Quote
Johnny Punisher wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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.
FW missions are my only income as I don't have alts (eve the hardcore way), so farmers make me a sad panda. But that's how market in eve goes... 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...
You are on right tracks, it is about what players can do to make EVE better not always what ccp can do. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:45:00 -
[497] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
When we say casual, we mean readily available, in a convenient location, without the drama of alliance politics. As for the pilots themselves, casual doesnt begin to describe them as many are very cutthroat and competitive when it comes to gang warfare.
|
Crosi Wesdo
Spiritus Draconis
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:49:00 -
[498] - Quote
On the topic of FW missions. When a system is swung any friendly agents in that system should be made unavailable. This means that if crazy old Drama Ragearion manages to swing Intaki then a valuable asset to the Gallente would be lost. In a scenario where all low sec for a faction is lost (as per Gallente last year), FW pilots would have to resort to the lower reward high-sec agents.
This gives some incentive to swing a system, or defend it for that matter.
As for the plexing side, i dont have the experience to comment. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:00:00 -
[499] - Quote
in addition to everything thats been discussed, players must gain significant rewards (i.e. LP) from killing those from the opposing faction. rewards should be relative to type of ship destroyed. the smaller the gangs, the more LP people acquire.
LP should simply replace lost ships, nothing more. this takes away the fear of losing one's ship. players should be able to purchase any ship with LP, not just faction/pirate crap. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
121
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:54:00 -
[500] - 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
|
|
Johnny Punisher
Wolfsbrigade
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:34:00 -
[501] - Quote
I think its enough with the silly mission stuff, back to pew pew :)
Johnny Punisher wrote:
What you SHOULD fix:
1) pirate frigs not allowed into minor plexes.
2) no standing loss in remote repping friendly militia member who is pirate/gcc
3) make plexes worth doing / dont spawn most of them after dt
I have to change this list because of the coming winter patches changes to dramiels (nerf) & destroyers (buff). I don't think pirate frigs are gonna be that overpowered in minor plexes after that... So only 2) and 3) left. Though like I said earlier in this thread, I don't have any good ideas how to do the 3). Good luck ccp :) |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:07:00 -
[502] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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
Yea, it is sad that your ideas usually do not stand closer look. Better to block me so you can have illusion going on.
How much you have plexing points? |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
121
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:27:00 -
[503] - 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 |
Hwong Jian
SniggWaffe
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:27:00 -
[504] - Quote
Haven't really had much time to reply to Hans' "you don't know FW so stay out of it" jab, but I will.
In the meantime, damn all of you for not saying this yet. (Psst, Hans, here's the proof that I have been following the thread.)
Set Amarr <-> Caldari and Minmatar <-> Gallente as "My Militia" on the overview. There is NO reason what-so-ever for Amarr and Caldari or Minmatar and Gallente to automatically be purple to each other on the overview.
Seriously, that would make cross-faction ops, or even just roaming through space so much easier. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 06:38:00 -
[505] - Quote
/ gives this thread attention http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 16:24:00 -
[506] - 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. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:49:00 -
[507] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:... Only ccp can decide if they will puke npcs everywhere forcing people to use pve fits so they can't pvp if someone else shows up. Only ccp can decide if they will let militias know when complexes are taken so they can actually fight for them instead of having people orbitting buttons all alone in low sec back waters. I do not know what you are talking about, we took all systems and i we were using only pvp fitted ships. We did not have any problems to know where plexes were or who did those and when. If you will send notification you have to still wait enemy to show up. And if you are too power full it will take several hours for militia to form up something that can beat people in plex. 10min 15min and 20min are not enough to make 15 jumps with proper sized ships, so if you want to take systems you have to keep some kind of control in area all the time. You need organisation that can handle all this, intel, plexing, pvp, logistics etc... We even told several time to gallente where we were plexing, but most of times they just did not show up. So notification hardly does not solve anything.
I don't know about gallente npcs but you will not want to fight minmatar npcs with a buffer tank. (the most common pvp type of tank)
If the npcs are irrelevant they are not even effecting hwo you fit your ship then why have them at all?
Finally there should be enough plexes being taken throughout the 8 regions of fw that its people would need to split up and constantly be going from one plex to another. There would rarely be enough time to wait for blobs to form.
Let me ask you why you told them where you were plexing? Did you tell them because you wanted some pvp and letting them know where you where was the obvious way to get PvP? That is sort of my point. Letting the enemy know where their military complexes are being taken is a pretty obvious way to increase pvp.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:49:00 -
[508] - Quote
double post Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:57:00 -
[509] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.....
Yes even I agree notifications won't solve everything. However it is a no brainer solution that would have a huge impact on FW plexing and make it the most fun someone can have in eve.
As far as the bottlenecks for amarr go I have noticed those too. But I am not sure that is really an issue with the notification system, as opposed to an issue in general. Also I don't think that is such a big deal.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:20:00 -
[510] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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. ...
I like your solution where you also require vp (assuming plexing does not remain a pve activity) or other similar solutions that require pvp kills for missions.
However I ran a bunch fw missions the other day. And I have to say I do not think it was all that profitable.
But I have to admit it was pretty fun. (not that I would want to do this more than 2 or 3 times a year) Lots of people where camping my missions. They seemed to be having a good time as well.
I think the fw mission design is actually a great way to do low sec missions.
Also as far as the risk versus reward do you think doing missions in null sec is much more dangerous than in low sec? It seems to me that people who rat deep in their own sov null sec have things pretty easy and safe.
But I will agree that measures should be taken so people who never pvp aren't just farming the missions.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 01:37:00 -
[511] - Quote
Johnny Punisher wrote:I think its enough with the silly mission stuff, back to pew pew :) Johnny Punisher wrote:
What you SHOULD fix:
1) pirate frigs not allowed into minor plexes.
2) no standing loss in remote repping friendly militia member who is pirate/gcc
3) make plexes worth doing / dont spawn most of them after dt
I have to change this list because of the coming winter patches changes to dramiels (nerf) & destroyers (buff). I don't think pirate frigs are gonna be that overpowered in minor plexes after that...
If they do the changes I saw to destroyers, minor plexes will be *all* catalysts and thrashers. Since destroyers are some of the most boring ships in eve this is not good for fw plexxing. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
209
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:09:00 -
[512] - Quote
I wish the PERVS bloc would stop pretending it has any desire to see FW balanced. It's not convincing. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 06:14:00 -
[513] - Quote
Indeed, I have no idea where PERVS are but it certainly isn't anywhere near FW. Last time I heard about them was when they decced The4, then did nothing with that *shrug*. But indeed. Stop posting. Your providing no positive ideas and your main point seems to be that PERVS conquered lo-sec with a multitude of alts or some ****...speaking for myself and I think most others. We. Don't. Care! Also your English is atrocious are you using google translate or something? Your messing up the conversation, CCP probably hasn't replied to this thread because of your trolling. Once you have something positive to contribute whether or not its critical of someone elses point go ahead and post, until then just stop posting, you read like a ****** who has the cognitive ability of a Twelve year old. Now sit back and be quiet.
NOW Back to a point I have made several times. Encouraging small scale PvP through an easy way to earn isk is and will be a boon to Faction Warfare. Forcing People to PvP is not the way to go. If the missions are rebalanced to make them unsoloable in a bomber ganking will become much easier.
Making my point again there needs to be SOME form of connection between PvP and/or Plexing Activities. I still advocate my Agent Standing Solution where Agent Standings decrease over time but PvP kills and Plexing activity give a significant boost. Missions still give standings but not enough for you to comfortably do level 4's. I have seen other ways as well, but the fact remains the same. Their MUST be a way for those of us who are in FW for PvP can earn a living while at the very least discouraging Farming alts.
See you Starside ~Simyaldee |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:42:00 -
[514] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:I wish the PERVS bloc would stop pretending it has any desire to see FW balanced. It's not convincing.
Yea, but i am trying to be nice and tell how we will abuse new rules you proposed.
But i am not good being nice, i am bad |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:50:00 -
[515] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Let me ask you why you told them where you were plexing? Did you tell them because you wanted some pvp and letting them know where you where was the obvious way to get PvP? That is sort of my point. Letting the enemy know where their military complexes are being taken is a pretty obvious way to increase pvp.
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. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:02:00 -
[516] - Quote
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. |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
213
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:40:00 -
[517] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Yea, but i am trying to be nice and tell how we will abuse new rules you proposed.
If you actually cared about balance and not just tools you could use to "win" (because honestly, is it really winning if you couldn't do it legitimately?), you would not abuse game mechanics.
You don't want any changes made to the system whatsoever, because the current broken mess benefits you. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:47:00 -
[518] - Quote
...you'd get fights in plexes if they were worth fighting for. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
73
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:52:00 -
[519] - Quote
X Gallentius 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.
X Gallentius wrote: 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.
This is what we seem to agree on:
1) If you want pvp its obvious that its best when the enemy knows where you are.
2) When you are forced to "announce" your location to the other side, they will assume you have something up your sleeve.
CCP should not ignore the obvious first point. Nor should they force us to announce where we are. If the game mechanics are simply telling the enemy where their military complexes are attacked there will be no reason to think they have anything "up their sleeve" and the fighting can start.
Also the side with less people need to have other plexes they can go for if larger side has a blob in one system. If the caldari outnumber the Gallente and they are sitting in oms then the mechanics should make it so Gallente can go to *several* systems 10-15 jumps away from oms and get some plexing done. Then if the caldari don't want to lose those plexes they will need to split up and not just all sit their in a big lump in oms.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
73
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:06:00 -
[520] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:...you'd get fights in plexes if they were worth fighting for.
I think we all agree they should add more value/worth than they currently do. But they can't go overboard due to potential exploits and the fact that that if occupancy really mattered more people would tend to join the winning side, making the war lopsided.
Because of these inherent limitations I think they need to do more than make plexing a more lucrative activity.
If they really want fw to be something great they need to make plexing fun - not just give a bunch of isk for doing it. For me that means they need to make it a small scale pvp activity and not a pve one. (nor should they make it a GÇ£null sec blob always winsGÇ¥ mechanic GÇô people who want that already have null sec.)
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:11:00 -
[521] - Quote
I think the worthless VP should be LP. Once there is a small incentive to plex, more people will do it. I don't worry about things becoming lopsidded because most people just want a fight anyhow, so if it gets too unbalanced I think people would join the opposing faction- because I've already seen that happen a lot. At least on the Minmatar/Amarr front. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:09:00 -
[522] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:I think the worthless VP should be LP. Once there is a small incentive to plex, more people will do it. I don't worry about things becoming lopsidded because most people just want a fight anyhow, so if it gets too unbalanced I think people would join the opposing faction- because I've already seen that happen a lot. At least on the Minmatar/Amarr front.
I'm really not sure how much vp you get for each kill or whatever but I do agree that they should award some lp for plexing. (or otherwise involve plexing or pvp kills in the fw lp store).
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.
I know people who have gone from amarr to caldari because the missions are easier. I don't blame them. Why join the side where its harder to make isk? I suspect some people I know switched from Amarr to minmatar for the easier missions as well. So people do tend to follow the money.
If they just increased the amount of lp for plexing I would still need to warp off if an enemy player came because the minmatar rats in the plexes chew through my tank too fast. This means you need to show up with larger numbers to do plexes. As you increase the numbers in a gang the likelyhood of finding another gang that 1) will be willing to fight you and 2) you will be willing to fight decreases. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
387
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:12:00 -
[523] - 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. |
Morar Santee
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:42:00 -
[524] - Quote
Frankly, there's no easy way of fixing Faction Warfare or FW missions. Both are inherently easy to abuse.
- The Plexing mechanic:
Let us assume, for a moment, spawn-timers were fixed to evenly distribute them throughout the day and the tiny standings boost was increased and matched with a LP payout that gives an incentive to run them. Sounds great, doesn't it? I'm all for it, too. Can't wait to see it implemented.
Now, how long exactly do you think it would take for people to use all their alts to see-saw systems? Use Minmatar alt to make system vulnerable and get LP, use Amarr character to capture one Plex, get LP, rinse and repeat. But wait, maybe we should use a notification system so other people interfere? Great idea!! Except.. no matter who comes to interfere GÇô one of those characters is in the right faction. So now we need a way to kick obvious spies? Yeah, good plan! Except.. we all know how many douchebags are in this game (and FW) and would stop at nothing to abuse it for griefing.
In short: There's no way to prevent abuse, and you would simply move people from currently farming FW missions to farming PLEXes with the same or even less risk.
- FW missions:
Making them harder so it becomes a group effort and cannot be done solo? Yeah.. except people are already using alts in Executioners to orbit at 150km while a different ship completes the mission. I'm sure there's ways to adjust the missions to where it really requires multiple well-tanked ships to complete them... but how exactly would X warp-core-stabbed Drakes be an improvement over the current situation? And what about the people who are already using their alts in the opposing militia to complete their missions in the first place? And if we made those NPCs shoot at people from their own militia to prevent it, how would you run interference anymore?
It's basically impossible to come up with a scenario that can not be abused, somehow.
Faction war needs a complete revamp.
- Complexes:
It starts with the complexes and how they're captured. I'm sorry, but orbiting a beacon is just silly in the first place. Incidentally, it also turns Plexing into a question of: GÇ£How to best circle a button without being hitGÇ¥, rather than GÇ£How to form a sensible fleet and have some funGÇ¥.
Complexes should host NPCs of both factions, which do not engage each other due to the GÇ£Cold WarGÇ¥ state between the Empires. Capturing a complex should require killing the opposing NPCs, and those need to have Sleeper AI. Not necessarily exactly the same damage output, but the AI itself. Killing a wave triggers a distress signal that calls in reinforcements with a delay of several minutes. That delay is needed so large fleets can't complete Complexes within seconds, and the opposing side has a chance to rally a defense. Depending on the size of the complex, there's so and so many waves of reinforcements of appropriate but variable size and difficulty. The system's occupancy status and how contested it currently is determines how strongly the Empires are represented in the complexes (in the form of Sleeper AI NPCs).
As an example: A minor complex in an uncontested system under Amarr occupation could initially host 5 Amarr frigates and 1 Minmatar frigate, and with each reinforcement wave on either side, 1 frigate is added. If the same system was about to flip, it could initially be 3 Amarr and 3 Minmatar frigates.
This is just a random example. The intended effect is: Defenders will still have an advantage inside complexes, but they too have to account for some incoming fire.
Now, if this was to give any form of reward (and I think LP would be sensible), it could still be abused, right? Not as easily if you apply Incursion mechanics and only members of the highest damage dealing fleet inside the complex receive the payout. The intention here isn't to make this just another form of low-sec Incursions, but using these existing mechanics goes a long way in enabling GÇ£The Real PvPersGÇ¥ to decide who they want to team with, and thus be rewarded when a complex is won.
- The actual PvP:
I think it would be good to offer greater rewards to people who actually manage to shoot down opposing faction members. Unfortunately, what this means is that we first need a working Insurance system, that correctly calculates a ship's worth (yes, that should include t2 and t3). And then we deny FW players access to it, because no insurance company would want a customer who's actively engaged in warfare with thousands of other maniacs. O_o What we give them instead is bounties for opposing faction members rated at 80% of a ship's worth. Say a fleet of 5 people kills an Abaddon worth 140 million ISK. 80% is about 112 million, divided by 5 makes an ISK payout of 22.4 million per player.
Not receiving insurance sounds harsh, at first, especially for new players. In fact, I think it is the other way around: New players flying frigates will have a much easier time replacing them, while having the opportunity to fund those doing actual PvP. This overall encourages the idea of flying ships that offer a nice bang for your buck.
If these changes are implemented, FW missions could be balanced in terms of difficulty and LP payout somewhat reduced, and things would be peachy. Why? Because now there would be added incentive for people to be out Plexing all over the place, and killing opposing faction members, both of which increases pressure on mission-runners. Problem solved.
|
Morar Santee
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:55:00 -
[525] - Quote
Fail double post. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:38:00 -
[526] - Quote
Morar Santee wrote:Frankly, there's no easy way of fixing Faction Warfare or FW missions. Both are inherently easy to abuse.
- The Plexing mechanic (the problem):
Let us assume, for a moment, spawn-timers were fixed to evenly distribute them throughout the day and the tiny standings boost was increased and matched with a LP payout that gives an incentive to run them. Sounds great, doesn't it? I'm all for it, too. Can't wait to see it implemented.
Now, how long exactly do you think it would take for people to use all their alts to see-saw systems? Use Minmatar alt to make system vulnerable and get LP, use Amarr character to capture one Plex, get LP, rinse and repeat. But wait, maybe we should use a notification system so other people interfere? Great idea!! Except.. no matter who comes to interfere GÇô one of those characters is in the right faction....
I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. The alts will get kicked out of plexes because both sides will be notified when complexes are invaded. Notification = fewer alts doing plexes and more pvp.
How many alts do you think people are going to multibox? Please give a bit more detail as to how you think this would be gamed.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Morar Santee
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:44:00 -
[527] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Morar Santee wrote:Frankly, there's no easy way of fixing Faction Warfare or FW missions. Both are inherently easy to abuse.
- The Plexing mechanic (the problem):
Let us assume, for a moment, spawn-timers were fixed to evenly distribute them throughout the day and the tiny standings boost was increased and matched with a LP payout that gives an incentive to run them. Sounds great, doesn't it? I'm all for it, too. Can't wait to see it implemented.
Now, how long exactly do you think it would take for people to use all their alts to see-saw systems? Use Minmatar alt to make system vulnerable and get LP, use Amarr character to capture one Plex, get LP, rinse and repeat. But wait, maybe we should use a notification system so other people interfere? Great idea!! Except.. no matter who comes to interfere GÇô one of those characters is in the right faction....
I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. The alts will get kicked out of plexes because both sides will be notified when complexes are invaded. Notification = fewer alts doing plexes and more pvp. How many alts do you think people are going to multibox? Please give a bit more detail as to how you think this would be gamed.
The problem is you only need one character (say Amarr) and one alt (Minmatar). You run a complex for rewards, and a notification goes out. Now three things can happen:
1. No one comes - you cap the plex and get the reward. 2. Minmatar come - you use your Minmatar alt and get the reward. 3. Amarr come - you use your Amarr character and get the reward.
In theory, both Amarr and Minmatar could come and fight each other. Even if that happens, all you have to do is wait until the fight is over, pick the character of the side that won, and get the reward.
If they don't want you to be there, sure, they could kill your insured t1 frigate - but how often do they do that before they're locked out of high-sec? Not to mention GCC makes moving the fleet more dangerous. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:49:00 -
[528] - Quote
Morar Santee wrote:Rewards for PvP (a proposal): I think it would be good to offer greater rewards to people who actually manage to shoot down opposing faction members. Unfortunately, what this means is that we first need a working Insurance system, that correctly calculates a ship's worth (yes, that should include t2 and t3). And then we deny FW players access to it, because no insurance company would want a customer who's actively engaged in warfare with thousands of other maniacs. O_o What we give them instead is bounties for opposing faction members rated at 80% of a ship's worth. Say a fleet of 5 people kills an Abaddon worth 140 million ISK. 80% is about 112 million, divided by 5 makes an ISK payout of 22.4 million per player. Again, Incursion mechanics could be utilized to ensure only eligible members of the main contributing fleet are rewarded in this fashion.
Not receiving insurance sounds harsh, at first, especially for new players. In fact, I think it is the other way around: New players flying frigates will have a much easier time replacing them, while having the opportunity to fund those doing actual PvP. This overall encourages the idea of flying ships that offer a nice bang for your buck.
If these changes are implemented, FW missions could be balanced in terms of difficulty and LP payout somewhat reduced, and things would be peachy. Why? Because now there would be added incentive for people to be out Plexing all over the place, and killing opposing faction members, both of which increases pressure on mission-runners. Problem solved. [/list]
This isn't a bad general idea but it would take allot of work. CCP would need to fix the many problems with killmails. Moreover they would need to start calculating the worth of items other than the insurance pay out. This would be allot of work but it would be goood for eve in other ways too. It would help the bounty system and make killmails better.
However, it would be hard for faction warfare pilots to deal with non fw pilots in low sec. We would have to field ships that are not insured against their insured ships. Perhaps you could say there would be insurance if no one from the opposing militia shows up on the killmail.
The other thing I would be afraid of is that this would make people even more risk adverse. Again we all know the best isk efficency is gained by blobbing. I think this might just give people a further incentive to join blobs instead of the risky endeavor of small scale pvp. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Morar Santee
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:52:00 -
[529] - Quote
This suggestion was regarding bland ship-insurance payout for the calculations only. The t2/t3 part was concerning insurance payout for t2/t3 ships, which is currently calculated wrong and does not reflect actual prices.
You do have a point when it comes to the proposal putting militia at a substantial disadvantage when fighting non-militia pilots, and that might require a solution along the lines of what you suggested. On the other hand, as you said: It would encourage smart piloting (and I don't just mean "blobbing" here, I mean good scouting in small-scale warfare and such) and using ships like cruisers and BCs. Let's be honest, the insurance doesn't make a gigantic difference there. And if you fly t2 / t3 ships at this very moment - don't know about you, but I don't insure them. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:01:00 -
[530] - Quote
Morar Santee wrote:Cearain wrote:Morar Santee wrote:Frankly, there's no easy way of fixing Faction Warfare or FW missions. Both are inherently easy to abuse.
- The Plexing mechanic (the problem):
Let us assume, for a moment, spawn-timers were fixed to evenly distribute them throughout the day and the tiny standings boost was increased and matched with a LP payout that gives an incentive to run them. Sounds great, doesn't it? I'm all for it, too. Can't wait to see it implemented.
Now, how long exactly do you think it would take for people to use all their alts to see-saw systems? Use Minmatar alt to make system vulnerable and get LP, use Amarr character to capture one Plex, get LP, rinse and repeat. But wait, maybe we should use a notification system so other people interfere? Great idea!! Except.. no matter who comes to interfere GÇô one of those characters is in the right faction....
I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. The alts will get kicked out of plexes because both sides will be notified when complexes are invaded. Notification = fewer alts doing plexes and more pvp. How many alts do you think people are going to multibox? Please give a bit more detail as to how you think this would be gamed. The problem is you only need one character (say Amarr) and one alt (Minmatar). You run a complex for rewards, and a notification goes out. Now three things can happen: 1. No one comes - you cap the plex and get the reward. 2. Minmatar come - you use your Minmatar alt and get the reward. 3. Amarr come - you use your Amarr character and get the reward. In theory, both Amarr and Minmatar could come and fight each other. Even if that happens, all you have to do is wait until the fight is over, pick the character of the side that won, and get the reward. If they don't want you to be there, sure, they could kill your insured t1 frigate - but how often do they do that before they're locked out of high-sec? Not to mention GCC makes moving the fleet more dangerous.
Ok I see what your saying. Yes hopefully there will be people coming for both of your alts.
So what you are saying is you will warp your alt out and wait for the person in your alts militia to do the fighting and then warp back in and leach off his reward?
Yeah you definitely will not be well liked in the militias. I would say I think this might be a theoretical problem that never really substantially materializes. If it does then I think the players would have some options on how to address it and if they don't work ccp could do somethings including altering how rewards are given. Also adding the pirate factions would help this because then the plex could be capped by several different factions. There are actually several possibilities to address this sort of conduct - if it really happened. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:10:00 -
[531] - Quote
Morar Santee wrote:......On the other hand, as you said: It would encourage smart piloting (and I don't just mean "blobbing" here, I mean good scouting in small-scale warfare and such) .....
I didn't say "smart piloting" I said "risk adverse piloting."
Whether "risk adverse piloting" is "smart" or not depends on what you want to do in eve.
For some people with allot of time who just want to min max their isk losses then risk adverse is the smart way to go. For others that want to get in there and get as much pvp as they can in a gaming session, then risk adverse piloting is not a smart way to achieve that goal.
Personally I would like Faction war to cater to the latter group. Not only because I fit in that group but because there are no mechanics currently in eve that work for that group. Yet the risk adverse, isk ratio min maxers have plenty of options in new eden. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:24:00 -
[532] - Quote
Cearain wrote:
How many alts do you think people are going to multibox? Please give a bit more detail as to how you think this would be gamed.
When we defended caldari systems i used 6 accounts at same time. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:30:00 -
[533] - Quote
Morar Santee wrote:-lot of text-
So you want that plexing sould be more PVE intensive than now?
Reward for PVP should always be PVP itself, or some bigger goal to achieve, example capture all systems or defend your home. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:31:00 -
[534] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:
How many alts do you think people are going to multibox? Please give a bit more detail as to how you think this would be gamed.
When we defended caldari systems i used 6 accounts at same time.
I imagine people got tired of trying to keep track of where your alts were plexing. A notification system would take care of that.
Were these free accounts? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:33:00 -
[535] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:
How many alts do you think people are going to multibox? Please give a bit more detail as to how you think this would be gamed.
When we defended caldari systems i used 6 accounts at same time. I imagine people got tired of trying to keep track of where your alts were plexing. A notification system would take care of that. Were these free accounts?
All were paid accounts.
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:39:00 -
[536] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Cearain wrote:
How many alts do you think people are going to multibox? Please give a bit more detail as to how you think this would be gamed.
When we defended caldari systems i used 6 accounts at same time. I imagine people got tired of trying to keep track of where your alts were plexing. A notification system would take care of that. Were these free accounts? All were paid accounts.
Well if you can keep track of all those ships more power to you. I don't think ccp can or should do anything to prevent that. I probably couldn't do that effectively (without giving the enemy lots of kills) even if I wanted to.
Hell I can't really keep track of two ships in low sec space very well. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
466
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:45:00 -
[537] - Quote
I just had a random idea, thought I'd throw it out there for everyone to discuss....We've been trying to think about ways to reward players without turning FW into farmville.
And than it hit me - what about rewarding players for losses, instead of paying them for plexing / mission? Clearly some of the appeal in joining a big alliance is having your pew pew ships reimbursed, I was wondering if an insurance-type system could be implemented to reward players who sacrifice ships in FW PvP.
Think of it like AFLAC for FW pilots - additional insurance payouts, upon death to a wartarget. Should be easy to program for the developers, if you're a FW pilot, and the final blow is laid by an enemy militia, you get some sweet bonus insurance money, financed by the Tribal Liberation force, or 24th crusade. (might be lore issues with this, feel free to bring those up)
This would solely reward those that are out PvPing, as this is not money you can farm and take elsewhere. You would have to go out and lose ships to benefit, and the amount could still be low enough that it doesnt completely cover mods and thus couldn't be proftitable to farm with an alt. But it would make ongoing pew pew much cheaper, attract players who want PvP without major grinding expense, and keep people out of the missions and in fleets.
Also, as an added benefit, it adds an incentive for militias to engage each other, and not to engage in piracy out of boredom. That will still happen, but this properly encourages people to stick to wartargets, as they'd lose the bonus insurance if they died fighting neutrals.
Go ahead, rip it to shreds, just trying to think outside the box a little. Its just one idea, could dovetail with other changes, but I think it aids in making FW what its suppose to be - PvP centric, rewarding players for fighting, and not for farming PvE content whether its plexing OR missions.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:58:00 -
[538] - 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. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:10:00 -
[539] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I just had a random idea, thought I'd throw it out there for everyone to discuss....We've been trying to think about ways to reward players without turning FW into farmville.
And than it hit me - what about rewarding players for losses, instead of paying them for plexing / mission? Clearly some of the appeal in joining a big alliance is having your pew pew ships reimbursed, I was wondering if an insurance-type system could be implemented to reward players who sacrifice ships in FW PvP.
Think of it like AFLAC for FW pilots - additional insurance payouts, upon death to a wartarget. Should be easy to program for the developers, if you're a FW pilot, and the final blow is laid by an enemy militia, you get some sweet bonus insurance money, financed by the Tribal Liberation force, or 24th crusade. (might be lore issues with this, feel free to bring those up)
This would solely reward those that are out PvPing, as this is not money you can farm and take elsewhere. You would have to go out and lose ships to benefit, and the amount could still be low enough that it doesnt completely cover mods and thus couldn't be proftitable to farm with an alt. But it would make ongoing pew pew much cheaper, attract players who want PvP without major grinding expense, and keep people out of the missions and in fleets.
Also, as an added benefit, it adds an incentive for militias to engage each other, and not to engage in piracy out of boredom. That will still happen, but this properly encourages people to stick to wartargets, as they'd lose the bonus insurance if they died fighting neutrals.
Go ahead, rip it to shreds, just trying to think outside the box a little. Its just one idea, could dovetail with other changes, but I think it aids in making FW what its suppose to be - PvP centric, rewarding players for fighting, and not for farming PvE content whether its plexing OR missions.
You can not make losing ships profitable. It breaks eve economy.
Now you get insurance from ships, but 50% modules will be destroyed and usually looted by someone else. If you will get compensation for module part too can we remove isk grinding from game.
You have to mine materials still for those but...
It seems that most of proposals are aiming to make simpler game with complex mechanics.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
467
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:31:00 -
[540] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
This is easily prevented by keeping payouts below 100% reimbursement - just like normal insurance.
Same with LP for kills GÇô the total given reward (if distributed) must be less than the cost of the ship, otherwise that will be farmed too. Lets take a Scimitar GÇô worth around 120 million. If the payout was say, 90 million divided by all the people on the killmail, it would reward participants without being abused, since youGÇÖd lose money even if you used an alt.
I think payout for kills gets really messy and hard to calculate, depends far too much on market pricing, and invites whoring for the sake of whoring. And doesnGÇÖt reward logistics pilots doing their jobs to keep the fleet alive. Handling rewards on the loss end fixes some of these fairness issues. No matter how you work out pay-for-kills, (top damage, final blow, initial tackle, even split, etc) someone gets screwed.
Since youGÇÖre talking about LP here, this FW insurance supplement could even be given in the form of loyalty points, and could even be restricted to Navy issue ships if so desired. Currently, insurance pays tech 1 hull price for losing something you had to earn thousands of LP for. Think of it GÇô what if you earned 50% of that LP back upon dying with it in battle, to a wartarget? Militias would fly faction vessels (including BS) much more often, and not lose as much of their hard earned work because they took a PvP loss. This would be a real treat for militia pilots without allowing the benefits of FW to be used elsewhere.
Again, as long as the payout is less than the cost of the ship, whether youGÇÖre talking about LP insurance for faction ship losses, or cash insurance for general losses, this wouldnGÇÖt be sustainable enough to be profitable. But it would make PvP much more sustainable in general, and thatGÇÖs a goal I think we all share.
For casual PvP to occur regularly, FW pilots have to be rewarded somehow to be able to finance their ships. Many here advocate a mission nerf, I see this as a viable way to shift some of that isk reward to PvP without removing lucrative rewards completely.
|
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 04:20:00 -
[541] - Quote
Ok I will say it even though I anticipate people will disagree.
If the destroyer changes go through and they are still allowed in minor plexes they will likely be the only ships used in those plexes. I suppose the armor tanked double web/disruptor hookbill might work as well but other than that it will be all thrashers and catalysts.
So because I like think that would be horribly boring I will say that if the destroyer changes go through as indicated I hope they are not allowed in minor plexes. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hallorin
State War Academy Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 04:26:00 -
[542] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Ok I will say it even though I anticipate people will disagree.
If the destroyer changes go through and they are still allowed in minor plexes they will likely be the only ships used in those plexes. I suppose the armor tanked double web/disruptor hookbill might work as well but other than that it will be all thrashers and catalysts.
So because I like think that would be horribly boring I will say that if the destroyer changes go through as indicated I hope they are not allowed in minor plexes.
Better imo is just to let T2 frigs into minor plexes. Especially since CCP has indicated they consider faction frigs to be 'better' than T2
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 04:31:00 -
[543] - Quote
Hallorin wrote:Cearain wrote:Ok I will say it even though I anticipate people will disagree.
If the destroyer changes go through and they are still allowed in minor plexes they will likely be the only ships used in those plexes. I suppose the armor tanked double web/disruptor hookbill might work as well but other than that it will be all thrashers and catalysts.
So because I like think that would be horribly boring I will say that if the destroyer changes go through as indicated I hope they are not allowed in minor plexes. Better imo is just to let T2 frigs into minor plexes. Especially since CCP has indicated they consider faction frigs to be 'better' than T2
Yeah I agree with letting t2 frigs into plexes. But until they get a boost I'm not sure they would even be able to compete with boosted destroyers.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
75
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 18:33:00 -
[544] - Quote
I would like it if when I was in a races complex there was a boost to the sensor strength of that race. So in an amarr complex all amarr ships would get a huge boost to radar sensor strength. All ships in Gallente complexs would get a boost to Magnometric, all ships in minmatar would get a boost to ladar etc.
The idea would be that the complexes are set up to boost their own races ships. So if I am in the amarr militia flying a minmatar ship I would still get the bonus if I am in a minmatar complex.
The bonus would be considerable like 10xs the ship sensor strength. In other words ecm would be all but pointless if you are facing that factions ships in their own complex.
1) I think this would add some amount of role play even if small
2)) I think this would give some encouragement to fly racial ships. Although it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
3) It would give some small discouragement to using ecm ships and drones in plexes. I don't want to turn this into an ecm needs a nerf thread (I'm actually not really in favor of a nerf to ecm) but I think in the solo and small gang setting ecm is a bit overpowered. A griffin with multi specs can pretty much permajam every bc out there.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 11:17:00 -
[545] - Quote
Cearain wrote:I would like it if when I was in a races complex there was a boost to the sensor strength of that race's ships. So in an amarr complex all amarr ships would get a huge boost to radar sensor strength. All ships in Gallente complexs would get a boost to Magnometric, all ships in minmatar would get a boost to ladar etc.
The idea would be that the complexes are set up to boost their own races ships. So if I am in the amarr militia flying a minmatar ship I would still get the bonus if I am in a minmatar complex.
The bonus would be considerable like 10xs the ship sensor strength. In other words ecm would be all but pointless if you are facing that factions ships in their own complex.
1) I think this would add some amount of role play even if small
2)) I think this would give some encouragement to fly racial ships. Although it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
3) It would give some small discouragement to using ecm ships and drones in plexes. I don't want to turn this into an ecm needs a nerf thread (I'm actually not really in favor of a nerf to ecm) but I think in the solo and small gang setting ecm is a bit overpowered. A griffin with multi specs can pretty much permajam every bc out there. No. This will just ruin things. If you take sov, everyone will be flying your ships (offensive or defensive) and when you lose it the other race's ships will be used. This will REMOVE variation to the pvp...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
75
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 12:36:00 -
[546] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Cearain wrote:I would like it if when I was in a races complex there was a boost to the sensor strength of that race's ships. So in an amarr complex all amarr ships would get a huge boost to radar sensor strength. All ships in Gallente complexs would get a boost to Magnometric, all ships in minmatar would get a boost to ladar etc.
The idea would be that the complexes are set up to boost their own races ships. So if I am in the amarr militia flying a minmatar ship I would still get the bonus if I am in a minmatar complex.
The bonus would be considerable like 10xs the ship sensor strength. In other words ecm would be all but pointless if you are facing that factions ships in their own complex.
1) I think this would add some amount of role play even if small
2)) I think this would give some encouragement to fly racial ships. Although it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
3) It would give some small discouragement to using ecm ships and drones in plexes. I don't want to turn this into an ecm needs a nerf thread (I'm actually not really in favor of a nerf to ecm) but I think in the solo and small gang setting ecm is a bit overpowered. A griffin with multi specs can pretty much permajam every bc out there. No. This will just ruin things. If you take sov, everyone will be flying your ships (offensive or defensive) and when you lose it the other race's ships will be used. This will REMOVE variation to the pvp...
The only thing flying the same races ship will do is counter ecm. There is not that much ecm now. Do you think there will be that much more ecm in the future were "everyone" will be trying to counter it?
I guess I would say if there that much ecm where "everyone" will be flying that races ships it would be a necessary change. But I doubt that would be the case. I think solo pilots would have some minor incentive to fly a ship of the plexes they are taking and gangs would have an incentive to have one ship of the race of the complex they are taking.
As far as removing variation I tend to think it will add it. People would have had a reason (albeit a small one) to plex in something other than a dramiels, cynabals and hurricanes.
Plus I would rather people tend to use the combat ships of every variety instead of all griffins and blackbirds - which I think might happen if they don't do anything. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
141
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 12:48:00 -
[547] - 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) |
Heimdallofasgard
APEX ARDENT COALITION NEM3SIS.
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 13:30:00 -
[548] - Quote
haven't posted in this thread yet as I've never followed faction warfare at all but have been reading.
There are some badass ideas ccp should really look into.
+1 to all u FW guys |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
75
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 23:01:00 -
[549] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
I have had a drake die a slow death to 2 assault frigates while being permajammed by a griffin. I have been permajammed a few other times. Its hard to call this "abuse" since when you look at the actual mechanics of ecm it is simply very powerful especially against smaller sized groups. And basically its lethal against solo pvpers.
It hasn't happened to me that often but that is because now I just warp out of plex if I see any ecm ships on a shorter scan. I will say I have left many fights due to ecm being there. I think they should make plexing so that they reduce people having to warp off as much as possible. ECM boats are a always a good reason to for a solo or small gang pvper to avoid a fight.
I agree I don't see too too much ecm in plexes but no one really cares about winning them now. I think if people all of a sudden start caring ecm ships will be very very popular. They are balanced in for larger fleet fights but they are not balanced for solo or small gang warfare.
I'm not in favor of a heavy handed approach about it, but I think this would be a nice subtle way to address it.
What you say about others flying all minmatar is sort of what I mean about adding some variety. This would give some slight advantage to the "also ran" races' ships in 3/4s of the plexes.
As far as rp I'm not claiming allot here but I do think its pretty neat to see the fw pilots flying their faction type ships. This would give them some reason to do that. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
486
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 17:37:00 -
[550] - Quote
Hey everyone, just checking in again. I've updated the original post, to serve as a resource both to CCP, CSM, and anyone else interested in the state of Faction Warfare and the topmost issues being discussed.
If there's a top issue that ISN'T included in the OP, let me know ASAP and I'll get it on there. There's been a lot discussed, I'm sure I've missed one or two obvious ones.
I've kept the list to the stuff we all agree needs to be fixed, even though we can continue to use this thread to discuss the various possible solutions, even the controversial ones.
The CSM members I've spoken to have pledged to review this information, and bring it with them to discuss again at the summit the first week in December. I will continue to keep it updated right up to the summit, so there's no confusion or chaos in what the CSM have to review and pass along to CCP.
Also, please let me know if there's any other FW resources I can link in my second post. I wanted to form a central location for links pertaining to the Faction Warfare improvement discussion, so any and all suggestions are appreciated.
Thanks for all your help guys! Our time will come soon.... |
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
76
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:03:00 -
[551] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:*UPDATE* - .... NOTE - This is a list of issues, not a list of solutions. I think we all agree on the issues - so let this be the concrete message that gets sent, even if we don't all agree on how it should be fixed.
I will continue to update this trend list, as a resource for the CSM to bring with them to the summit, in a concise form they can present to CCP on our behalf. Please continue to share feedback if you want something bumped onto the trending issues list.
Top Trending Faction Warfare Quick Fixes - "the little stuff"
..... 2.) Pirate frigates widely considered too powerful to be included in a plex designed for tech 1 frigates and destroyers. Faction Frigates make sense for Faction Warfare, but if interceptors are banned than Dramiels and Daredevils should be as well. ......
If they make the proposed chages to destroyers minor plexes will be all thrashers and catalysts. Pirate frigates won't compete. If they make the proposed changes to destroyers destroyers should not be allowed in minors.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ...... 2.) Capping plexes is too easy. Circling a button is boring, and doesnGÇÖt lead to engaging combat.
......
I don't think ccp needs to do anything to the actual mechanic of how plexes are captured. I am fine with orbitting a button so long as the other side is notified i am there. I would be against most of the pve activities that seemed intended to fill the time such as forcing us to shoot all the npcs or bunkers. I'm also not in favor of requiring us to fit some decrypter mod on our ships so we can hack something while we wait.
Orbiting the button means you have to be in a certain range of it so it is a good mechanism for pvp - there is no need to change that at all, IMO. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Susan Black
KA POW POW Inc
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:46:00 -
[552] - Quote
Late to the party, as usual. Good forum post.
Ideas I like:
- Remove NPC FW corp: Make FW more Player controlled, get rid of farmers, etc.
- More LP/Rewards for PVPing. (epic)
- Real-time events in space. Random NPC fights on stations, gates. Love it.
- Being able to rep ppl in-faction who are flashy without penalty. Being able to help legitimate allies without penalty is common sense.
- Make plexes worth something so we fight over them. Anything that promotes pvp.
Ideas I don't like:
- Removing police from high-sec. So Jita/Amarr/Rens can be even more laggy? Or so pirates can unsub when all the fighting moves to high-sec, and low-sec fw space dies?
- Allow alliances to join fw. Alliance mechanics revolve around sov in null-sec, so allowing them into faction war is pointless. More practical just to all join one corp, but men in this game are too egotistical to give up their CEO rights most of the time.
- Remove supers from low-sec. While I understand the sentiment, I think it would be enough to nerf fighter bombers in low-sec.
I don't care what you do to missions, I only do them when I'm bored or want a free SFI.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
488
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 05:28:00 -
[553] - Quote
Caerain - I updated the blurb about plexing to better reflect the views of the greater FW community - upon reviewing the relevant threads most are split on how to fix the plex situation, roughly half favor beefing up or balancing the NPC difficulty, adjusting the AI to avoid speedtanking, others like yourself favor elimination of PVE entirely.
Either way, the mechanics inside the plex are clearly something that needs attention, everyone agrees on that. |
Silence iKillYouu
The Innocent Criminals
58
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 06:56:00 -
[554] - Quote
Hans touched my pee pee |
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge Flatline.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 10:14:00 -
[555] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Cearain wrote:I would like it if when I was in a races complex there was a boost to the sensor strength of that race's ships. So in an amarr complex all amarr ships would get a huge boost to radar sensor strength. All ships in Gallente complexs would get a boost to Magnometric, all ships in minmatar would get a boost to ladar etc.
The idea would be that the complexes are set up to boost their own races ships. So if I am in the amarr militia flying a minmatar ship I would still get the bonus if I am in a minmatar complex.
The bonus would be considerable like 10xs the ship sensor strength. In other words ecm would be all but pointless if you are facing that factions ships in their own complex.
1) I think this would add some amount of role play even if small
2)) I think this would give some encouragement to fly racial ships. Although it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
3) It would give some small discouragement to using ecm ships and drones in plexes. I don't want to turn this into an ecm needs a nerf thread (I'm actually not really in favor of a nerf to ecm) but I think in the solo and small gang setting ecm is a bit overpowered. A griffin with multi specs can pretty much permajam every bc out there. No. This will just ruin things. If you take sov, everyone will be flying your ships (offensive or defensive) and when you lose it the other race's ships will be used. This will REMOVE variation to the pvp...
I think the vast majority of cearains ideas are ********, why you even read his posts still is beyond me. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 10:48:00 -
[556] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:Har Harrison wrote:Cearain wrote:I would like it if when I was in a races complex there was a boost to the sensor strength of that race's ships. So in an amarr complex all amarr ships would get a huge boost to radar sensor strength. All ships in Gallente complexs would get a boost to Magnometric, all ships in minmatar would get a boost to ladar etc.
The idea would be that the complexes are set up to boost their own races ships. So if I am in the amarr militia flying a minmatar ship I would still get the bonus if I am in a minmatar complex.
The bonus would be considerable like 10xs the ship sensor strength. In other words ecm would be all but pointless if you are facing that factions ships in their own complex.
1) I think this would add some amount of role play even if small
2)) I think this would give some encouragement to fly racial ships. Although it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
3) It would give some small discouragement to using ecm ships and drones in plexes. I don't want to turn this into an ecm needs a nerf thread (I'm actually not really in favor of a nerf to ecm) but I think in the solo and small gang setting ecm is a bit overpowered. A griffin with multi specs can pretty much permajam every bc out there. No. This will just ruin things. If you take sov, everyone will be flying your ships (offensive or defensive) and when you lose it the other race's ships will be used. This will REMOVE variation to the pvp... I think the vast majority of cearains ideas are ********, why you even read his posts still is beyond me. Because we can't risk having a CCP dev reading it and thinking it is a good idea - you might end up with something akin to what Soundwave suggested in regards to removing the navy from high sec...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
76
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 11:13:00 -
[557] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Caerain - I updated the blurb about plexing to better reflect the views of the greater FW community - upon reviewing the relevant threads most are split on how to fix the plex situation, roughly half favor beefing up or balancing the NPC difficulty, adjusting the AI to avoid speedtanking, others like yourself favor elimination of PVE entirely.
Either way, the mechanics inside the plex are clearly something that needs attention, everyone agrees on that.
Hans I appreciate what your trying to do here. But when you say:
"This is a list of issues, not a list of solutions. I think we all agree on the issues - so let this be the concrete message that gets sent, even if we don't all agree on how it should be fixed. "
I have to say that I don't agree that either of the above is an issue that needs to be fixed. I think your op comes the closest to a consensus so I gave it a like - me and about 20 others. Hell it seems there are over 6xs as many people who want ccp to start working on incarna again as people who agree this is what needs to be fixed in fw.
I'm just saying there are very few of us on these boards that agree on much when it comes to fw.
Not only do we have people who think about the mechanics and come up with different ideas about what should be fixed. But we have players who seem more concerned about who posted the idea than the idea itself. Yes some people never really grow out of that junior high mentality.
I think you and others have tried to get the fw community behind certain ideas but people just disagree. This is ok. I hope ccp reads what people suggested and more importantly, why they suggsted it, but ultimately CCP will just have to sort this out themselves. There is no clear strong consensus on anything that will really *fix* fw. The only issue we truly all agree on is that fw is broken.
Does anyone know what changes to fw are on sisi? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Kinis Deren
EVE University Ivy League
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:55:00 -
[558] - Quote
+1 likes to OP because FW is something I aspire to do soon.
We've seen that CCP can pull the proverbial rabbit out of the hat just when it matters and I hope that this thread inspires them to do the same for FW in the not too distant future.
Keep up the good fight! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
490
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 15:57:00 -
[559] - Quote
Cearain wrote:I have to say that I don't agree that either of the above is an issue that needs to be fixed. I think your op comes the closest to a consensus so I gave it a like - me and about 20 others. Hell it seems there are over 6xs as many people who want ccp to start working on incarna again as people who agree this is what needs to be fixed in fw. I'm just saying there are very few of us on these boards that agree on much when it comes to fw. Not only do we have people who think about the mechanics and come up with different ideas about what should be fixed. But we have players who seem more concerned about who posted the idea than the idea itself. Yes some people never really grow out of that junior high mentality.
Thanks Caerain - and I should clarify that my goal at this point is just to collate, condense, and clarify the wealth of suggestions and feedback that have been shared over several years of discussion. Thats why I stripped away my original list, which has a couple of things I personally wanted to see, in favor of the most popular discussion points made by the community in general. I could care less whether FW is fixed to my liking at this point, I just want to see progress as soon as possible and am trying to work with the CSM to give them what they've asked for going into the summit.
The five points each under "little fixes" and "big ideas" are among the most repeated suggestions for improvement that have been shared, though obviously there will still be some individuals that don't feel those are issues, even amongst the most vocal on the forums. Everyone's feedback here is valuable though, so definitely keep sharing your thoughts. It's impossible to obtain a 100% consensus on any given talking point, but that doesn't mean there aren't some common themes amongst the fix suggestions. NPC issues in plexes / missions are one of the oldest items on the to-do list, and even had a CSM resolution backing it historically, so I've included it on the list for now.
I refuse to be swayed by the idea that we are an obscure minority, and that Incarna somehow trumps FW in terms of fan popularity. I really think that most players have simply given up speaking up based on CCP's history of ignoring the issue, and that there is a huge base of players like Kinis Deren here that would welcome a healthy, functioning, FW system in lowsec. The past CSM resolutions were all passed because of huge player support for FW fixes, back when you could vote in support of proposals. Eventually the situation got so bad that the proposals were no longer about what to fix, but about the lack of attention and more importantly total lack of communication with players about FW.
I think now, its not a minority of players who want FW fixed, its a minority of players who are willing to fight for such fixes. And when we give up, that is the moment it really will become an abandoned feature.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
490
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 15:59:00 -
[560] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Does anyone know what changes to fw are on sisi?
Unless they've made a special announcement in the last 24 hours, there aren't any. Any FW fixes would be included in the next expansion release (I'm fairly certain Crucible will be a phased release just like the last few expansions) along with things like Assault Ships and such that they are working on but not finished yet. |
|
Gallactica
Shadows Of The Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:06:00 -
[561] - Quote
So bascially as it stands theres naffall changes being implemented / proposed changes planned for FW?
Nice waste of a thread..............again...........if this is the case.
Can one of the GM's confirm things are being looked at? or has it been shelved?
Would be nice to know where things stand either way. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
490
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:21:00 -
[562] - Quote
Gallactica wrote:So bascially as it stands theres naffall changes being implemented / proposed changes planned for FW?
Nice waste of a thread..............again...........if this is the case.
Can one of the GM's confirm things are being looked at? or has it been shelved?
Would be nice to know where things stand either way.
Actually, the developers have confirmed that they are working on a Faction Warfare improvement right now. Also, the CSM have an upcoming summit in December, and have said they will revisit FW with CCP during those talks. I've been speaking with the CSM to ensure they have everything they need from us to pass along to CCP.
The GM's are the wrong people to ask about this sort of thing, that's a whole different department dedicated to resolving in-game issues and account issues, they strictly deal with whats already live and in progress on Tranquility. |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
236
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:24:00 -
[563] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Gallactica wrote:So bascially as it stands theres naffall changes being implemented / proposed changes planned for FW?
Nice waste of a thread..............again...........if this is the case.
Can one of the GM's confirm things are being looked at? or has it been shelved?
Would be nice to know where things stand either way. Actually, the developers have confirmed that they are working on a Faction Warfare improvement right now. Also, the CSM have an upcoming summit in December, and have said they will revisit FW with CCP during those talks. I've been speaking with the CSM to ensure they have everything they need from us to pass along to CCP. The GM's are the wrong people to ask about this sort of thing, that's a whole different department dedicated to resolving in-game issues and account issues, they strictly deal with whats already live and in progress on Tranquility.
They are making sites respawn differently, not only after DT, which is great, but SO THE **** WHAT
Just NOW they are getting to it? Repair Drones should be able to repair anyone ... really, they should. -áThink of them as the first targetable subsystem if you're worried about PvP and for missions if someone wants Rep drones over a flight of Hobs, who cares. -áThere is no reasonable objection here other than it's always been that way (so was RR until recently). |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
76
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:24:00 -
[564] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: I could care less whether FW is fixed to my liking at this point, I just want to see progress as soon as possible and am trying to work with the CSM to give them what they've asked for going into the summit.
I don't care if they fix it in any particular way. But I do hope the improved fw offers small scale pvp that you can not get anywhere else in eve. I have to say if they make plexing into even more of a pve activity than it already is I will be very disappointed. Even if the pve is so rewarding that every carebear that ever did an incursion or level 4 mission all of a sudden decides to start plexing instead, it will still be a major let down.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: The five points each under "little fixes" and "big ideas" are among the most repeated suggestions for improvement that have been shared, though obviously there will still be some individuals that don't feel those are issues, even amongst the most vocal on the forums. Everyone's feedback here is valuable though, so definitely keep sharing your thoughts. It's impossible to obtain a 100% consensus on any given talking point, but that doesn't mean there aren't some common themes amongst the fix suggestions. NPC issues in plexes / missions are one of the oldest items on the to-do list, and even had a CSM resolution backing it historically, so I've included it on the list for now.
I refuse to be swayed by the idea that we are an obscure minority, and that Incarna somehow trumps FW in terms of fan popularity. I really think that most players have simply given up speaking up based on CCP's history of ignoring the issue, and that there is a huge base of players like Kinis Deren here that would welcome a healthy, functioning, FW system in lowsec. The past CSM resolutions were all passed because of huge player support for FW fixes, back when you could vote in support of proposals. Eventually the situation got so bad that the proposals were no longer about what to fix, but about the lack of attention and more importantly total lack of communication with players about FW.
I think now, its not a minority of players who want FW fixed, its a minority of players who are willing to fight for such fixes. And when we give up, that is the moment it really will become an abandoned feature.
Well I think allot of players who wanted solo and small gang pvp simply unsubbed over time. CCP never truly delivered a comprehensive mechanic for it. FW was an attempt so those players would naturally gravitate there. But by and large eve has been a game where the mechanics promote large fleet fights. Other than fw plexxing CCP has never really done anything comprehensive to promote solo or small scale pvp, and since it has remained broken that segment of gamers don't stay long. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
490
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:27:00 -
[565] - Quote
Apollo Gabriel wrote: They are making sites respawn differently, not only after DT, which is great, but SO THE **** WHAT
Just NOW they are getting to it?
Unfortunately, that's just player speculation. Team Pink Zombie Kittens didn't say what the fix was, only that they are programming it right now.
|
Maz3r Rakum
The Imperial Fedaykin
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:53:00 -
[566] - Quote
Lets fix it. |
Lord Meriak
Amarrian Retribution
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 18:53:00 -
[567] - Quote
Ccp no mention if fw in notes ?
is this another round table momnet again. Looking that way
|
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 19:38:00 -
[568] - Quote
They just don't mention it on the feature page, without any further information.
CCP never changes. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
494
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 20:32:00 -
[569] - Quote
Hentes Zsemle wrote:They just don't mention it on the feature page, without any further information.
CCP never changes.
They also don't mention nebulas or gate travel changes, or changes to fitting screen, etc, etc, etc.
Dont assume that just because FW isn't on the features page means they've skipped out on it again. There's a ton of stuff in the SiSi build not included in the Crucible page.
I'd be pessimistic too if the developers didn't already tell us they are actively programming a Faction Warfare iteration as we speak. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
76
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 21:59:00 -
[570] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:A nice change to the whole game would be to have boosters, neutral or not, only boosting when they are on the same grid as the people they're boosting. This.
BTW: There is a proposal for this in assembly hall here:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=10444&find=unread Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 02:20:00 -
[571] - Quote
Lord Meriak wrote:Ccp no mention if fw in notes ?
is this another round table momnet again. Looking that way
There was a comment in the SISI thread (about the current release) that stated there was content in the new SISI build that hadn't been mentioned in the dev blogs yet...
That being said, I am inclined to agree that it appears that there is no FW content in this patch (besides the customs office being seeded in the LP store at 1/2 the price it is in the concord store...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
77
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:58:00 -
[572] - Quote
This is not a bump.
Am I the only one who thinks catalysts and thrashers will be too powerful for minor plexes after they remove the rate of fire penalty and make the other changes to them (lower sig, increase armor and shields hp more capacitor etc.)?
I'm thinking they will be able to put out somewhere around 350-400 dps with faction ammo (the catalyst may even be able to get away with void ammo given the change to blasters and its tracking bonus) and have a tank of around 8k ehp. Why would anyone use any other ships for minors? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
503
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:20:00 -
[573] - Quote
Cearain wrote:This is not a bump.
Am I the only one who thinks catalysts and thrashers will be too powerful for minor plexes after they remove the rate of fire penalty and make the other changes to them (lower sig, increase armor and shields hp more capacitor etc.)?
I'm thinking they will be able to put out somewhere around 350-400 dps with faction ammo (the catalyst may even be able to get away with void ammo given the change to blasters and its tracking bonus) and have a tank of around 8k ehp. Why would anyone use any other ships for minors?
No, you're not the only one. On the other hand, the destroyer boosts would mitigate the Dramiel effect, making their use not so overpowered. I think it remains to be seen, personally I'd rather them fix the plex spawn timers and standings stuff (regarding repping) first, since those are a known issue. Once the known issues are fixed, than I'd say move on to the theoretical incoming imbalances.
This is of course, assuming we only get one fix worked on at a time. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
42
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:24:00 -
[574] - Quote
Cearain wrote:This is not a bump.
Am I the only one who thinks catalysts and thrashers will be too powerful for minor plexes after they remove the rate of fire penalty and make the other changes to them (lower sig, increase armor and shields hp more capacitor etc.)?
I'm thinking they will be able to put out somewhere around 350-400 dps with faction ammo (the catalyst may even be able to get away with void ammo given the change to blasters and its tracking bonus) and have a tank of around 8k ehp. Why would anyone use any other ships for minors?
From earlier estimates made a week ago or so the estimated dps was around 700 for a full gang cat and around 600 for a coercer. It goes down from there, but suffice it to say, they are going to ****.
Although they will be a great deal stronger, look forward to the new fad in fw frig fits, TD's on EVERYTHING. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
77
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:57:00 -
[575] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Cearain wrote:This is not a bump.
Am I the only one who thinks catalysts and thrashers will be too powerful for minor plexes after they remove the rate of fire penalty and make the other changes to them (lower sig, increase armor and shields hp more capacitor etc.)?
I'm thinking they will be able to put out somewhere around 350-400 dps with faction ammo (the catalyst may even be able to get away with void ammo given the change to blasters and its tracking bonus) and have a tank of around 8k ehp. Why would anyone use any other ships for minors? From earlier estimates made a week ago or so the estimated dps was around 700 for a full gang cat and around 600 for a coercer. It goes down from there, but suffice it to say, they are going to ****. Although they will be a great deal stronger, look forward to the new fad in fw frig fits, TD's on EVERYTHING.
Did the coercer get another mid slot?
I must not have done the math right. If what you say is true the new fad in fw frigs will be to leave them in the station - at least if you want to plex.
Hans: This won't mitigate the dramiel effect it will replace it with something worse. Drams could be beat with hookbills, daredevils and even sometimes slicers, thrashers, and comets or even 2 t1 frigs if they both had webs. There was a decent variety of ships and options. Outside fo plexes assault ships could easilly fight off drams and sometimes steal the occasional kill.
Destroyers are some of the most boring ships in eve. Everyone in a minor plex will be flying not only the same ships but the same 3 or 4 fits. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
145
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 21:08:00 -
[576] - 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. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
77
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:24:00 -
[577] - Quote
I don't have a problem with the boost as a whole. (at least not much of one) Destroyers are to frigaates what bcs are to cruisers. They just don't belong in minors anymore than bcs belong in medium plexes. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 02:17:00 -
[578] - Quote
In this matter, I do tend to concur with Cearain - desties are likely to be OP for minor plexes...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Deerin
Murientor Tribe
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:52:00 -
[579] - Quote
I wanted to drop by and tank Hans for summing up important points that need fixing. All these points are critical for future of FW. Especially the DT problem. CCP should base their changes on the original post.
I want to provide some ideas here.
Here is my idea about Conquering systems.
Right now conquering the system does give no rewards at all, and is being ignored by many. CCP has actually introduced a new contesting system to EVE: Incursions!!!
Make FW contesting like incursions. Make systems gather contest points normally. At half contest value the incursion script kicks in and rope pulling game begins. Defending side will try to decontest system while offending side willl push for a victory. Players who participate in this tug of war get LP counters on their journals. When offending side wins and conquers the system the offense side players gain that LP. When defending side wins and decontests system defensive side players gain that LP.
Also make sure that the systems initially have minors only...as the contest amount rises minor plex amounts decline and we get more meds....as the contest amount approaches max major plexes will begin to spawn and we'll get less and less medium plexes and no minor plexes at all. (Make sure you somehow nerf my rifter being able to speedtank amarr majors without any problems)
The systems that have incursion script active should be shown in the journal (like incursions) and playes should be able to see the progress. So that when a fw player logs in he should be able to know where to go....current FW button in stations doesn't provide necessary intel conveniently.
One more thing that bothers me is that I can go deep in enemy territory and do plexes there. Borders should have a meaning. Limit defensive plex spawn to 3 jumps from nearest enemy occupied system. So that fighting will occur at border systems and you need to push borders to advance in enemy territory.
Finally there is the problem of Amarr (Pator, New Caldari, Luminaire). I want to invade that place. Give us some key systems. When they are taken down let us be able to march to enemy Capital and conquer it.
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
77
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:20:00 -
[580] - Quote
Deerin wrote: One more thing that bothers me is that I can go deep in enemy territory and do plexes there. Borders should have a meaning. Limit defensive plex spawn to 3 jumps from nearest enemy occupied system. So that fighting will occur at border systems and you need to push borders to advance in enemy territory.
Good post and nice ideas. Of course, I will only quote the one thing I disagree with and that is the above.
The best way to reduce blobs is to spread out the territory that needs to be fought over. To the extent you limit the fighting to "border zones" you will have more blobbing to victory.
You will also have situations where the side with fewer active pilots can't do anything. This is too much like null sec to really add a new form of gameplay to new eden. I hope they keep all the systems at least somewhat in play so that smaller groups can coodinate and complete attacks in distant systems unless the other side splits up its blob.
I won't get into the back and forth as to whether this would be "realistic" or not, other than to say we have never fought wars with warp gates in space so we really don't know how it would work. But there are other reasons that could justify these systems which seem deep in one sides space to become contested.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge Flatline.
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:01:00 -
[581] - Quote
Whats wrong with making dessies stronger? They're cheap, and more accessable to newer players, everyone can fly them. What FW needs is new blood and not 100 bitter vets that ignore all the new players who end up leaving the militia because everything thinks said person is a spy, or isnt worth taking into their fleet. |
Pulgy
Spiritus Draconis
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:39:00 -
[582] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:Whats wrong with making dessies stronger? They're cheap, and more accessable to newer players, everyone can fly them. What FW needs is new blood and not 100 bitter vets that ignore all the new players who end up leaving the militia because everything thinks said person is a spy, or isnt worth taking into their fleet.
but they are spies Anyway. I agree FW needs new blood. Whenever one corp leaves FW we all feel it. Monkeys writing-á Shakespeare? That's like putting CCP in charge of game balance and content updates. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 02:28:00 -
[583] - Quote
Nothing is wrong with making them stronger - but if frigs are not usable in minors, that IS an issue...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 12:06:00 -
[584] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Nothing is wrong with making them stronger - but if frigs are not usable in minors, that IS an issue...
Frigs are not usable in minors now either so nothing changes. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 12:09:00 -
[585] - Quote
this thread is going downhill fast lol |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 17:03:00 -
[586] - Quote
Also:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=12772&find=unread
Very important for FW. Just saying.
I will be more inspired to undock if I get a pretty shiny new station to undock from. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 17:07:00 -
[587] - Quote
I want my 5 minutes back. 3 pages of trolling
/me shakes his head |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
164
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 17:11:00 -
[588] - Quote
http://www.eveonline.com/en/crucible/features/
Faction Warfare isn't on the features list anymore.
Feature Ninja Removed.
Nothing to debate anymore.
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |
Yogsoloth
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 18:00:00 -
[589] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/en/crucible/features/
Faction Warfare isn't on the features list anymore.
Feature Ninja Removed.
Nothing to debate anymore.
This made me laugh. FW is like the Rodney Dangerfield of the cosmos, no respect.
The total and utter lack of response from CCP on this one is almost insulting. Maybe not as bad as not showing up to their own roundtable meeting, but pretty close. What is obvious and continues as we move forward is the complete lack of respect and consideration for the FW community.
P.S. %#@& can we get a dedicated FW forum already ??? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
510
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 18:07:00 -
[590] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/en/crucible/features/
Faction Warfare isn't on the features list anymore.
Feature Ninja Removed.
Nothing to debate anymore.
Nebulas, Stargate navigation, and reskinning half the ships in the game, aren't on the feature list either, so I take it all those must have been scrapped as well??
There's nothing ninja about anything here, CCP has already state they are actively working on a feature improvement, that its taking a little bit to program and isn't on the first rollout of the expansion. It will likely be released along with Assault ships on the later update. This is not THE expansion list - its the first release fix list. All the other expansions have been phased rollouts, this one is no different.
CCP has been open about where they are at in the process, that FW is still the table not just as a discussion point, but that there is actually programmers programming a FW improvement. One obviously wont' be enough though, so I'm hoping the CSM takes note and keeps the pressure on CCP to keep moving forward with Faction Warfare.
I assure you, there is still plenty to discuss. When we give up, FW really will be abandoned. I appreciate everyone's ongoing input, 30 pages is awesome, even if it meanders into troll territory or fitting debates from time to time. |
|
praznimrak
Level Up
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 20:51:00 -
[591] - Quote
Keep roling great discussion. My youtube chanell: http://www.youtube.com/user/EveOnlineGameplay |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
172
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 20:58:00 -
[592] - Quote
FW whiners, best whiners. MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Jodis Talvanen
State War Academy Caldari State
125
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:13:00 -
[593] - Quote
Because FW is not on SISI yet ->
So it isn't likely going to be included in the winter expansion
CCP 1 players 0 |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
510
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:30:00 -
[594] - Quote
Denidil wrote:FW whiners, best whiners.
Troll bumps, best bumps :) |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:34:00 -
[595] - Quote
Denidil wrote:FW whiners, best whiners.
Looked you up on battleclinic. Lols. At least you got forum warrioring going for you :)
http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hwong Jian
SniggWaffe
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:39:00 -
[596] - Quote
Denidil wrote:FW whiners, best whiners.
Saw Morsus Mihi.
10 minutes later, still chuckling. |
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 04:04:00 -
[597] - Quote
Feature page seems to have been updated. Still no mention of FW... |
Elrich Kouvo
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 04:42:00 -
[598] - Quote
Dehlandrae wrote:On the topic of Alliances, why not also allow Militia and non-Militia corps to enter into Alliances with one another? Creating a Military-Industrial Complex of a sort.
Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed. I would. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
74
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 02:52:00 -
[599] - Quote
Elrich Kouvo wrote:Dehlandrae wrote:On the topic of Alliances, why not also allow Militia and non-Militia corps to enter into Alliances with one another? Creating a Military-Industrial Complex of a sort.
Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed. I would. This would be abused to no end. Corp mates repping corp members who are in FW when they are not in FW... That's a REAL good idea...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Elrich Kouvo
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 09:04:00 -
[600] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Elrich Kouvo wrote:Dehlandrae wrote:On the topic of Alliances, why not also allow Militia and non-Militia corps to enter into Alliances with one another? Creating a Military-Industrial Complex of a sort.
Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed. I would. This would be abused to no end. Corp mates repping corp members who are in FW when they are not in FW... That's a REAL good idea... Can't you already neut rep? Anyways I don't think corp members would travel way out to the battlefield anyways.... If they did wouldn't they just join FW too? |
|
Uppsy Daisy
Deteis Industries
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 12:25:00 -
[601] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:. Corp mates repping corp members who are in FW when they are not in FW... That's a REAL good idea...
FW is absolutely rife with non-FW alts remote repping FW players!
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:37:00 -
[602] - Quote
I couldn't even find the post I thought I made in this thread... and I may be way late here but I just want to make sure I said:
Soundwave's NPC removal proposal would be awful.
People have already noted why. Spreading a sparse war even thinner, trade-hub camping and brutal station games, Militia members with low sec can't join high-sec fights, zero safety for casual and new players while they prep/shop.
The edited OP is a one-stop-shop for issues that need fixing, and extreme elaboration on all of them can be reviewed by reading through this threadnought. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:52:00 -
[603] - Quote
Here's a request for you Hans, as if you haven't poured enough time into this already :
You've communicated with the CSM and recommended that we share our voice as well, can you provide some simple steps on who/how to communicate with to be most effective?
I'm a very casual player (hence my sparse presence on the forums and my EVE lifestyle choice.... FW) so it would be appreciated if you could point me in the right direction, having already engaged in it... I wouldn't know where to start . |
Hainnz
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 23:37:00 -
[604] - Quote
I would keep the FW missions solo-able, at least the levels 1-3 missions. This game already has a serious lack of fun solo/casual things to do in it. No point in making it worse. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
518
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 05:30:00 -
[605] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:Here's a request for you Hans, as if you haven't poured enough time into this already : You've communicated with the CSM and recommended that we share our voice as well, can you provide some simple steps on who/how to communicate with to be most effective? I'm a very casual player (hence my sparse presence on the forums and my EVE lifestyle choice.... FW) so it would be appreciated if you could point me in the right direction, having already engaged in it... I wouldn't know where to start .
No problem Damassys - I'm in the middle of answering some questions for Shalee's blog, which should answer your questions specifically along with a few others. I'll deliver them to her ASAP and she can post em up, I've just finished a crazy busy work week, barely time to sleep even between shifts, so pardon my brief (by my normal wall-o-text standards) answer here.
I promise I'll get back to you.....Soon(TM) |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
80
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 16:04:00 -
[606] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:Whats wrong with making dessies stronger? They're cheap, and more accessable to newer players, everyone can fly them. What FW needs is new blood and not 100 bitter vets that ignore all the new players who end up leaving the militia because everything thinks said person is a spy, or isnt worth taking into their fleet.
I don't have much of a problem with making them stronger but they no longer belong in minor plexes. They are going to completely overpower everything else that can go in them.
The only problem I have is that if they are going to be somewhere right between cruisers and frigates then they should have a scan resolution between a frigate and cruiser. Right thrashers have very high scan resolutions (I haven't checked the other destroyers)
Not only will new players not be able to fly *any* other frigates in minors but I anticipate it will be much harder to travel through gates (even with frigates) due to sensor boosted arty thrashers at every turn.
Again I think the comparision between cruisers and bcs should apply. Cruisers have a better scan res than bcs frigates should have a better scan res than destroyers.
As far as whether they are cheap and easy to get into they are so so. Its easier to train for faction frigates. Faction frigates are a bit more expensive but not much. Those tech 2 guns get expensive on destroyers. Moreover getting a racial frigate to five at least opens up more things for a new low sec pilot than destroyer 5.
Finally, because so many of their slots are high slots Advanced Weapons Upgrades becomes an important skill to train. I still don't have mine at 5 and, for me, just about the only reason to train it to 5 is to fly destroyers.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 18:17:00 -
[607] - Quote
Indeed a reduction in scan resolution for the destroyers would be a good way to re-balance them if it is needed. The obvious solution is just to add more classes of Plexes. One for T1 Frigs only, one for T1 Frigs and Dessies, so on and so on.
Obviously this is all just blowing smoke. Seven days till the expansion and no FW fixes in sight. For half the stuff were asking it wouldn't even TAKE that long. Like the Plex spawn time fixes. It annoys me the CCP is ignoring something that affects hundreds if not thousands of players in EVE and what would undoubtedly get them more Subs. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 19:44:00 -
[608] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I promise I'll get back to you.....Soon(TM)
Thanks a lot. I receive notifications on this thread, so I'll just keep an eye out for it.
Or you can message me directly or whatever is easiest. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 02:44:00 -
[609] - Quote
We should probably stop asking for anything and just be happy we are getting pretty clouds and stuff.
/tired of being optimistic http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
ghost st
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 12:21:00 -
[610] - Quote
FW needs more than just fixes against meta-gaming.
Imo, FW lowsec should 'feel' like a warzone. Going into enemy occupied territory should feel like it, getting attacked by enemy npcs when you cross into thier space, enemy (npc) resistance should be heavier the further you go into thier occupied space. Likewise friendly territory should feel friendly, with npcs manning posts at gates and such, protecting you should you come under fire, and engaging the opposing faction should they enter.
In other words the FW ai needs to be able to tell friend from foe, and act accordingly. Something the AI is currently not capable of.
|
|
Bengal Bob
Royal Order of Security Specialists
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 13:08:00 -
[611] - Quote
I realize CCP has no real plans for FW, or at least none they want to let slip.
A QUICK fix would be to resolve ONE of the issues we have in low sec.
Basically MANY neutral people come into Minmatar low sec systems. Most of these people are either sekret Amarrian sympathisers or just look at us funny. For self defence reasons, many of these people are pre-emptively killed to preserve the security of our systems and/or prevent them supporting the Amarr.
My suggestion is simple. FW Warriors should receive a sec status gain from killing members of the opposing faction. This will allow us to police FW areas and not have to waste time ratting. We wouldn't mind going flashy except for the annoying faction standing loss from repping friendlies(which is apparently unfixable), so this way will keep everyone slightly happier.
So CCP, help US help YOU. Give us sec status from killing the Amarr rats!!! |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:50:00 -
[612] - Quote
Oh wow, I really do like that idea. It'd be great to get some kind of sec boost for doing our jobs in militia. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
83
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 16:28:00 -
[613] - Quote
Bengal Bob wrote:... Basically MANY neutral people come into Minmatar low sec systems. Most of these people are either sekret Amarrian sympathisers or just look at us funny. For self defence reasons, many of these people are pre-emptively killed to preserve the security of our systems and/or prevent them supporting the Amarr.
How can anyone not look at you funny. If you looked in the mirror you would look at yourself funny. Might I suggest that you, and your minmatar friends with names like "Silence I kill you", are just paranoid.
IMO they should just make the sec status hits much smaller when you kill someone in low sec.
As I recall concord is sort of a police force that the factions all agreed on. Gaining favor with them by killing the other faction seems a bit odd but it could be done. It could actually lead to some interesting game play.
Say Gallente loses a bunch of systems. Maybe they would get upset with concord boosting the sec status of all the caldari that are killing gallente pilots. Maybe even enough that they pull out part of their regions from concord control! Then maybe portions Gallente high sec space would be patroled by the gallente navy and otherwise be like low or null sec. This could change over time.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Bengal Bob
Royal Order of Security Specialists
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 19:23:00 -
[614] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Bengal Bob wrote:... Basically MANY neutral people come into Minmatar low sec systems. Most of these people are either sekret Amarrian sympathisers or just look at us funny. For self defence reasons, many of these people are pre-emptively killed to preserve the security of our systems and/or prevent them supporting the Amarr. How can anyone not look at you funny. If you looked in the mirror you would look at yourself funny. Might I suggest that you, and your minmatar friends with names like "Silence I kill you", are just paranoid. IMO they should just make the sec status hits much smaller when you kill someone in low sec. As I recall concord is sort of a police force that the factions all agreed on. Gaining favor with them by killing the other faction seems a bit odd but it could be done. It could actually lead to some interesting game play. Say Gallente loses a bunch of systems. Maybe they would get upset with concord boosting the sec status of all the caldari that are killing gallente pilots. Maybe even enough that they pull out part of their regions from concord control! Then maybe portions Gallente high sec space would be patroled by the gallente navy and otherwise be like low or null sec. This could change over time.
Learn to humour |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
83
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:14:00 -
[615] - Quote
Bengal Bob wrote:Cearain wrote:Bengal Bob wrote:... Basically MANY neutral people come into Minmatar low sec systems. Most of these people are either sekret Amarrian sympathisers or just look at us funny. For self defence reasons, many of these people are pre-emptively killed to preserve the security of our systems and/or prevent them supporting the Amarr. How can anyone not look at you funny. If you looked in the mirror you would look at yourself funny. Might I suggest that you, and your minmatar friends with names like "Silence I kill you", are just paranoid. IMO they should just make the sec status hits much smaller when you kill someone in low sec. As I recall concord is sort of a police force that the factions all agreed on. Gaining favor with them by killing the other faction seems a bit odd but it could be done. It could actually lead to some interesting game play. Say Gallente loses a bunch of systems. Maybe they would get upset with concord boosting the sec status of all the caldari that are killing gallente pilots. Maybe even enough that they pull out part of their regions from concord control! Then maybe portions Gallente high sec space would be patroled by the gallente navy and otherwise be like low or null sec. This could change over time. Learn to humour
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
532
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 21:57:00 -
[616] - Quote
Bengal Bob wrote:
A QUICK fix would be to resolve ONE of the issues we have in low sec.
Basically MANY neutral people come into Minmatar low sec systems. Most of these people are either sekret Amarrian sympathisers or just look at us funny. For self defence reasons, many of these people are pre-emptively killed to preserve the security of our systems and/or prevent them supporting the Amarr.
My suggestion is simple. FW Warriors should receive a sec status gain from killing members of the opposing faction. This will allow us to police FW areas and not have to waste time ratting. We wouldn't mind going flashy except for the annoying faction standing loss from repping friendlies(which is apparently unfixable), so this way will keep everyone slightly happier.
So CCP, help US help YOU. Give us sec status from killing the Amarr rats!!!
Hahahahaha nice. I wholeheartedly support this. [AUTOZ] also has quite a bit of negative sec status from our relentless effort to "preserve security" by nuking anyone we suspect of being "sekret Amarrian sympathisers" or "Neutral industrials fueling the Pandemic Legion warmachine" .....and its JUST NOT FAIR. Why must we punished by gate guns when all we are trying to do is keep the area safe for the minmatar tribes? |
Ephia
Deteis Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 23:30:00 -
[617] - Quote
Bengal Bob wrote:I realize CCP has no real plans for FW, or at least none they want to let slip.
A QUICK fix would be to resolve ONE of the issues we have in low sec.
Basically MANY neutral people come into Minmatar low sec systems. Most of these people are either sekret Amarrian sympathisers or just look at us funny. For self defence reasons, many of these people are pre-emptively killed to preserve the security of our systems and/or prevent them supporting the Amarr.
My suggestion is simple. FW Warriors should receive a sec status gain from killing members of the opposing faction. This will allow us to police FW areas and not have to waste time ratting. We wouldn't mind going flashy except for the annoying faction standing loss from repping friendlies(which is apparently unfixable), so this way will keep everyone slightly happier.
So CCP, help US help YOU. Give us sec status from killing the Amarr rats!!!
It's sounds lovely, but can't ever make a reward for kiling opposing players apart from loot.
If this idea was ever implemented anyone wanting to repair their sec status would just join the militia, make an alt in the opposing militia, then kill the alt over and over again.
All systems that reward players for killing members of the opposing faction are open to this abuse.
This is why the reward system must be plexes or missions |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
85
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 23:40:00 -
[618] - Quote
Ephia wrote:Bengal Bob wrote:I realize CCP has no real plans for FW, or at least none they want to let slip.
A QUICK fix would be to resolve ONE of the issues we have in low sec.
Basically MANY neutral people come into Minmatar low sec systems. Most of these people are either sekret Amarrian sympathisers or just look at us funny. For self defence reasons, many of these people are pre-emptively killed to preserve the security of our systems and/or prevent them supporting the Amarr.
My suggestion is simple. FW Warriors should receive a sec status gain from killing members of the opposing faction. This will allow us to police FW areas and not have to waste time ratting. We wouldn't mind going flashy except for the annoying faction standing loss from repping friendlies(which is apparently unfixable), so this way will keep everyone slightly happier.
So CCP, help US help YOU. Give us sec status from killing the Amarr rats!!! It's sounds lovely, but can't ever make a reward for kiling opposing players apart from loot. If this idea was ever implemented anyone wanting to repair their sec status would just join the militia, make an alt in the opposing militia, then kill the alt over and over again. All systems that reward players for killing members of the opposing faction are open to this abuse. This is why the reward system must be plexes or missions
I think he was kidding.
At the risk of being laughed at, I will say it might work with the npcs though.
Thing is not all militia members want a high sec status though. If they want a low sec status and killed allot of npcs they would have to grind non combatants to keep their sec status low. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 23:31:00 -
[619] - Quote
Well it looks like there will be no Faction Warfare updates in the near future. Couldn't even take the five seconds to tell us even that there WON'T be an update in the upcoming patch. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
555
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 02:33:00 -
[620] - Quote
Everyone, please speak out in opposition to the CSM's handling of our discussion here.
Apparently, we are a "little thing" to be tacked onto a discussion about wormholes. If I am mistaken about the CSM's attitude about us, than I hope they clarify.
I won't say much more than that, I'm pretty upset at the moment. But please, focus your efforts on asking the CSM to make Faction Warfare a seperate and focused discussion, not a tacked on accessory to a thread about something else. Their handling of the topic belittlles our cause, and will not give it the gravitas necessary to convince CCP that is important enough to be talked about on its own merits once again.
Also, please do NOT fill this thread with a list of fixes. That work has already been done. If the CSM hasn't read the thread I am posting with, there's no point wasting your keystrokes repeating yourselves there.
What we need to do now is rally and convince the CSM to seperate FW from wormholes, and give the subject its own discussion.
Thank you all for your support. |
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 14:09:00 -
[621] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Everyone, please speak out in opposition to the CSM's handling of our discussion here. Apparently, we are a "little thing" to be tacked onto a discussion about wormholes. If I am mistaken about the CSM's attitude about us, than I hope they clarify. I won't say much more than that, I'm pretty upset at the moment. But please, focus your efforts on asking the CSM to make Faction Warfare a seperate and focused discussion, not a tacked on accessory to a thread about something else. Their handling of the topic belittlles our cause, and will not give it the gravitas necessary to convince CCP that is important enough to be talked about on its own merits once again. Also, please do NOT fill this thread with a list of fixes. That work has already been done. If the CSM hasn't read the thread I am posting with, there's no point wasting your keystrokes repeating yourselves there. What we need to do now is rally and convince the CSM to seperate FW from wormholes, and give the subject its own discussion.Thank you all for your support.
Hans I posted a longer version in that thread.
Fact is no one on the csm proper does small scale pvp. That is because ccp has always done things to encourage blobbing and those who like small scale pvp tend to leave. Sure lots of people claim to like it. But really they just want the other side to be smaller scale than them.
Now its all people who are willing to spend all day waiting to gank pve ships and players willing to spend their lives playing eve in order to be the next bob. CSM proves that there just aren't many people who like small scale pvp. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 08:11:00 -
[622] - Quote
I've done a short Q&A with Hans on Sov Wars here. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
154
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 09:18:00 -
[623] - 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.
|
Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 10:46:00 -
[624] - Quote
Pulgy wrote:[Anyway. I agree FW needs new blood. Whenever one corp leaves FW we all feel it.
QFT. Even when active individuals leave, it is felt by the entire warzone.
The best thing about FW is that its a rivalry. It's like UCLA vs. USC. Or a more general comparison, the USA vs. USSR during the Cold War.
There is a lot of history in Faction Warfare. NullSec is always shifting and changing, but FW is solid and consistent.
my2cents
|
Uppsy Daisy
Deteis Industries
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 16:38:00 -
[625] - Quote
For reference:
Crucible Patch Notes wrote:Fixed an issue where Factional Warfare systems would run out of combat sites. GÇÿOutpostGÇÖ sites of all sizes will now respawn every 30 minutes in all Factional Warfare systems.
Not enough, but a start I hope... |
Wendi Wu
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 16:43:00 -
[626] - Quote
From today's patch notes, which can be found here:
Quote:Exploration and Deadspace
Fixed an issue where Factional Warfare systems would run out of combat sites. GÇÿOutpostGÇÖ sites of all sizes will now respawn every 30 minutes in all Factional Warfare systems.
We'll have to wait to see how this works in practice, but if this is what it sounds like it's awesome! At last we're getting something, even if it's only a start! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
564
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 17:04:00 -
[627] - Quote
The fixing on the respawn timers is AWESOME. Thanks to all at CCP who listened to the players, this should give everyone more stuff to do around the clock when they log in.
An excellent starting point, here's hoping there's more to come in the pipeline.... |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 17:08:00 -
[628] - Quote
Wendi Wu wrote:From today's patch notes, which can be found here: Quote:Exploration and Deadspace
Fixed an issue where Factional Warfare systems would run out of combat sites. GÇÿOutpostGÇÖ sites of all sizes will now respawn every 30 minutes in all Factional Warfare systems. We'll have to wait to see how this works in practice, but if this is what it sounds like it's awesome! At last we're getting something, even if it's only a start!
This is the one thing about plexing that all the players have indeed agreed on. This does indeed show that CCP is reading and trying to do what we ask. (to the very limitted extent we have a unified voice.)
I don't think we will get 10s of thousands more doing plexing with this change but we shall see. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Yogsoloth
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 21:45:00 -
[629] - Quote
Hooray for being forgotten ! \o/ |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 01:07:00 -
[630] - Quote
Are those the medium plexes only? |
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
79
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 01:12:00 -
[631] - Quote
Some official response from CCP over what is next for FW is definately needed. Whilst this is of course welcome, it is a long way short of what FW needs to truely shine... Now - who wants to go kite some supers in Amamake using BC hulls with BS weapons???
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
80
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 04:09:00 -
[632] - Quote
I've created a post about how we are going to engage with CSM/CCP post crucile that can be found here.
Please continue to use this thread around improvement ideas - the other thread is to address the lack for CSM/CCP understanding/interaction with the FW community...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
87
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 04:21:00 -
[633] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:I've created a post about how we are going to engage with CSM/CCP post crucile that can be found here. Please continue to use this thread around improvement ideas - the other thread is to address the lack for CSM/CCP understanding/interaction with the FW community...
Please no more threads covering the same ground. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Retribution
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 06:40:00 -
[634] - Quote
Insomnia strikes, and so do I!
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
80
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 06:45:00 -
[635] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Har Harrison wrote:I've created a post about how we are going to engage with CSM/CCP post crucile that can be found here. Please continue to use this thread around improvement ideas - the other thread is to address the lack for CSM/CCP understanding/interaction with the FW community... Please no more threads covering the same ground. Which part of I am intending the new thread to focus on engaging with CCP/CSM post Crucible and to discuss getting a FW CSM representative do I need to explain. This isn't the same ground. The same ground would be discussing the broken features...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Faction Warfare
Southern Cross Empire Flying Dangerous
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 07:07:00 -
[636] - Quote
Posting in a thread entirely dedicated to me. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
87
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 20:43:00 -
[637] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Cearain wrote:Har Harrison wrote:I've created a post about how we are going to engage with CSM/CCP post crucile that can be found here. Please continue to use this thread around improvement ideas - the other thread is to address the lack for CSM/CCP understanding/interaction with the FW community... Please no more threads covering the same ground. Which part of I am intending the new thread to focus on engaging with CCP/CSM post Crucible and to discuss getting a FW CSM representative do I need to explain. This isn't the same ground. The same ground would be discussing the broken features...
I guess that first half of your original post were you start listing things we want changed seemed pretty similar to this one. Of course, there are already the 2 threads where the csm members have been posting. You know one thread was actually started by a csm for that purpose.
Its unclear why we would need a different thread to discuss this with them to begin with - I mean we are just posting links to this thread in those.
So what exactly is the point of yet another thread? This just makes it hard for the csm ccp or the players to follow. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
565
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 20:47:00 -
[638] - Quote
Faction Warfare wrote:Posting in a thread entirely dedicated to me.
Well, hello there! Nice to finally meet you. I'm a huge fan of yours, obviously. Too bad you don't get much respect. |
Astra Solare
Ophidia in herba
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 21:13:00 -
[639] - Quote
Faction Warfare wrote:Posting in a thread entirely dedicated to me.
There are rumors that there were many people IN You. Is that true? You could be a little more responsible |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 11:25:00 -
[640] - Quote
So what are the feelings on the plex respawn tweak?
From playing today, there is definitely a surge in activity overall, which is the positive point. But obviously there is a lot of steamrolling going on because of how fast you can flip a system.
Do you think the activity will be short-lived because occupancy is even LESS meaningful (because of it's ease)? Or do you think the abundance of plexes will keep drawing more people out than before?
Sadly, I think it's likely that interest will diminish rapidly. But at the very minimum, we'll have the short surge of activity, and with luck, they will actually work on an overhaul. |
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
163
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 12:27:00 -
[641] - 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. |
Bad Messenger
draketrain
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 12:34:00 -
[642] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
There is always one solution that works, kill the mutants ! |
Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 12:40:00 -
[643] - Quote
Because there is nothing more fun than a Bunker Bust, amirite guys? |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
88
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 16:40:00 -
[644] - Quote
I haven't actually done plexing yet, because its still pve. But if what I am understanding is correct this is a very good change.
Hirana Yoshida 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..
People still have to fit their ships for pve and therefore need to warp out when the enemy comes. Why should anyone use their main for this? This won't change as long as there are npcs to fight in these plexes.
Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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?
But that is why null sec is so blobby. They always have time to bring the blob before anything is truly lost. In other words because they have so much time to react small gang pvp is meaningless in null sec.
Its good if fw systems are becoming vulnerable fast. Can no one stop this one character from captuing 2 systems? Is he that good? The problem is not that things are moving fast the problem is the enemy either doesn't know where he is or doesn't care. Why wouldn't they care? Because they know he is pve fit and will just warp out if they come. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
marketjacker
Percussive Diplomacy
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 16:44:00 -
[645] - Quote
I'm so glad they nerfed the Federation Omni Directional Tracking Link. Really. As if Gallente FW missions weren't already the hardest to do with jamming rats and missile spam, now we have our key item raped and thrown under a bus by CCP's lack of foresight. You made an item that's just as good and cost almost nothing. Thanks for nothing CCP. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 17:26:00 -
[646] - Quote
I absolutely love everything that's come from Crucible except for the FW 'fx'.
Hirana said, "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."
I can't agree more.
They have pretty much made occupancy more pointless than before. And this fix didn't inspire anyone that I fly with to plex more, because what's the point? What is the point of flipping a system if it can be undone in a matter of hours- and there's still no incentive to do it other than bragging rights. Plexing is still mostly worthless to the average FW player, what do you think they are going to choose? Running missions to make ISK or orbiting a button 20 mins for no reward?
Granted, the downtime plexing spawn stuff was annoying, but just fixing that one thing doesn't really do anything for FW overall. http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
88
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 17:54:00 -
[647] - Quote
Shalee Lianne wrote:They have pretty much made occupancy more pointless than before. .
There used to be a tiny number of people who used to do plexing right after downtime. They could plex for an hour or 2 and accomplish something that they knew no one could really effect the entire rest of the day. Thats no longer the case. Now the people who sign in after them can have an effect.
So the very few people who would plex right after down time correctly feel that what they did is not as significant as it used to be. What minute significance plexing had has now been spread out over the 23 hours instead of just concentrated in 1 hour. So to some extent the significance of their plexing has been diluted by 23.
However for people like me who could never play after downtime - well I'm now getting my rightful 1/23rd of the pointlessness - if I want it.
This change is a good one. But the major problems remain:
The question is how can they make plexing meaningfull?
There are 3 general views:
1) give me isk/rewards for plexing (lp payout/require vp to cash in lp etc.)
2) give me consequences for plexing (don't let the enemy dock there/have stations change ownership etc.)
3) Make plexing an activity that the community respects. (make it pvp instead of pve - not just blob wins etc.)
I think CCP needs to look at all three of these things. But IMO the most important one, by far, is the 3rd. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
JaneBudden
Spiritus Draconis
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 18:26:00 -
[648] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Shalee Lianne wrote:They have pretty much made occupancy more pointless than before. . There used to be a tiny number of people who used to do plexing right after downtime. They could plex for an hour or 2 and accomplish something that they knew no one could really effect the entire rest of the day. Thats no longer the case. Now the people who sign in after them can have an effect. So the very few people who would plex right after down time correctly feel that what they did is not as significant as it used to be. What minute significance plexing had has now been spread out over the 23 hours instead of just concentrated in 1 hour. So to some extent the significance of their plexing has been diluted by 23. However for people like me who could never play after downtime - well I'm now getting my rightful 1/23rd of the pointlessness - if I want it. This change is a good one. But the major problems remain: The question is how can they make plexing meaningfull? There are 3 general views: 1) give me isk/rewards for plexing (lp payout/require vp to cash in lp etc.) 2) give me consequences for plexing (don't let the enemy dock there/have stations change ownership etc.) 3) Make plexing an activity that the community respects. (make it pvp instead of pve - not just blob wins etc.) I think CCP needs to look at all three of these things. But IMO the most important one, by far, is the 3rd.
yeah totally agree with Cearain ;-) the after downtime plexing problem seems to be fixed now;-)
|
Bad Messenger
draketrain
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 20:17:00 -
[649] - Quote
FW had only one real problem and that was plex spawning. CCP fixed that so now there should be possibility to have fights again.
It may take a while to see effects and i am sure that if nothing happens CCP will do something else, but this was best and easiest fix to do now. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
582
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 05:05:00 -
[650] - Quote
Hello again everyone!
Since the CSM are on their way to the summit, and were receptive already to the "top ten" list I forwarded them that is also at the top of this thread, I wanted to seize the opportunity to drop them a proposal to mention during the talks with CCP.
Here is my proposal to the CSM for an easy to implement Faction Warfare fix.
Simply put, lets get the ownership of stations to be swapped with a sovereignty change, and implement gate gun fire similar to GCC. It makes no sense to have enemy pilots hanging outside a militia-run station with zero consequence.
I oppose docking blockouts, only because while us veterans could manage, it unfairly punishes and deeply frustrates new players who may not have alt accounts to haul their stuff. I've had friends abandon their null-sec alliance because they lost all their stuff, I don't want people leaving Faction Warfare over losing everything this way.
If you agree with this proposal, please show some support in the thread linked above! I'm looking forward to your feedback, I'm sure many players would welcome this change and it's an easy one to program I'm sure. |
|
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 14:41:00 -
[651] - Quote
up! I'ts simple ccp: Give us LP for finishing plexes. Switch station ownership. |
Hwong Jian
SniggWaffe
25
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 16:15:00 -
[652] - Quote
Hans, I posted a reply in your proposal that, I believe, would make FW extremely interesting and make plexing pvp-centric. Or, at least, give everyone a vested interest in plexing. |
Jhaelee de'Auvrie
The Peerage
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 07:07:00 -
[653] - Quote
Having now played with the 30m respawn 'fix' to FW, I think this may finally push me away from plexing completely. Until actual fixes or atleast some balances are applied, there is no point.
One of the biggest problems with the plexing, pointless as it is right now, is the huge glut of plexes that spawn after downtime. That has not changed, all they did was allow for a thin amount of fighting to continue later in the day. It is still an issue of have a strong post DT crew or do not bother. Hours of pre-DT work end up being completely being undone by a handful of alts.
System occupation has at this point stopped really representing anything. Atleast pre-'fix' it showed the dedication of those few FW players that still put some measure the little bit of pride that could be gained. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
595
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 08:56:00 -
[654] - Quote
Jhaelee de'Auvrie wrote:Having now played with the 30m respawn 'fix' to FW, I think this may finally push me away from plexing completely. Until actual fixes or atleast some balances are applied, there is no point.
One of the biggest problems with the plexing, pointless as it is right now, is the huge glut of plexes that spawn after downtime. That has not changed, all they did was allow for a thin amount of fighting to continue later in the day. It is still an issue of have a strong post DT crew or do not bother. Hours of pre-DT work end up being completely being undone by a handful of alts.
System occupation has at this point stopped really representing anything. Atleast pre-'fix' it showed the dedication of those few FW players that still put some measure the little bit of pride that could be gained.
Is this because we just took Huola??? OH..... SNAP!!! WINMATAR VICTOR!!!!! SUCK IT, SLAVER SCUMM!!
....sorry. I umm... got a little unprofessional there. This is definitely something we should look into. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 10:52:00 -
[655] - 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. |
Mabego Tetrimon
Spiritus Draconis
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 11:52:00 -
[656] - Quote
i like the new sytem of fast spawn plexes, but as system control is total useless and unincentive i still do not see apoint in going plexing.
Make system control worthy. On a faction wide scale, like some fighting bonus in controlled system for example. Or spawn missions only in controlled systems. And on an individula scale. Like give LP to everyone who contributed conquering the system (something like in Incursions) just......something.
Also remove that fuckingt stupid bunker at the end and make it a "boss fight" to remember |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
91
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 14:26:00 -
[657] - Quote
Jhaelee de'Auvrie wrote:Having now played with the 30m respawn 'fix' to FW, I think this may finally push me away from plexing completely. Until actual fixes or atleast some balances are applied, there is no point.
One of the biggest problems with the plexing, pointless as it is right now, is the huge glut of plexes that spawn after downtime. That has not changed, all they did was allow for a thin amount of fighting to continue later in the day. It is still an issue of have a strong post DT crew or do not bother. Hours of pre-DT work end up being completely being undone by a handful of alts.
System occupation has at this point stopped really representing anything. Atleast pre-'fix' it showed the dedication of those few FW players that still put some measure the little bit of pride that could be gained.
I don't understand here. Is the post downtime still the key to success and that is the problem?
For me the problem is and always has been I don't want to go running around low sec doing pve.
It sounds to me like plexing is still a pve-drudgery instead of pvp-fun.
Until ccp changes this I am glad there are no consequences for occupancy.
One more question: The op is still hand wringing over pirate frigates going in minors. Is anyone flying anything other than a destroyer in minors now? I anticipate the destroyer boost will have done more to kill the diversity of ships in minors than any faction frigate ever could. Is it time to change the suggestion in the op? Kick both pirate frigs and destroyers out? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 14:37:00 -
[658] - Quote
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. Usually it starts with a few people running plexes in a system, you get a couple of scouts poking around, each side starts calling in backup and things escalate. Personally I would like to get more LP off of other players than the actual plex. Maybe a bonus for killing someone inside a plex, since the current amount you receive per kill is laughable? |
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 15:13:00 -
[659] - Quote
Who do we contact in CCP so they keep the ball rolling on planned updates for FW? We have to keep the pressure on CCP. I never understood ccp position on FW. FW has the potential to be massive cash cow for the company yet they choose to ignore it. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
178
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 15:25:00 -
[660] - 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.
|
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
91
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 15:38:00 -
[661] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
I don't think the fact that people are using alts has anything to do with the timing of the plex spawns. It has much more to do with the fact that no one wants to keep track of where, in the 200 systems of fw, the alts are plexing.
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? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
595
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 16:21:00 -
[662] - Quote
Cearain wrote: One more question: The op is still hand wringing over pirate frigates going in minors. Is anyone flying anything other than a destroyer in minors now? I anticipate the destroyer boost will have done more to kill the diversity of ships in minors than any faction frigate ever could. Is it time to change the suggestion in the op? Kick both pirate frigs and destroyers out?
Nope, not hand wringing at all. The list posted at the beginning of the thread is simply a summary of the topmost issues, as presented by the players, over the years they've been providing feedback. I've got my own personal gripe list, but it only partially overlaps that list and its more useful to summarize condensed player feedback to CCP rather than try to constantly trumpet my own agenda.
And when I last spoke with the CSM and had them post the topic and list on their internal CSM / CCP forums, I made a special point of mentioning that the destroyer boosts may indeed solve the pirate frig issue without needing to ban them from plexes. I simply relayed the fact that historically, minor plex ship permission balancing has been a common issue brought up by Faction Warfare players but may or may not need attention given recent developments. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
178
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 16:24:00 -
[663] - 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 |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
595
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 16:44:00 -
[664] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
*sigh*
Lets cut to the chase here. Reality is, fixing plexes so that they spawn around the clock has arguably been the top player-requested Faction Warfare bug fix of all time. LetsGÇÖs keep in mind that 6 months ago, the conversation was still stuck at GÇ£CCP, will you EVER get around to doing ANYTHING with Faction Warfare?GÇ¥
The developers were given a window with Crucible to implement as many player GÇôrequested fixed as possible, and chose to finally revisit Faction Warfare and tackle the number one bug. There is nothing constructive that will come from trolling them for doing this, even if it still needs more work. Clearly they are more receptive to feedback than many have given credit to them for, seeing as how many of us thought FW was genuinely left for dead. They didnGÇÖt just pull a random change out of a hat, they gave us one of the things we asked for.
IGÇÖm sorry youGÇÖre still not happy with plexing, but as for the spawn changes, you only have other Faction Warfare pilots to blame for that. TheyGÇÖre the ones that have asked for plexes to be spawned beyond the down time window. Lets keep criticism where criticism is due, rest assured if CCP is ridiculed by the community the one time they finally do something regarding Faction Warfare, it will do nothing to encourage them to continue iterating and developing this feature.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
595
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 16:48:00 -
[665] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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
These are some good ideas, but again, having previously talked about CCP as having poured cow dung onto dog ****, I can guarantee you the developers are already taking you less seriously. Respect is a huge part of communication, and many developers have been frank that when a person strays into troll territory, any interest in listening to them and their ideas goes out the window.
I urge all of us participating in the feedback here to keep the tone respectful and constructive. Rants will get us no where. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
178
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 16:56:00 -
[666] - 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 |
Enna Bairelle
Avant-Garde Monastery Cascade Probable
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 17:13:00 -
[667] - Quote
Maybe do FW like alliances, and take it to the next level. I mean, allow them to take sov in nullsec, and everything going with it. It would be fun to see the Gallente Federation in Cloud Ring and the Caldaris in Pure Blind, fighting each other for REAL sov warfare, not only a "Contested" status in losec systems. They wouldn't be able to build supercaps anyway, but they would have access to more PvP tools - like JBs and cynojammers - IMO if it happens i would be the first one to join FW
Oh and Fix the FW plexs, put a reward on it - maybe with LPs ? And make it MOAR interesting for everyone that wants to PvP but that doesn't like blobs. Scanning all day long to found a f*ckin FW plex that would give me anything really worthy and fighting for totally virtual sov, sorry but no. Just, no. Maybe do FW systems like "semi-nullsec" systems ? Like real sov warfare but without timers ? Station bashing ? Something ? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
595
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 17:24:00 -
[668] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:Oy! I made my snide post AFTER you made your Huola blurp!!!
Perhaps it was a lapse in judgement, but I could only do this "neutral, professional, cross-faction advocate" thing for so long before I had to have a little fun!!
It doesn't really mean anything in the greater scheme of things, but I'm still proud of my comrades-in-arms for their recent accomplishment.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
596
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 17:31:00 -
[669] - Quote
Enna Bairelle wrote:Maybe do FW like alliances, and take it to the next level. I mean, allow them to take sov in nullsec, and everything going with it. It would be fun to see the Gallente Federation in Cloud Ring and the Caldaris in Pure Blind, fighting each other for REAL sov warfare, not only a "Contested" status in losec systems. They wouldn't be able to build supercaps anyway, but they would have access to more PvP tools - like JBs and cynojammers - IMO if it happens i would be the first one to join FW
Why would we be able to hold nullsec Sov but NOT be able to build supercaps?? That would ensure we are simply crushed by the surrounding powers. I dont even think its possible to hold sov in nullsec for any length of time without a supercap fleet.
Besides, I don't really know that the various factions would even want to fight out in nullsec if they were given the chance. I for one hate the style of PvP that exists out there - supercap battles or 300 person battleship attrition wars involving zero pilot skill is not my idea of fun.
There are plenty of ways to make faction sovereignty meaningful in lowsec regions, I truly believe if most of us wanted nullsec gameplay we'd simply join a nullsec alliance. I can't speak for everyone though. |
Enna Bairelle
Avant-Garde Monastery Cascade Probable
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 17:34:00 -
[670] - Quote
Quote:Why would we be able to hold nullsec Sov but NOT be able to build supercaps?
Quote:I for one hate the style of PvP that exists out there - supercap battles - ...
You gave yourself the answer.
PS : This is only my two cents, I'm not speaking for everyone. I'm just saying what I would find fun... ;) |
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
92
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 19:52:00 -
[671] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote: One more question: The op is still hand wringing over pirate frigates going in minors. Is anyone flying anything other than a destroyer in minors now? I anticipate the destroyer boost will have done more to kill the diversity of ships in minors than any faction frigate ever could. Is it time to change the suggestion in the op? Kick both pirate frigs and destroyers out?
Nope, not hand wringing at all. The list posted at the beginning of the thread is simply a summary of the topmost issues, as presented by the players, over the years they've been providing feedback. ....
By op I meant "original post" not "original poster". And yes I agree you did a good job sorting through the concerns and finding those that surface the most. Players definitely did allot of hand wringing about pirate ships in minor plexes and your op reflects that.
I think the pirate frigate issue is now moot with destroyers making all other ships that can enter minor plexes obsolete. I think in general we just want ccp to look at what is allowed into minor plexes. Personally I think they should create a rookie plex that allows t1 frigates and maybe faction frigates (not pirate faction) and then the minor plexes should let in destroyers pirate frigates and t2 frigates. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
92
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 20:09:00 -
[672] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:....lots of ideas of how things spawn.... PS: Still keen on the border concept, just not relevant to spawn mechanics which you asked about
I'm glad you didn't bring up the border concept.
I can't really say I entirely understand your post. But as long as it leads to frequent quality small scale pvp it would be fine with me.
In any event I do think CCP will need to tweak with how often plexes spawn. There can't be so many plexes that both sides can run plexes 23/7 without a fight. But then again there can't be too few so that the entire militia just needs to plant a blobs within reach of 6 or 7 systems.
How many and how often plexes spawn is definitely something that needs to be iterated on. They may have to increase the number of spawns if fw starts to actually grow in numbers.
I'm just saying lets not jump on ccp's back because they don't have the timing right. They definitely did a good thing by making more plexes spawn at other than downtime.
As far as *how* plexes spawn, I don't care too much. Just don't tell me I have to start fitting some sort of stupid pve hacking module or a scan probe launcher instead of guns to my ships. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
92
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 20:13:00 -
[673] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:Oy! I made my snide post AFTER you made your Huola blurp!!!
"snide comment" as in singular? If CCP stops listening to people after snide comments then they will surely not listen to any of us who have been posting about fw for more than 6 months. I guess its time to visit the character bazarr. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 15:51:00 -
[674] - Quote
I think FW plexing should be elevated to to it's own mini profession like PI and Incursions. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 00:42:00 -
[675] - Quote
A few things here, and a few things from Hans' proposal I wanted to comment on:
PvE is still an issue, but I don't think the solution is very complicated. The problems are simple: -PvP ships (particularly passive tanks) are not ideal for plexes -individual alts can speed-tank them
To fix both problems, rebalance the NPCs. Make there be ONE set of them to clear out, and balance their total EHP so that (for example) 2 players with PvP ships, appropriate for the plex size, could wipe them out fast enough to avoid screwing up their tanks. Also give them webs, or some other anti-frig buff.
If done correctly, the result should be that: -PvP ships can steam-roll the NPCs without changing out your fit, and then be free to PvP -the rebalanced NPCs prevent single alts in cheap ships from running larger plexes
Also (depending on balance) it could promote small groups by keeping it practical as a solo'er, but making that much more smooth with a partner.
Remember that if we remove NPCs entirely, that it will be even EASIER for alts to run the plexing war. It needs to be harder for them, and easier for PvPers. This may not be a flawless proposal, but I'm sure many will agree on the results that need to be achieved.
On the same subject was a suggestion that plex timers should be based on the number of players running it. I think there is potential there if all possibilities are considered. It could definitely nerf alt plexing, but it would also inadvertently nerf the solo playstyle. To ensure it doesn't totally unbalance something, my take on it is something like this:
-with one player inside, timer starts at something like 150% of current timer values -2 players drops in to 100% -3 players or more drops it bellow 100%
And something else that might help in this subject, either in place of, or in addition to the timer-value-modifiers above, is if the timer would count down faster and faster as long as no opposing ships entered the plex.
As an attacker, obviously you want one of two things: get a fight, or complete the plex. If no one is showing up to defend, why should you have to wait the full time to close the plex? And if a defender does show up, they are hindering you that much more by resetting the rate at which the timer counts down.
Ok, other comments in a new post... gotta work on my text-walling :P |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 01:00:00 -
[676] - Quote
Someone suggested a boarder mechanic, where at least one adjacent system would need to be owned before that system could be taken. Similarly, if a system was cut off from all adjacently owned systems, properties in that system would change (like reduced enemy plex timers).
I have to say that I really like this idea because of the potential for concentrated fighting. And at the same time, I don't think it would concentrate it to the point where it would generate problems. With the size of the FW battlefield, there would still be several fronts, and each of them could shift in interesting ways and keep tactics fresh. Mix this with some form of Hans' proposal to affect stations, and the war could get exciting... imagine that!!! heheheh
One other comment I had was on players changing over to the winning side if they are given advantages in owned ststems...
I really don't foresee that being an issue. Sure I've seen some people change sides for ***** and giggles, but the VAST majority of players I've interacted with have been loyal to one side, just because of the nature of the play-style involved. You create enemies and friends, and those generally don't change because you'd prefer basic advantages.
This also speaks to blobbing. It was commented that people will flood the winning side and steam-roll, and that if you change the plexing timer based on players inside the plex, that people will just blob up. Aside from the fact that I don't think it will happen nearly as much as is feared, I say "who cares!".
If I don't want in a blob, I don't join it. If I don't want to be blobbed, I avoid it.
Players will do what they want, and as long as there are opportunities to stay small, people will take them and that style will stay active indefinitely. That's really what we're talking about here, promoting the small stuff.
....if you really want to get into FORCING anti-blob play, we need to discuss limiting the number of ships from each opposing side that are allowed into a given plex. Which is something I brought up recently, and think it could be really good. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
623
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 05:55:00 -
[677] - Quote
Quote: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
I was quick to jump on Hirana, only because I feel like the work we're doing here is so fragile and I want so badly for it to pay off, making me overly sensitive to people cursing the Dev's in our feedback.
I wanted to say though, that I should have given this concept more credit to begin with, as it is a fantastic base model for a plexing revamp. I actually love the Assault Pod idea, and maybe they can be shot out of ships like bombs or probes, and i also like the idea of stacking them. Instead of just orbiting the button, you gotta get in there and launch more marines to win the fight....
The only way this could be EVEN BETTER is to simply use Dust 514 mercs. Why not build some maps that are space bunkers? something a little more close quarters to break up the monotony of planetside warfare. Whenever you launch an Assault Pod, your paid merc friends get to spawn in the bunker and do their thing. Dust matches could easily be fought and won in the amount of time it takes for fleets to orbit the button. And here's the bonus - with cross platform comms, orbiting that button would be WAY more fun if you actually heard troops getting slaughtered inside. Effing GLORIOUS 'twould be.
Dust 514 matches in an internal bunker map would address the limit on troops (you'd have to actually get real people to assist, there might be a player cap in a map as well), and the timer issue - timers would be variable depending on the skill of your hired hands. If they're ruthless, your team can GTFO and escape in ships quickly - if you go the cheap route you may be orbiting a while waiting for a victory, and have to stave off enemy fleets in the mean time.
Of course, all this would work just as well planetside, you would have to make transport of mercs to and from the planet take a bit of time, to force you to hold a fleet alongside the planet while their troops are beamed up. You either hold the field, and get your troops out alive, or you bail and your troops get slaughtered (remember that trailer??)
And Hirana, I absolutely agree with reducing spawn rates to a steady pace, and ONLY having one launch at DT (Ok, maybe one of each size in play in the warzone at any time) If there's a bunch spawning at once post downtime, clearly that's an issue to be fixed.
Cmon FW junkies - tell me you dont want to see Assault Pods with paid Dust bunnies duking it out over a plex while you protect the getaway ship, with cross platform chat so you can yell at them to hurry the eff up, cause fighting would be happening in space while ***** going down with the bunnies, either side could be losing and calling for retreat....tell me that wouldn't be a rad alternative to button orbits on preset timers.....
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
623
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 05:59:00 -
[678] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote: ....if you really want to get into FORCING anti-blob play, we need to discuss limiting the number of ships from each opposing side that are allowed into a given plex. Which is something I brought up recently, and think it could be really good.
CCP already has the tools they need to reduce blobbing (as much as is feasibly possible). I personally feel hard caps on ship entries (except wormholes, conceptually the mass limit makes a lot of sense) breaks the sandbox, but Incursions are set up to simply reduce the payout if you blob to win.
Assuming that plexing actually becomes lucrative and attractive, CCP can easily scale rewards to ship numbers in the plex, and dole out Faction LP at the rate that rewards the smaller groups. Easy fix, without just making forced arenas.
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 09:14:00 -
[679] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:CCP already has the tools they need to reduce blobbing (as much as is feasibly possible). I personally feel hard caps on ship entries (except wormholes, conceptually the mass limit makes a lot of sense) breaks the sandbox, but Incursions are set up to simply reduce the payout if you blob to win.
Assuming that plexing actually becomes lucrative and attractive, CCP can easily scale rewards to ship numbers in the plex, and dole out Faction LP at the rate that rewards the smaller groups. Easy fix, without just making forced arenas.
If you're looking at the act of plexing as an activity, then reward balancing is important. And I do think it should be done, regardless of other modifications. But my comment is coming from a strictly PvP mindset.
Plexes already have arena properties. The ship restrictions are meant to keep you from getting wildly overpowered. I would consider it an iterative improvement to simply add a numbers restriction to compliment the ship restriction. I can't think of a negative effect of such a change. I can only imagine that it would reduce the variety of circumstances where players have to run from overwhelming enemy forces, and where players engage in what they feel is not a fair fight, neither of which is fun.
Keep in mind that this suggestion doesn't have to apply to all plexes. If we're concerned about the sandbox, we should be creating more choices for players. Right now there are the standard plex rules, but they are so basic that they actually reduce the number of ways you can go about plexing. If there were more types of plexes in terms of restrictions, NPC execution, layout, timers/objectives... then players could choose what types suit their play-style and likely encounter enemies that share their style which in turn will lead to more satisfying fighting. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
96
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 11:07:00 -
[680] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:Someone suggested a boarder mechanic, where at least one adjacent system would need to be owned before that system could be taken. Similarly, if a system was cut off from all adjacently owned systems, properties in that system would change (like reduced enemy plex timers).
I have to say that I really like this idea because of the potential for concentrated fighting. And at the same time, I don't think it would concentrate it to the point where it would generate problems. With the size of the FW battlefield, there would still be several fronts, and each of them could shift in interesting ways and keep tactics fresh. Mix this with some form of Hans' proposal to affect stations, and the war could get exciting... imagine that!!! heheheh.
Consider the current occupancy map and how easy it would be for a blob or 2 to cover the necessary systems. If such a system was ever implemented it would be even worse.
Damassys Kadesh wrote: One other comment I had was on players changing over to the winning side if they are given advantages in owned ststems...
I really don't foresee that being an issue. Sure I've seen some people change sides for ***** and giggles, but the VAST majority of players I've interacted with have been loyal to one side, just because of the nature of the play-style involved. You create enemies and friends, and those generally don't change because you'd prefer basic advantages.
This also speaks to blobbing. It was commented that people will flood the winning side and steam-roll, and that if you change the plexing timer based on players inside the plex, that people will just blob up. Aside from the fact that I don't think it will happen nearly as much as is feared, I say "who cares!".
If I don't want in a blob, I don't join it. If I don't want to be blobbed, I avoid it..
The occupancy mechanics shouldn't encourage blobbing either. Having artificial rules where timers run faster the more ships you have in a plex does that. CCP has always tried to encourage people to form groups and now they have a game where blobbing is king. I know they want blobs in null sec so they can talk about large fleet fights with thousands of pilots. ThatGÇÖs fine and I agree thatGÇÖs pretty nice. IGÇÖm just saying offer *one* mechanic for those who do solo or small scale pvp.
Also consider that if the mechanics do encourage blob to win, then you are simply saying - if you don't want to blob then don't plex. I think null sec already fills that role. If you don't want to blob don't do null sec warfare. Well if I donGÇÖt want to blob what mechanics are for me?
For me I wish ccp would provide small scale and solo pvpers a *single* mechanic in new eden. I think fw plexing is the obvious choice - I see no reason to make mechanics to encourage plexes to be blobbed.
As far as people switching sides - I don't think many people admit they switched from say amarr to caldari or minmatar because the missions are easier. But some openly admit this, and others probably did it for that reason anyway. But the more important problem isn't so much people switching itGÇÖs new people joining. As someone who is looking to join fw do you think they will want to join the faction where you have to grind 4 xs as long to make the same isk as the other side because all your agents are imprisoned?
Most people don't care enough about the role play back story to willing accept having to spend 4xs as long grinding the same isk for their ships. This means more and more people will join the winning side even if those already in the fight will stay loyal.
Damassys Kadesh wrote:
Players will do what they want, and as long as there are opportunities to stay small, people will take them and that style will stay active indefinitely. That's really what we're talking about here, promoting the small stuff.
....if you really want to get into FORCING anti-blob play, we need to discuss limiting the number of ships from each opposing side that are allowed into a given plex. Which is something I brought up recently, and think it could be really good.
I am not a fan of the artificial limits on numbers of ships entering plexes. The blob will just camp the gates anyway, so it wonGÇÖt accomplish much.
Just donGÇÖt make rules that encourage blobbing like GÇô concentrating the war zone into one border GÇô making timers go faster the more people you have GÇô making the npcs require you to have a large group. ItGÇÖs not that hard.
Seriously if all of eve is going to be about he who gets the larger group always wins every hour of every day and a solo or small gang pilot will never have anything to do, IGÇÖm leaving. FW plexing is sort of a last hope for eve for me. I see nothing else that is even close to promising in eve.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
96
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 11:20:00 -
[681] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:A few things here, and a few things from Hans' proposal I wanted to comment on:
PvE is still an issue, but I don't think the solution is very complicated. The problems are simple: -PvP ships (particularly passive tanks) are not ideal for plexes -individual alts can speed-tank them
To fix both problems, rebalance the NPCs. Make there be ONE set of them to clear out, and balance their total EHP so that (for example) 2 players with PvP ships, appropriate for the plex size, could wipe them out fast enough to avoid screwing up their tanks. Also give them webs, or some other anti-frig buff.
If done correctly, the result should be that: -PvP ships can steam-roll the NPCs without changing out your fit, and then be free to PvP -the rebalanced NPCs prevent single alts in cheap ships from running larger plexes
Also (depending on balance) it could promote small groups by keeping it practical as a solo'er, but making that much more smooth with a partner.
Remember that if we remove NPCs entirely, that it will be even EASIER for alts to run the plexing war. It needs to be harder for them, and easier for PvPers. This may not be a flawless proposal, but I'm sure many will agree on the results that need to be achieved.
I agree with allot of what you say here. I think ewar is a decent answer for alts taking plexes. I still think we can do without the npc all together. But if they have to leave them in then there are options. What you describe seems tolerable but I would add give the npcs lots of target painters and webs.
Here is a discussion I had with superchair on the same issue. There is another proposal with how npcs would work. I think its a bit better at promoting pvp even though it eliminates alts in rookie ships doing plexes.
Cearain wrote:Super Chair wrote:The whole NPC situation is tricky. Completely removing NPCs will give rise to just everyone and their mother making several trial (or non trial) accounts with recycleable, untrained, stabbed plexing alts in cheap little frigs. NPCs serve some purpose in this fashion. I believe that EWAR should be completely removed from all NPCs in FW plexes (or at the very least, have the number of EWAR NPCs severely reduced in a plex). Another Issue at least with major plexes is NPCs take too long to die if you're solo/in a small gang. I think the EHP of the NPC battleships/Elite EWAR boats should be reduced, making them easier to dispatch with a BC. A full spawn (at least in terms of missiles) is devastating and the DPS should be lowered (but increase explosion velocity to help with smaller targets, ie, kill afk speed tankers), maybe even nerf npc dps across the board some. The overall function of the NPCs should be to force players to at least bring an appropiately sized ship and to eliminate the "untrained alts" so people just can't afk cap plexes with them. There's a lot of tweaking to be done with the NPCs but I think this is a step in the right direction.
Ok I agree that the npc part is tricky. I think ccp can do away with them completely, but I agree your concerns are valid. I like the idea that the missiles would have increased explosion velocity. Along the same lines consider these ideas. 1) Have an "alarm beacon" spawn say at 3minutes and 6 minutes for a minor and say 3 times for a medium 4 times for a major. f th alarm is not destroyed in 2 minutes the rats as described below will spawn. The minor alarm will tank 50 dps. The medium wil lank 150 dps. The major (bc and down) will tank 350 and the major open will tank 500. These are rough numbers. They are pretty low because not all fw pilots have top skills. Moreover some pvp fits do not do allot of dps. For example a merlin might have 2 neuts insead of rockets launchers. 2) Make it so the all the rats have *lots* of target painters and missiles. *No other ewar* (edit I suppose webs would be ok) The target painters and missiles would mean that they can not be speed tanked by fast frigates. This would make it so pvpers could still kill the rats without having to fit a lame pve tank. Yet noob ships and t1 frigates would not be able to tank the npcs and run the major sites.
The beacon alarm would be paused when an enemy enters the plex. It would then start going if the enemy left. I think this would solve the problem and people running the plexes could still fit a proper buffer pvp tank. What do you think?
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 09:20:00 -
[682] - Quote
I think there are many ways that NPCs could be rebalanced to make gameplay better. The problems are simple enough. Don't penalize PvP fits, and nerf the effectiveness of alts. Any method (be it one of our visions or not) that will make this happen, will be welcome.
---
As far as timer speed, number restrictions, and boarders go... I feel that you (Cearain, and maybe others) have a somewhat irrational fear of blobs... You manage to find fault in many suggestions because blobing could theoretically get in the way of fun. While you may have had more experiences than I that validate these concerns, I just can't believe that it's enough of a problem to completely invalidate the ideas. And in the case of the last few posts, I only see ways of reducing blobbing, not promoting it.
As examples:
In the theoretical boarder mechanic, I can not imagine that one militia will be able to blob up all boarder systems for hours on end and be invulnerable, AND completely squash all small gang activity (especially if number-restrictions on plexes were in place... see next).
In the theoretical number-restricted plex, if your small gang is inside, then what does it matter that the enemy is blobbing the accel gate?.... isn't that an example of how it PREVENTS blobbing? The large numbers that the enemy has can not all enter the plex and BLOB you. Your smaller gang can easily sneak around them and enter subsequent plexes, and remain safe from being blobbed. Their only option would be to match your numbers and give you a more reasonable fight.
Then for timer speed, if there's no effect after say 3 or 4 players being inside, then it gives no advantage to blob up to like 20-40 in one plex (assuming number restrictions are not in place to prevent that). So blobbing would be no more effective than having a small gang 5-10 strong...
---
I am also a blob hater, for sure. That's why I'm talking about these things. And I do my best no to let blobs ruin my fun. If I can work around them, I do, and if changes are made to help me avoid them further, even better! I just think we can spice things up and generate more diversity in the fighting. Blobbing WILL occur, but if fighting of all types increases, then all play-styles benefit. Right?
---
One other quick comment on the winning side getting flooded. I think the problem that you foresee could be avoided by including additional balancing to keep it desirable to be on the losing side. Sure the quantity of agents in low-sec might be shot, but if the rewards for taking back systems increased as your side started losing, or something of that nature, the balance could be kept.
Plus they need to make plexing itself more profitable. It all needs to come together. One idea may rely on another, just like concentrating the fighting to a smaller number of systems (via boarders) but implementing anti-blob mechanics in order to keep the fight-quality high.
.....god damn text-wall! don't hate me |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
96
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 14:59:00 -
[683] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:I think there are many ways that NPCs could be rebalanced to make gameplay better. The problems are simple enough. Don't penalize PvP fits, and nerf the effectiveness of alts. Any method (be it one of our visions or not) that will make this happen, will be welcome.
I think we can step back even further and state what we want in the end.
I want to be able to get 4-7 quality small scale pvp fights in 2 hours of play. I *don't* want them to be prearranged arena style fights or asking for fights in local.
I have about 2 hours from the time I put the kids to bed until I need to go to bed myself. I'm tired of telling my wife I am going to play a computer game by myself for 2 hours and have absolutely no fights that are even half way exciting happen in that time.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
96
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 03:00:00 -
[684] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:As far as timer speed, number restrictions, and boarders go... I feel that you (Cearain, and maybe others) have a somewhat irrational fear of blobs... You manage to find fault in many suggestions because blobing could theoretically get in the way of fun. While you may have had more experiences than I that validate these concerns, I just can't believe that it's enough of a problem to completely invalidate the ideas. And in the case of the last few posts, I only see ways of reducing blobbing, not promoting it.
As examples:
In the theoretical boarder mechanic, I can not imagine that one militia will be able to blob up all boarder systems for hours on end and be invulnerable, AND completely squash all small gang activity (especially if number-restrictions on plexes were in place... see next).
In the theoretical number-restricted plex, if your small gang is inside, then what does it matter that the enemy is blobbing the accel gate?.... isn't that an example of how it PREVENTS blobbing? The large numbers that the enemy has can not all enter the plex and BLOB you. Your smaller gang can easily sneak around them and enter subsequent plexes, and remain safe from being blobbed. Their only option would be to match your numbers and give you a more reasonable fight.
Ok several things. With the small number of players that actually do plexing now the borders wouldn't be a problem. Its just that it is limitting so if the numbers ever grew by 10 or even 100 thousand then there would be blobs. Why create mechanics that are limitted. Even if a large corp takes over you will see the blobbing. It seems foreign now because fw doesn't matter and its broken. But when I first started reikoku had a short stint with minmatar. That one corp lead to blobs. It made it impossible for us to do anything. I think the gallente were in that situation at certain times. But I wasn't there so they can speak for themselves.
But the fear of ccp creating a mechanic where the blob = iwin button is not an irrational fear.
If you are in the plex and the other side can send endless streams of reinforcements in and you can't they will win the plex. If the blob camps the accel gate or even the gates into the system then they can send in their ships and will eventually whittle what you have down and win all the plexes. If the systems that are in play are spread out they can not do this and the other side will be able to make strategic strikes throughout the multiple regions.
Its really pretty straight forward if you want blobs to be split up require the pilots to be in several distant areas at once. If you concentrate where the pilots must be you invite blobs. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 14:38:00 -
[685] - Quote
When do we get to hear about the CSM meeting notes???? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
626
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 14:57:00 -
[686] - Quote
Draco Rosso wrote:When do we get to hear about the CSM meeting notes????
I would keep an eye on the Jita Park speakers corner, they'll be posted there first, and likely a Dev Blog will too announcing that the CSM minutes are up. Usually takes them a week at least, or months in the case of the Incarna notes but these ones should be far less controversial and needing of "oversight" from CCP.
From what I've gathered things have been pretty positive so far, looks like the summer expansion will be much like Crucible in that Hilmar promised "no more Jesus features" (Turning 5 loaves and 2 fishes into 10,000 new subscribers) so basically the summer expansion will be further development on core features. It should be mentioned that Faction Warfare was the first and primary thing mentioned as an example by Soundwave in his recent Mintchip interview. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 18:54:00 -
[687] - Quote
I get where you're coming from Cearain. And I can't agree enough that win-by-blob is incredibly annoying when you don't enjoy that play style.
My position remains though, that some of these ideas being thrown around (or maybe some things we haven't even thought of) could at the very least help our play style. We cannot ask for perfection, or the abolishment of the power of a blob, because that would be an unreasonable restriction. If you have lots of allies, you should be able to go out in force. What I want to see are more ways to stay under that radar and do smaller, more meaningful things. The blobs can carry on and those players shouldn't be required to suffer at all, but likewise, the occupancy mechanics shouldn't allow steam-rolling based on numbers alone.
I did in fact consider the situation of the enemy sending in continuous reinforcements to a numbers-restricted plex, and yes it's still not as perfect a system as would be ideal to players like us. But would it not be better than what we have now? where the whole blob just lands on you and you're immediately effed. I think good players could make a hell of a fight out of the enemy-reinforcement situation... which is exactly what we're after here .
And what about diving deeper into boarder balance? Something like: allowing you to take a non-boardered system but it would require more effort? and thus opening a brand new boarder. Basically just making boardered systems easier to take than random other systems, creating the choice: do I want to be on the front-lines? or do I want to sneak behind the lines? (yay choices!)
There are places we can go with these ideas to make things better for us without the constant blob-fear.
I do have to comment that your ideal fight-per-hour statistic sounds unrealistic to me. Not by a whole lot, but your desires could only really be fulfilled by a genuine, dedicated, alliance-tournament-style arena mechanic (which I actually think there should be some form of... not for FW though). Personally, I'm satisfied by one truly quality fight in a 2-hour session, or a few decent ones plus a gank or two.
If the venues for fighting get some variation, we will spend less time dancing around and looking for a good fight, and more time in quality combat. |
Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
96
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:34:00 -
[688] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote: I do have to comment that your ideal fight-per-hour statistic sounds unrealistic to me. Not by a whole lot, but your desires could only really be fulfilled by a genuine, dedicated, alliance-tournament-style arena mechanic (which I actually think there should be some form of... not for FW though). Personally, I'm satisfied by one truly quality fight in a 2-hour session, or a few decent ones plus a gank or two..
I think they should strive for 4-7 quality small scale pvp fights in 2 hours that do not involve prearranged arenas.
The problem is ccp has never really *tried* to accomplish this. So the people who play eve can't imagine how it could be done. People like myself and probably several hundred thousand others who would like to play eve if they accomplished that tend to either not play because they hear its a boring waiting game, (like hunting) or unsubscribe.
CCP always seems to lose focus. FW plexing is about some small scale pvp some blobbing and some pve versus npcs. But it does none of them well. Eve has lots of pvp and blobbing opportunities. Its time ccp *focused* on small scale pvp opportunities. FW plexing is the obvious choice for this.
With current eve I agree you are lucky if you get one or two quality pvp fights in 2 hours. Often you will get none. But this is not satisfactory.
If CCP really said ok our goal is to make it so people who do fw plexing will get 4-7 quality small scale pvp fights per 2 hours I bet they could do it. Would they get it right off the bat? No it will take iterations. But they could do it - or come very close. Would it be worth it? I don't see how anyone with a brain could think it wouldn't massively boost the numbers of eve subscriptions.
I'm not the only one in the world that doesn't have 5 hour blocks of time I can dedicate to a computer game - even if I am apparently rare in the eve community.
CCP should develop some pvp mechanics for casual players.
There is no need for fw plexing to accomodate people who want to blob up. There are already plenty of opportunities to blob up in sov null sec and other places if you want blob. And you can always blob up and roam in low sec or null sec. Why does fw plexing have to be yet another mechanism to blob up?
The problem is many people think that fw pvp should be some sort of step on the way to null sec style blob pvp. But that is stupid because it doesn't expand what new eden has to offer. FW should offer something entirely unique from null sec pvp. It should offer pvp for casual players who don't have huge amounts of time to dedicate waiting around for fleets to form and dancing around reshipping. It should offer pvp for those who just want to jump in a ship and go out shooting people for a couple of hours.
Just my opinion. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 15:34:00 -
[689] - Quote
News? |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
96
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 02:05:00 -
[690] - Quote
I haven't heard any have you? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
J Kunjeh
81
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 23:07:00 -
[691] - Quote
Bumping this because it's a damn good thread that needs more attention from the players and CCP. Fixing FW should be HIGH on the priority list for the next expansion, IMHO. "The world as we know it came about through an anomaly (anomou)" (The Gospel of Philip, 1-5)-á |
Infinimo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
369
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 00:14:00 -
[692] - Quote
faction warfare is for turboniggers Theta Squad best squad. Monocle crew represent~ |
Garr Earthbender
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 01:07:00 -
[693] - Quote
Just chiming in here now that FW plexing has changed. That small change to FW that has made big differences in the amount of fights I've been getting. Hell, even yesterday I was in a 2v3 in a minor plex. I am usually on for about 2-3 hours at night and get possibly 1-2 fights.
I'm on later than the East Coast crowd usually stays up. Before the plexing change my M.O. was to log in right after a big fight happened and then nothing. It would be known to be dead and people would run FW missions or play LoL. Now with plexes spawning throughout the day, anyone can jump into their ship of choice and go Plex/PVP. There's people who used to come out in nothing but faction frigs that now come out in T1 frigs or Dessies so they can get a fight.
Good job in the FW change and I'm looking forward to hearing more about it in the coming months! |
SandKid
Gateway Mining Division
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 01:47:00 -
[694] - Quote
I don't know if FW was intended to be a 'pick up and play' PvP part of EVE...
But considering that every single new pilot to New Eden asks about joining a militia in the first days...
This is of course because the military career agents direct them that direction. Kind of funny how CCP made a big deal about NPE (even investing it into the CQ) but kind of 'drop the ball' after the career agents by FW being a huge let down.
I'd love for FW to be an insta-fight mechanic - literally designed simply to PvP without profit at a surface level. If you were to pursue FW as a career, it should have bonuses and profits that award skill, not time like most of EVE. We have something of a reward system in place, but it could be so much more.
Imagine if the FW store had layers that were accessible based on rank - now you've given an incentive to PvP (especially those who only wish to PvP, not grind missions or play nullsec politics). EVE would benefit from a lot of fast-paced players - the draw being FW.
This is all speculation of course and there are lots of ideas on how to at least fix FW...but what I think frustrates most of us is not what's wrong with FW, but how much could be right with FW. It is an incredible mechanic that could be expanded heavily on - providing another great feature to grow New Eden. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
632
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 20:22:00 -
[695] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote:Just chiming in here now that FW plexing has changed. That small change to FW that has made big differences in the amount of fights I've been getting. Hell, even yesterday I was in a 2v3 in a minor plex. I am usually on for about 2-3 hours at night and get possibly 1-2 fights.
I'm on later than the East Coast crowd usually stays up. Before the plexing change my M.O. was to log in right after a big fight happened and then nothing. It would be known to be dead and people would run FW missions or play LoL. Now with plexes spawning throughout the day, anyone can jump into their ship of choice and go Plex/PVP. There's people who used to come out in nothing but faction frigs that now come out in T1 frigs or Dessies so they can get a fight.
Good job in the FW change and I'm looking forward to hearing more about it in the coming months!
Thanks for the report! I've been a bit busy out of game myself, but I love hearing about whether or not the FW plex change has impacted the region in a practical sense. If it is actually encouraging more plexing, than it was definitely the right move. Needless to say, that doesnt mean that plexes are "fixed" in any way, shape, or form - just that hopefully the one tweak CCP implemented was at least a net positive for the feature.
Thanks for your input too, SandKid and J Kunjeh - I always love hearing from non-militia types that understand how much potential the feature has. This has been my argument all along for CCP's increased attention to lowsec and FW - there may only be a couple thousand of us that still participate actively, but in these threads we keep seeing more and more individuals like yourself who have said "I WANT to like FW, but don't participate because its borked". And rightfully so.
I really believe the impact that improving and overhauling the FW system will have reaches far beyond just the active participant count. We simply have to remember the large "diaspora" of players understandably frustrated by the mechanics who moved elsewhere so they could have a greater impact on the the sandbox.
|
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:42:00 -
[696] - Quote
updates? |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
88
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 02:11:00 -
[697] - Quote
Draco Rosso wrote:updates? It would seem not...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
72
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 03:18:00 -
[698] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
It should be mentioned that Faction Warfare was the first and primary thing mentioned as an example by Soundwave in his recent Mintchip interview.
I just jizzed my in my pants. *ahhh* |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
635
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 17:08:00 -
[699] - Quote
Super Chair wrote: I just jizzed my in my pants. *ahhh*
I just hope it doesn't turn out to be premature ejaculation :)
|
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 15:10:00 -
[700] - Quote
Fix Nullsec!!!!!!!!!!!! Nerf Highsec!!!!.....................................................wait.................................... |
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
100
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 15:23:00 -
[701] - Quote
From Selenes blog:
"Factional Warfare & Wormholes
This was all about one feature that could have been amazing and a feature that is already amazing but could use more love. Both are front and center in terms of things that CCP wants to iterate on in the coming year. FW will most likely start with a series of minor tweaks before introducing some new elements that breathe new life into the feature. The Wormholes discussion focused a lot on what it's like to live there and how the economic opportunity scales with other EVE 'lifestyles'."
http://seleenes-sandbox.blogspot.com/2011/12/csm-6-december-summit-report.html
you can ask follow ups here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=49408&find=unread
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
635
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 15:39:00 -
[702] - Quote
Thanks for sharing that Cearain!! I've been, ummmm preoccupied the last couple of days so I haven't been keeping up with my usual blogmongering and forumwhoring. And my preoccupation has absolutely NOTHING to do with SW:TOR. I swear it!! |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
100
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 15:47:00 -
[703] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Thanks for sharing that Cearain!! I've been, ummmm preoccupied the last couple of days so I haven't been keeping up with my usual blogmongering and forumwhoring. And my preoccupation has absolutely NOTHING to do with SW:TOR. I swear it!!
Thats fine keep playing other games while Amarr continues to take back our territory and other "property"
It wasn't much info other than really we can expect them to try some smaller tweaks and not something drastic at first. Which I think makes sense. I do happen to think the plexing mechanic can be tweaked into something really great.
I asked seleene to put as much detail as he could in the minutes so hopefully they will have some more meat in the minutes if not in a dev blog. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
197
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 16:18:00 -
[704] - 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). |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
635
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 16:27:00 -
[705] - Quote
Cearain wrote:
Thats fine keep playing other games while Amarr continues to take back our territory and other "property"
And by "property" I'm assuming you're referring to my tribal brothers and sisters? You slaver types are simply horrible people.
Back to business though, now that we've confirmed that FW is front and center in CCP's development plans, this should lay to rest the "CCP doesn't care about us rabble rabble rabble" that's been going on far too long and get the conversations going on again with some serious fervor. I'm hoping that this news will spark an influx of substantive feedback that can be used by the next CSM (the current one's influence will be coming to a close soon) to make sure the FW improvements CCP's about to roll out are community approved. It is all of YOU, the players, that have carried the weight of making FW a fun place to fly and fight - moreso than the CSM or the developers themselves. You deserve to have your input weighed the heaviest moving forward.
2012 is going to be a great year for Faction Warfare!! |
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 16:33:00 -
[706] - Quote
I'll say it before and I'll say it again. CCP should release said smaller tweaks in winter 2012 not the summer. In the summer they do the drastic fine tuning. One more thing: Hans Jagerblitzen, Damassys Kadesh and Hirana Yoshida one of you if not all three should run for the next CSM. We need people like you represent FW at a higher level. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
635
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:31:00 -
[707] - Quote
Draco Rosso wrote:One more thing: Hans Jagerblitzen, Damassys Kadesh and Hirana Yoshida one of you if not all three should run for the next CSM. We need people like you represent FW at a higher level.
Agreed ;) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
711
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 15:55:00 -
[708] - Quote
Keep an eye out, Faction Warfare peeps!! CCP Guard said we should see our very own Dev Blog coming out ... Soon(TM)
Hope everyone's had a wonderful holiday season full of gaming goodness, we'll get back into the swing of things here once the next set of FW details come out and have plenty to discuss, I'm sure. I've got my eye on the webosphere again, scanning for all things FW-related - and will keep you posted if I hear anything new.
The next couple of weeks should be exciting - we have the Dev Blog as well as the detailed CSM summit notes to look forward too!
Thanks for all of you who have contributed to the cause - we wouldn't have gotten this far without you. FW's best days are ahead... |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
95
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 16:41:00 -
[709] - Quote
It's about time |
Karl Planck
Heretic Academy
103
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 16:45:00 -
[710] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Keep an eye out, Faction Warfare peeps!! CCP Guard said we should see our very own Dev Blog coming out ... Soon(TM)Hope everyone's had a wonderful holiday season full of gaming goodness, we'll get back into the swing of things here once the next set of FW details come out and have plenty to discuss, I'm sure. I've got my eye on the webosphere again, scanning for all things FW-related - and will keep you posted if I hear anything new. The next couple of weeks should be exciting - we have the Dev Blog as well as the detailed CSM summit notes to look forward too! Thanks for all of you who have contributed to the cause - we wouldn't have gotten this far without you. FW's best days are ahead...
Don't want to burst your bubble but he said that the next dev blog would "shine some light" on the new features, NOT that fw gets its own dev blog.
Hell, he doesn't even say fw will get worked on, he just says it is unlikely that it wont get attention (I am aware of the double negative for you grammar ***** out there). |
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
235
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 17:02:00 -
[711] - 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! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
713
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 17:28:00 -
[712] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote: Don't want to burst your bubble but he said that the next dev blog would "shine some light" on the new features, NOT that fw gets its own dev blog.
Hell, he doesn't even say fw will get worked on, he just says it is unlikely that it wont get attention (I am aware of the double negative for you grammar ***** out there).
FINE FINE, we dont get "our own blog". I'm just thrilled to see a video where we're mentioned at all, after three years of absolute silence, every little thing seems like a big freaking deal. And it is a big deal, for those of us who live and breath lowsec and FW. This time last year none of us would have dreamed we would hear such news. We have the awesome community to thank for keeping the pressure up and the conversation about FW alive.
As for them actually working on FW though, this I have no doubts about. I think the reason for any "maybe" language from CCP at this point is more covering their ass in case whatever they are working on goes horribly wrong for some reason (incarna-style vidcard meltdowns), not a maybe because they're still deciding whether to work on FW. We're well past that phase now. The CSM said its on their agenda, Soundwave's said its on their agenda, and the "fix" we saw with Crucible probably isn't what they tasked a whole team to work on, fixing a simple coding error correction. In my previous posts I predicted we'll likely see FW changes as part of subsequent Crucible releases, if they didn't make the first cut. Looks like Guard is confirming this.
And no, I'm not expecting these changes to be mind-blowing or revolutionary. But progress is progress, I think we should celebrate and appreciate each step CCP takes in the right direction. And of course, I'll still be the first one there to nip at their heels if they start dragging their feet again! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
713
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 17:40:00 -
[713] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:You mean front and and a little off to the side
QFT. But again, remember a year ago when we couldn't even get a Dev to utter the words "Faction Warfare" using a dozen angry threads. I can totally live with "a little off to the side". Faction Warfare ISNT the whole game, even if its where we like to hang out. But it deserves development attention in proportion to everything else, at least. Maybe a little more given the bang-for-CCP's-buck factor. A lot of people will resub if they get FW roaring again.
Quote: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
Yup, I absolutely want everyone to sleep with pitchfork ready under the bedside....its community pressure that got us this far, and its community pressure that will work again if they start slacking.
Now that they've started work for real, I'll be damned if I'm going to give up the fight now - we are by no means finished. The work (for us as a community not just the developers) isn't over till we see a vibrant, active Faction Warfare scene and a revitalization of all of lowsec. The pirates, the highsec producers of ships and goods that supply lowsec dwellers, they all need this as much as we do.
I'm just enjoying the "good cop" mode we're in for the time being...but CCP should certainly know we're more than willing to flip the switch to "bad cop" mode if the need arises. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
235
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 17:55:00 -
[714] - 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? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
714
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 18:17:00 -
[715] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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?
For the record, I think this is a common myth - its my understanding that most nullsec alliances already make their own stuff out there. Wormhole Alliances rarely even emerge from their WH bases - they can exist in there as long as they want and make a full range of necessary ships, mods, ammo. Highsec production really just supplies high and lowsec space.
Dont simply take my word for it though, I'm just sharing what the nullsec dwellers I've spoke with have told me. |
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
17
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 18:43:00 -
[716] - Quote
I've been in a few major null alliances and in every case a good portion of the market was seeded by corporations specifically contracted to keep the main hubs stocked. Some of the items were manufactured locally but a sizable chunk was imported from high sec.
I'm really looking forward to see what they do with FW. ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 14:35:00 -
[717] - Quote
I was just about to ask for updates. Once again thank you Hans for keep us bitter vets updated. I have my 425mm Rail guns ready for either celebratory gun fire or revolution! |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
210
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 15:21:00 -
[718] - Quote
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.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Uppsy Daisy
State Protectorate Caldari State
41
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 15:38:00 -
[719] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=608120#post608120
Posted to my other thread by CCP Konflict, but deserves reporting here.
Alliances will be able to join FW. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
236
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 15:45:00 -
[720] - 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'
|
|
Uppsy Daisy
State Protectorate Caldari State
41
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 15:52:00 -
[721] - Quote
Also there is an 'official test server feedback' thread here for the 'Alliances can join FW' feature.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=54054&find=unread |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
213
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 16:08:00 -
[722] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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'
So we have had allot to look forward to for years! Isn't that wonderful?
Seriously, did you have to call it out so fast? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
717
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 16:09:00 -
[723] - Quote
I just wanted to let everyone know that I've spoken out about the Alliance-into-FW change currently in the pipeline for Tranquility - responding in this post.
I made sure to separate my own personal thoughts on the matter with what YOU, the community, have stated pretty clearly over the last few months of intensified feedback (supported by polls on Shalee Lianne's Sov Wars Blog).
Even those saying they liked the idea did so with certain provisions (like not being able to hold Sov) that are NOT being considered for this release, other than a simple standings requirement.
Before everyone panics too hard, remember the standings requirement alone will restrict a large number of Alliances from participating, but that doesnt change the resource issue (farming FW missions) or the "weekend warrior" issue of Alliance joining on a whim during boring periods and leaving just as fast without contributing anything lasting to the community or ongoing conflict.
Whichever side of the issue you're on, NOW is the time to speak up, speak loud, and be heard before this goes into effect. If it does go into effect, I want to make sure its because YOU, the FW community, embraced the idea and not because CCP is simply tackling the easiest changes first without considering the impact this could have. |
M'nu
Autocannons Anonymous
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 17:28:00 -
[724] - Quote
With the upcoming change to allow Alliances to join FW, I feel a few things need to be tweaked to avoid OMGWTFBBQ.
First off, don't allow Alliances to join FW. Instead name it something like a Coalition, that functions in the exact same way as an alliance would. Change the Executor Corp name to something more militaryesque such ass "Faction Command" or w/e. The corp founding the alliance has to be in FW for at least a year, or have 5.0 standings with their faction of choice. The reason is to not make FW some vacation blob fest, those who are dedicated to the cause of losec small scale warfare should be dedicated to the faction they are fighting for. If losec is meant to be a stepping stone to o.0, there should be a stepping stone Alliance feature. Coalitions would fit this role perfectly.
All Sov will be for the faction. Meaning FW can claim nullsec space for the glory and freedom of our oppressed brothers under the tyrannical Amarr oppressors. This may be a good idea or not. Im not sure how or what changes nullsec will have.
To make fighting over a button have more meaning, allow Coalitions to set up system upgrades in losec we have captured. These upgrades wouldnt be like the ones in o.0 that are isk faucets. No, these will be more interesting like weak ass annoying navy rats that can easily be tanked that chase opposing FW members around system after 20 minutes or so that point. Or making it impossible for the Amarr to dock in TLF station and vice versa. Or spawn an incursion type system when a system is about to be taken over or defended, multiple buttons that all need objectives to be completed, that have that scaling rewards amount incursions do. The more people you try and pile in, the less points you get towards the incursion. Not a sansha incursion tho, use that type of system because I think it has potential in something called FW.
Just some thoughts and ideas on how I feel faction warfare should be if Alliance type gameplay is given to us.
If it all happens that is
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
237
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 17:30:00 -
[725] - 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! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
720
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 18:35:00 -
[726] - Quote
M'nu wrote: All Sov will be for the faction. Meaning FW can claim nullsec space for the glory and freedom of our oppressed brothers under the tyrannical Amarr oppressors. This may be a good idea or not. Im not sure how or what changes nullsec will have.
While all of your ideas are great food for thought, M'Nu, this one is my favorite!!
Most Faction Warfare pilots agree that nullsec Alliances should be forced to give up Sov to participate in Faction Warfare. However, CCP has not included that as a requirement as of yet.
If sovereignty-holding alliances are allowed to join Faction Warfare - than any Sov that the Alliances hold should be declared as an extension of Faction-owned space, its only fair.
This way, if CVA or EM or UK want to join Faction Warfare, they can actually claim nullsec territory for the Republic or for the Empire.
This should be a two way street if we're involving nullsec sov in the mix - all of the Amarr militia should be able to help CVA win Providence for the Empire, or vice versa.
|
Shaalira D'arc
Quantum Cats Syndicate
342
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 18:42:00 -
[727] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:M'nu wrote: All Sov will be for the faction. Meaning FW can claim nullsec space for the glory and freedom of our oppressed brothers under the tyrannical Amarr oppressors. This may be a good idea or not. Im not sure how or what changes nullsec will have.
While all of your ideas are great food for thought, M'Nu, this one is my favorite!! Most Faction Warfare pilots agree that nullsec Alliances should be forced to give up Sov to participate in Faction Warfare. However, CCP has not included that as a requirement as of yet. If sovereignty-holding alliances are allowed to join Faction Warfare - than any Sov that the Alliances hold should be declared as an extension of Faction-owned space, its only fair. This way, if CVA or EM or UK want to join Faction Warfare, they can actually claim nullsec territory for the Republic or for the Empire. This should be a two way street if we're involving nullsec sov in the mix - all of the Amarr militia should be able to help CVA win Providence for the Empire, or vice versa.
+1
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
237
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 18:53:00 -
[728] - 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
721
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 19:04:00 -
[729] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
You're absolutely right, it doesnt solve anything.
I'm not saying that Faction Warfare should become just like nullsec - though allowing sov-holding alliances into FW, or the reverse, will do just that.
Faction Warfare SHOULD have a gameplay identity and feel that is an alternative to nullsec, and is focused on casual, pickup, ship to ship combat and fleet / gang work rather than all the trappings of advanced large-scale resource management.
I'm simply saying that its a two way street - IF CCP decides to go through with this without requiring the giving up of Sovereignty, than we better be able to put our name and Faction ownership back onto nullsec as well. That is the only way we stand to benefit from allowing Alliances with already superior resources from nullsec to join our ranks in the first place.
But you're right. That just makes us a clone of null, and doesnt fundamentally improve the system at all. It very well could destroy the unique identity of Faction Warfare gameplay if the core system isn't iterated upon first BEFORE the alliances are allowed it. |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
92
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 19:04:00 -
[730] - Quote
Seems people are forgetting alot of FW players are in FW because NULL is ******* BORING. Sov war, who the **** wants that.
As for this lastest "FIX" whatever, Im just in it for the fun of flying with friends. I gave up giving a **** about FW a while ago. If it gets too blob fest = win, then eve has other space, or the internet has other games.
One of those. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
721
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 20:13:00 -
[731] - Quote
Attention everyone!! Shalee has done me the courtesy of posting a survey on Sov Wars where you can respond with your thoughts about the proposed Alliances change to Faction Warfare.
Please, please, please respond to this poll, its totally informal but could be useful for the CCP devs to gauge the community's reaction to such a change. I requested this because the previous poll on the topic was about sharing detailed reactions, but doesnt provide any ballpark numbers on just how the community feels about this.
Please encourage all your non-forum warrior friends to hop over to that poll and answer for me, I'd greatly appreciate it! Take a moment and send the link as a corp email. Once we get more numbers replying I'll share the results with the feedback thread.
Thanks! |
Sakkar Arenith
PIE Inc.
33
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 20:13:00 -
[732] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:Seems people are forgetting alot of FW players are in FW because NULL is ******* BORING. Sov war, who the **** wants that.
As for this lastest "FIX" whatever, Im just in it for the fun of flying with friends. I gave up giving a **** about FW a while ago. If it gets too blob fest = win, then eve has other space, or the internet has other games.
One of those.
QFT!
As many boring and tedious flaws as FW might have atm, the ONE thing it certrainly doesnt need are more ******* blobs!
Why the hell does ccp think those in FW chose to do it in the first place?!
0.0 blobfare needs to be destroyed, not expanded into empire... |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
237
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 20:30:00 -
[733] - 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"?
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
725
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 01:05:00 -
[734] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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"?
Hey now, don't blame Shalee, she just copy pasted what I sent her. Blame me if you're upset with the poll. It started out as only three options - I'm quitting FW but not EvE, I'm quitting eve, or I'm staying in FW. I pushed her to expand the survey, knowing full well that even with 5 or 6 options there will always be one person with one opinion that doesnt fit.
Shalee deserves credit for allowing everyone to put precisely how they feel - the results of her own previous survey on the same topic were highly detailed comments from every single person that responded. Nobody's feelings were excluded on either side.
I insisted on her putting up a more limited (but not too limited) numerical survey only so that CCP could have some data to work with on the overall community consensus.
But polls are just that, polls, they always exclude someone or another and should be taken with a grain of salt. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
213
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 01:16:00 -
[735] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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.
Well cant they just set up an alt corp and do that now? I'm not sure this changes anything in that regard.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
725
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 01:22:00 -
[736] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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.
Well cant they just set up an alt corp and do that now? I'm not sure this changes anything in that regard.
Yes, they can. No, it doesn't change that problem. This is still a big issue, which I personally should be addressed first before we expand the militia rosters.
If we fix the mission system to encourage PvP that ISNT just bombers and inty's (just give all the NPC's more target painters and missiles regardless of race) we can effectively prevent Alliances from joining up just to tap an extra source of income.
If the Alliances are allowed in before missions, plexing, and the other core mechanical issues breaking Faction Warfare are addressed, we will most certainly see some that enlist specifically to allow their members access to lucrative missions whether they live and PvP in the region or not. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
213
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 01:23:00 -
[737] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: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. You're absolutely right, it doesnt solve anything. I'm not saying that Faction Warfare should become just like nullsec - though allowing sov-holding alliances into FW, or the reverse, will do just that. Faction Warfare SHOULD have a gameplay identity and feel that is an alternative to nullsec, and is focused on casual, pickup, ship to ship combat and fleet / gang work rather than all the trappings of advanced large-scale resource management. I'm simply saying that its a two way street - IF CCP decides to go through with this without requiring the giving up of Sovereignty, than we better be able to put our name and Faction ownership back onto nullsec as well. That is the only way we stand to benefit from allowing Alliances with already superior resources from nullsec to join our ranks in the first place. But you're right. That just makes us a clone of null, and doesnt fundamentally improve the system at all. It very well could destroy the unique identity of Faction Warfare gameplay if the core system isn't iterated upon first BEFORE the alliances are allowed it.
I don't know if this is a good or bad path but what the heck:
What if an alliance could join fw. But if it joined and it held sov in 10 or more systems it had to donate 10% of them to the npc faction they represent. That section would effectively be more npc null sec. How stations would work I don't know but more npc null sec would be nice.
How other null sec alliances could potentially retake that space would have to be considered. Perhaps the side taking the space would have to fight for the other militia in order to free it back up for players. I don't know. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
213
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 01:27:00 -
[738] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: 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.
Well cant they just set up an alt corp and do that now? I'm not sure this changes anything in that regard. Yes, they can. No, it doesn't change that problem. This is still a big issue, which I personally should be addressed first before we expand the militia rosters. If we fix the mission system to encourage PvP that ISNT just bombers and inty's (just give all the NPC's more target painters and missiles regardless of race) we can effectively prevent Alliances from joining up just to tap an extra source of income. If the Alliances are allowed in before missions, plexing, and the other core mechanical issues breaking Faction Warfare are addressed, we will most certainly see some that enlist specifically to allow their members access to lucrative missions whether they live and PvP in the region or not.
Is it an issue? Are any big alliances making alt corps that go into fw? If they aren't now why would they start later?
I don't think you can - nor should you try to - make missions pvp. They are pve. Just fix missions so they can't be run in a solo stealth bomber and its done. Make them all like the amarr missions. Like you said, lots of target painters and missiles. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
725
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 01:44:00 -
[739] - Quote
Cearain wrote: I don't know if this is a good or bad path but what the heck:
What if an alliance could join fw. But if it joined and it held sov in 10 or more systems it had to donate 10% of them to the npc faction they represent. That section would effectively be more npc null sec. How stations would work I don't know but more npc null sec would be nice.
How other null sec alliances could potentially retake that space would have to be considered. Perhaps the side taking the space would have to fight for the other militia in order to free it back up for players. I don't know.
There are a lot of ways this could be done right, they all just take a bit more work. My fear here is that in an attempt to please all of us who want FW fixed, they're doing what most people do when you have a large work queue and impatient customers - you tackle the quick stuff first, than move on to the time-consuming stuff.
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.
But the reality is, without those types of REAL iterations, stuff like simply ushering Alliances into an already broken system just means there will be twice as many people asking the questions "why are we fighting over this again?" and "why do these mechanics seemed to be designed for alts to ***** rather than genuinely compelling more people to fight more often?"
Core mechanics - whether they are incursions, nullsec sovereignty, or Faction Warfare systems - are the skeleton around which the flesh (the collective capsuleers who participate) are built around. Right now, these core systems are weak, and rather than have a strong player-driven machine that keeps people fighting and having fun, the skeleton was rotted out long ago and has been incapable of entertaining a larger community for a longer length of time. Yes, we all still participate, but out of a masochistic love of killing our favorite enemies, not because we're intrigued and entertained by the process of missioning or plex capturing itself.
CCP is aware of this, and has been talking about this with the CSM, this was the whole point of making summer expansion about core system iteration and not about more "jesus features".
This new mindset on development is precisely why I'm urging to CCP to take community feedback with much weight here - if the core system is too weak to support long-term player interest, temporarily adding more numbers just tests and strains the underlying mechanics even further. It'll only usher a new batch of bittervets and FW complainers like us who rightfully ask for something so much more meaningful and lasting in terms of gameplay improvements.
I'm not going to definitively say CCP should or should not do this at this point in time - I'm simply urging them to allow the FW community, who they are reaching out to with this, to decide whether we are willing to wait till after summer to allow Alliances in, or whether we are so anxious for ANYTHING that we'll settle for this right now, issues and all. |
Brujo Loco
Brujeria Teologica
295
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 02:31:00 -
[740] - Quote
Alliances in FW ... meh, there goes the LAST bastion where any sane person could take refuge without Alliances setting their dirty claws in.
Eternal death of FW if alliances are set in, lol killboard farming and one sided pushing, why turn FW into Null Sec mechanics? I mean, isnt THE WHOLE OF EVE surrounded by Null Sec already? What's with the let's bring Null Sec into everything eve?
I quite enjoyed the few days I was in FW, met some nice people and actually engaged in some fun run and hide tactics.
With Alliances you just turn it into an awful crap fest of the same nightmare null sec is already.
Oh well ... meh, forever alone with my apple pie. Inner Sayings of BrujoLoco: http://eve-files.com/sig/brujoloco |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
725
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 02:46:00 -
[741] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Is it an issue? Are any big alliances making alt corps that go into fw? If they aren't now why would they start later?
I don't think you can - nor should you try to - make missions pvp. They are pve. Just fix missions so they can't be run in a solo stealth bomber and its done. Make them all like the amarr missions. Like you said, lots of target painters and missiles.
Well, we don't know whose alts they are, but there's a lot of LP rewards on the market being sold by those that aren't out PvPing. and its not like anyone's going to stand up and say "Hey, here at _______ Alliance we LOVE sending alts into the militias to farm LP" because they'd be an instant target. Our corporation has had no qualms wardeccing corporations that we catch abusing the LP system. It's a bit like fighting bots though - very much a game of whack-a-mole in terms of long term success if the underlying mechanics arent addressed by CCP.
As for missions, they most certainly are PvP however you slice it. The minute those missions appear on an overview, they've changed from being a discreet income opportunity to becoming a giant "COME ATTACK ME, I'M DOWN FOR PEW" sign. I still farm missions in bombers and I've never ONCE gone on a run where I haven't been actively pursued along the way. You MUST know PvP basics (defensive scanning, threat assessment, manual piloting, etc) if you want to run the missions and be successful. Faction Warfare should provide more lucrative rewards than highsec, but militia pilots should always face enemy hostility and intervention as well. We could be making the most money because we successfully thwarted our PvP attackers - right now the way you make the most isk is by evading any combat whatsoever and by doing your own missioning. I've logged in to see several corpmates all solo farming because its more efficient than teaming up and working together. Needless to say that's a bit borked.
Its too funny, I almost put all this into my other post in the Zombie Kitten thread, starting out with "And I know what you're going to say about missions, Cearain!" but eliminated it for the sake of brevity (not that any my posts are that brief).
I know you're all about the PvP - but the cool thing about Faction Warfare is that it has great potential to mix the two if the poor, outdated NPC AI was balanced properly. Players don't HAVE to choose one or the other - nothing is more satisfying than killing an enemy where he's lost more than just the one ship - he's lost precious time he needs to stay resupplied in the long run.
TL:DR - Plexing should be all about PvP in gangs. Missions should invite PvP in gangs. ALL of Faction Warfare should revolve around PvP in gangs. No need to keep saying "This should only be PvE, this should only be PvP", you can certainly have a world of both if the NPC AI gets revisited and rebalanced. |
Shalee Lianne
Imperial Outlaws
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 03:25:00 -
[742] - Quote
Alliances in faction war? Booooooo. I could write a huge long essay on why that would suck but I'm sure countless others have said it already.
So I'll just leave my opinion short and simple. BOOO.
http://amarrian.blogspot.com/ -á~ Roleplay blog.http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
239
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 08:03:00 -
[743] - 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 |
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 09:43:00 -
[744] - Quote
So I can "get my feet wet" in PvP by being hot dropped by titans and shot by people whose allegiance is most certainly not to the colors they are flying?
If I ever had any hope of participating in FW CCP has just utterly crushed that. Instead of improving on FW they just made it a nightmare for themselves to ever balance in the future.
In short, FW went from "poorly balanced but got potential" to "more of the same ****". Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook-á |
Eggduck
Celestial Apocalypse
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 12:55:00 -
[745] - Quote
There goes the neighbourhood.
I joined FW just to NOT have to deal with the big megalomaniac Alliances.
If its going live i forsee a big downfall for the FUN that fw can bring, and fights that can be brought down to "who has the biggest wallet."
Hope its a fail on sisi.
Eggduck |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
240
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 13:11:00 -
[746] - 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.
|
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
17
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 14:43:00 -
[747] - Quote
To CCP: Do you envision a dynamic that sets FW apart from other gameplay in EVE, if so, what is that dynamic?
Personally, I don't think making FW simply more accessible is the route to go. If there's a great enough incentive people will come and will find ways to make the system work for them. Think of the initial progress towards player alliances in the early days. ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |
Kinis Deren
EVE University Ivy League
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 14:51:00 -
[748] - Quote
Jowen Datloran wrote:So I can "get my feet wet" in PvP by being hot dropped by titans and shot by people whose allegiance is most certainly not to the colors they are flying?
If I ever had any hope of participating in FW CCP has just utterly crushed that. Instead of improving on FW they just made it a nightmare for themselves to ever balance in the future.
In short, FW went from "poorly balanced but got potential" to "more of the same ****".
+1, I feel the same FW was my intended destination of Eve career, but I think I'll be revising my plans if the null sec alliances start moving in. I saw FW as an alternative to null sec slavery, I'm not so sure this will actually be the case in the future. |
Gallactica
Shadows Of The Federation
35
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 16:21:00 -
[749] - Quote
Who says all the big 0.0 alliances will join? Lets see how it transpires before the sky is falling in.
You get the bigger 0.0 people doing drops anyway, hopefully this will give us FW people more to shoot at and is going to provide a lot more high sec pinatas :) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
731
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 17:22:00 -
[750] - Quote
Jowen Datloran wrote:So I can "get my feet wet" in PvP by being hot dropped by titans and shot by people whose allegiance is most certainly not to the colors they are flying?
If I ever had any hope of participating in FW CCP has just utterly crushed that. Instead of improving on FW they just made it a nightmare for themselves to ever balance in the future.
In short, FW went from "poorly balanced but got potential" to "more of the same ****".
Oh, and if you wanted an easy to improvement FW you should have banned super caps from low sec instead. Now THAT would have changed the nature of the game and allowed a different kind of PvP experience to grow. But, meh, it's dead.
Well said. This is perhaps the strongest argument against such a change, the point of Faction Warfare to begin with was to provide a platform for pickup PvP (It used to be considered noobie PvP but the militia pilots are just as excellent at PvP as any Allliance pilot these days, if not better) without all the trappings of nullsec sov, resource management, capitals, and the like.
Faction Warfare outgrew that "newbie PvP" thing over a year ago, when capitals started becoming a normal part of Factional Warfare. But whether its for new players or Veterans, I think most of us who have participated in it all along value the casual PvP nature of FW, which could be compromised by this change.
You're absolutely right, this change is a stepping stone towards making lowsec just like nullsec - and is a band-aid approach to improving Factional Warfare. Regardless of whether you think this will or won't "destroy FW as we know it" the fact remains that this change does nothing to address the core issues facing the Faction Warfare system.
I would vastly prefer that CCP invite more people into FW by making it a genuinely fun and meaningful mechanical system, fixing the bugs, upgrading the NPC AI, plex system, etc, adding more rewards / penalties for occupancy, than just drop an arbitrary barrier and let a new crowd in that will be just as confused and disappointed with the state of FW as those of us who have been here all along have been.
|
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
240
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 18:40:00 -
[751] - 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.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
734
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 19:04:00 -
[752] - Quote
Count NULL wrote:Make it possible to kick out known spies. While not most pressing issue, there is nothing more annoying than to have a roaming fleet to be followed by a spy: who is in your militia, who you can't kill without loosing standing for yourself and your corp. Make it possible for general militia to vote them out without possibility to comeback for 3 month. This will go a long way towards making militia channels useful for anything else besides trolling. As it stands right now newbies are being kept in dark about all the action going on closed channels. Being able to kick people out of militia is just as important as letting them in.
Second thought: Add an other faction BS to LP store. It's stupid when everyone has to grind missions just to flood market with same item (i.e. Navy Domies ) as it gives best Isk/LP ratio. If you want to have more people in FW then you have to make sure that LP items market doesn't collapse, as it will force people to grind even more missions (or what ever else you replace them with) to support their PVP.
Being able to kick spais would be awesome, though probably problematic to put into practice - how do you get a militia wide vote? is it just a certain number of votes?
Think of FlyingHotPocket - he certainly isn't a spai, but imagine if militias had voting power to kick anyone they wanted....we would lose our favorite killmail victim!
As to your second thought - I only have three words: HURRICANE FLEET ISSUE. Ok fine, I'll settle for a Cyclone Fleet Issue...since usually its the lower tiers that get the Faction upgrade.
Fixing the market from reward angle isn't enough though - the best idea I've ever heard for this problem is to make FW missions the privilege of those who have earned victory points through PvP efforts, whether its plexing or being on enemy militia kills. Assuming Soundwave delivers on the make-plexing-mean-something end of things (I have faith!) we could use those victory points as a token to entice the militia agents to assign their high-paying jobs to us. That way, "I've heard great things about your accomplishments, Hans Jagerblitzen" won't be just a fluff line, players will EARN their right to ***** on the juicy LP rewards.
This way, it wouldn't be possible to join FW just for the missions. You'd have to put a minimum level of participation in the PvP warfront to actually get to the rewards.
I also personally think CCP should add a supplemental LP bonus to insurance payouts - if a militia pilot dies to a war target, you get LP as a payout on top of your insurance claim. This way, you get rewarded for putting ships on the line, and I believe loss compensation is a more fair way to provide players with the isk they need to keep pewing daily than paying for kills, since no matter how you reward a kill (top damage, final blow, etc) someone gets screwed, even if its just the logi pilots that may not be on a kill if they're doing their job right. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 19:43:00 -
[753] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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 ...
Hirana, I've already said Ithink its a bad idea to let alliances in but I'm starting to waiver.
As has already been said they can set up splinter corps now if they want. They don't. So why would they set up splinter alliances? It doesn't make sense.
Jack Dant wrote: why would they do it? What's their motivation? Dropping supers on every WT gang? They can do that already, it's not like super pilots need to keep their sec status up.
I think these are good questions.
Moreover its not so much that its hard to get a .5 standing with a faction but the negative of not being able to enter the other high sec is pretty bad. Plus anyone who actually participates in FW will kill their faction standings with the other 2 militias. Most alliances will no doubt have a substantial number of members who have ground up standings with the other 2 factions. They won't be happy to see that work go down the drain for LOLFW.
I really think most non rp alliances care about FW about as much, or less, than we care about null sec.
It seems the only realistic danger this poses is that a few Alliances will join FW, thereby doubling our ranks and CCP will say "See we fixed FW. Done!"
The other problem is that null alliances may start to lobby that FW become more like null sec. After all that is what they are currently choosing to do.
But there are some benefits that likely balance off these theoretical harms.
Moreover lets say for example Goons join Amarr. Then lets further assume White noise wants Goons to stop attacking them so they join Amarr FW. Now if goons attack Whitnoise they lose faction standings with amarr. Is this really going to be worth it? I doubt it.
I guess my view is that if this causes the sky to fall lets complain then but I'm not really hearing how this will be a significant problem. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
18
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 20:32:00 -
[754] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:[quote=Count NULL]
As to your second thought - I only have three words: HURRICANE FLEET ISSUE. Ok fine, I'll settle for a Cyclone Fleet Issue...since usually its the lower tiers that get the Faction upgrade.
Fixing the market from reward angle isn't enough though - the best idea I've ever heard for this problem is to make FW missions the privilege of those who have earned victory points through PvP efforts, whether its plexing or being on enemy militia kills. Assuming Soundwave delivers on the make-plexing-mean-something end of things (I have faith!) we could use those victory points as a token to entice the militia agents to assign their high-paying jobs to us. That way, "I've heard great things about your accomplishments, Hans Jagerblitzen" won't be just a fluff line, players will EARN their right to ***** on the juicy LP rewards.
Faction versions of the Tier 1 BCs only available through FW would be awesome. Also they should look at reevaluating the faction cruisers available through FW, especially the faction cruisers based on a logi hull.
Now for a non-crap way to get LP that has a real incentive for PvP. ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 20:42:00 -
[755] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: As for missions, they most certainly are PvP however you slice it. The minute those missions appear on an overview, they've changed from being a discreet income opportunity to becoming a giant "COME ATTACK ME, I'M DOWN FOR PEW" sign. I still farm missions in bombers and I've never ONCE gone on a run where I haven't been actively pursued along the way. You MUST know PvP basics (defensive scanning, threat assessment, manual piloting, etc) if you want to run the missions and be successful. Faction Warfare should provide more lucrative rewards than highsec, but militia pilots should always face enemy hostility and intervention as well. We could be making the most money because we successfully thwarted our PvP attackers - right now the way you make the most isk is by evading any combat whatsoever and by doing your own missioning. I've logged in to see several corpmates all solo farming because its more efficient than teaming up and working together. Needless to say that's a bit borked.
Its too funny, I almost put all this into my other post in the Zombie Kitten thread, starting out with "And I know what you're going to say about missions, Cearain!" but eliminated it for the sake of brevity (not that any my posts are that brief).
I know you're all about the PvP - but the cool thing about Faction Warfare is that it has great potential to mix the two if the poor, outdated NPC AI was balanced properly. Players don't HAVE to choose one or the other - nothing is more satisfying than killing an enemy where he's lost more than just the one ship - he's lost precious time he needs to stay resupplied in the long run.
TL:DR - Plexing should be all about PvP in gangs. Missions should invite PvP in gangs. ALL of Faction Warfare should revolve around PvP in gangs. No need to keep saying "This should only be PvE, this should only be PvP", you can certainly have a world of both if the NPC AI gets revisited and rebalanced.
I strongly think missioning is something that should be doable solo without penalty. (although *not* solo in a stealth bomber maybe solo in bc or bs.) The thing is if I sign on and there are other people in my corp active and willing to team up, I want to use that time to pvp!
When I sign on and no one is active pvp wise I would like to use that time for solo mission running.
I think the mission mechanics that the amarr militia face (we have tps and missiles spams) are fine and balanced. The risk reward is reasonable. Make other factions equal to that and mission issues are done. If large alliances want to come down and farm those thats fine. They will make less than high sec incursions and realize the lp is worth very little.
As for mixing pvp and pve the 2 don't mix. CCP has tried it with plexing. It doesn't work. Making the rats even stronger/smarter will make it so you have to warp out more often not less. Its time ccp acknowledged that players don't want to have combat against a computer ai unless it yields isk. And they don't want to die horrible deaths where there BS is scrammed by an ishkur long enough for the rats to kill them off.
1) We have plenty of empirical evidence that 2 don't mix. Do low sec missions lead to allot of pvp? Do fw missions? Do null sec missions? Do low and null sec incursions? Does killing sleepers in wormholes? The only things these activities lead to are occasional ganks. They do not give rise to quality pvp fights.
The fact that fw plexes often give rise to good pvp fights is in spite of the rats not because of them. I get allot of good fights in plexes by immediately moving away from the button so the rats don't aggro. That way I can get good fights without the rats ruining it. But of course I can never do the plex because I can't go in range of the button.
99% of the time the npcs do nothing but suppress pvp.
2) Here is an example of a blog where the blogger doesn't even realize it, but the npcs ruined his chances for pvp. He never counts the rats he only counts the pvp ships and gets upset when they warp away.
http://factionalwarfare.info/1565/pvp-are-you-willing-to-engage/
This happens allot. I got a lol when I had to warp my drake out of a mission when a thrasher came. The rats are strong enough that I don't have spare midslots for a point. And indeed most missions I running against a timer that I need to get my ship out. Just holding me ship in place a minute longer will lead to it exploding from the rats. So I always warp when I am out to shoot rats.
Personally I have seen people in plexes but couldn't even reach them before the stupid npc dps decimated my tank requiring me to warp off.
3) You just never know how many npcs are in there and therefore you never know how to calculate their impact. Hence the side that has to deal with npcs will figure they need extra ships. The side that has the npcs on their side will see the extra ships and gtfo.
4) NPCs take control of the fight out of players hands. If the npcs do well then the side that has them on their side will win if not they will lose. This makes the pvp more of a crap shoot than based on piloting.
The only good npcs do is prevent people from running plexes with alts. But that can be prevented by giving players a notification of the plexes or using different npcs mechanics as have been discussed earlier in this thread. But in no case will it be good if the npcs are there "pitching in" on pvp battles. The pvp battles should be up to the players.
5) Since ccp can't really add huge isk rewards for plexing, plexxing should provide some sort of bragging rights. No one cares how good you are at shooting npcs. So requiring that detracts from the GÇ£worthinessGÇ¥ of winning the war.
TLDR: Every attempt at trying to mix pve and pvp has failed miserably. ItGÇÖs a bad idea. Its time to accept that.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
240
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 21:12:00 -
[756] - 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
734
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 21:24:00 -
[757] - Quote
Cearain wrote: TLDR: Every attempt at trying to mix pve and pvp has failed miserably. ItGÇÖs a bad idea. Its time to accept that.
We probably need our own thread for these PvP vs PvE debates, but I'll just keep it here till everyone else gets sick of us and asks us to get a room.
Mixing PvE and PvP works. Our corp's done it. We've gotten a lot of kills doing it. It's pretty simple - instead of grabbing a bunch of missions and running them solo, you grab a bunch of missions as a group and take out *PvP fit* cruisers in a gang to complete them. Stabber fleet Issues with long points and artillery can tear up a Faction Warfare Level 4 quite nicely. Cruisers are mobile enough to evade the mission NPC fire long enough to take them down. Missions SHOULD be soloable, obviously one of us could have brought out a beefy Maelstrom (which like you said could not afford tackle mods) and accomplished the same thing, albeit at a much greater risk. PvE doesn't HAVE to be done the way you describe using a single, tanky, one-tackle-frig-and-you're-screwed approach as you describe.
This is a method our corp has used to both make isk and grab PvP kills with one operation. No secrets here, the enemy knows this because they've ganked us and been ganked back. The FW missions already work as a PvP driver, as intended. If we're mission roaming in non-bombers, there WILL be enemy engagements. I simply wish that everyone in Faction Warfare did more of this, instead of defaulting to bombers, because everyone would have a lot more fun this way.
The economics of course, are where the problem lies. Running them in cruiser gangs like this, the isk is in a different source - the NPC dog tags. Having plenty of pilots means loot scooping (something a solo bomber would never take the time to do, and forfeits the additional isk) is much more viable. You can make a decent side-income while baiting PvP fights, since you're lingering in a mission longer than usual, giving the enemy time to engage.
The issue is that this isn't the most efficient way to make isk. If the corp is cash strapped, most of us would rather just solo roam in bombers, because if you're going out with the specific purpose of making income, you aren't going to go with the cruiser method outlined above.
This is where other, terrestrial MMO's have an advantage on EvE. Traditional MMO's often scale up the experience points when you're teamed with friends, to encourage killing NPC's in groups. This can be done in EvE just as easily. Since group mission running favors tag collection over a fast, raw LP grind, CCP could tweak the tag requirements in the PvP store, and favor tag collection over LP cash in as far as ultimate isk / hour earning potential.
This way, those looking to spend a few hours making money could have a chance to make a solid income if solo, or an even better income if they team up to do the same thing, with the added bonus of not having to forsake a golden PvP invitation because you're needing to make isk with your time. This isn't really "penalizing" solo players, the way I see it, but in the end Faction Warfare shouldn't be favoring solo play anyways, though I agree it needs to be viable for those times when no one else is online, or you need a social break.
There are lots of variables and ideas as to how all these adjustments could be made, and how AI and rewards can be shuffled around, but I continue to reject your notion that PvE and PvP don't mix only because I've seen it in action and participated myself. It's just not the BEST way to make isk when you mix the two, and that, to me, is where FW missions fail to work as originally intended. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
734
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 22:09:00 -
[758] - Quote
Cearain wrote:
2) Here is an example of a blog where the blogger doesn't even realize it, but the npcs ruined his chances for pvp. He never counts the rats he only counts the pvp ships and gets upset when they warp away.
5) Since ccp can't really add huge isk rewards for plexing, plexxing should provide some sort of bragging rights. No one cares how good you are at shooting npcs. So requiring that detracts from the GÇ£worthinessGÇ¥ of winning the war.
This is why I said to Soundwave that I approve of them looking at the reasons why people plex over the mechanics of taking them. They could just as easily strip ALL of the NPC's from plexes and just keep the button timer and gate requirements and plenty of pilots will still enter and fight there, provided they have a good reason to do so. (Currently not enough people care about the occupancy of systems to make plexing a primary activity within the warzones) That's not too difficult a change to make while they investigate a more interesting mechanic for seizing a plex. I agree with you, the NPC's currently in plexes don't really add anything to the PvP role of plexing to begin with.
There will always be those of us who look for fights for fights sake - these would be the ones drawn to plexing that is purely PvP, with no NPC's, in a FW world where plexing still didn't matter. But we're still in a minority, there are many more who will PvP if they stand to gain something, and who usually aren't motivated to go to the effort of baiting and waiting to get a fight if there isn't an activity to focus on in the mean time. Parking somewhere and begging the enemy to "come at me bro" has always been a viable option all along for faction warfare pilots, but it hasn't been enticing enough to maintain a healthy scene. This is why I said by all means, lets make plexes all about the PvP and leave the PvE to the missions, but unless there's a larger reason to engage in them to begin with, fixing the nature of the plex won't be enough to get the scene roaring again in and of itself. |
Deerin
Murientor Tribe
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.07 09:20:00 -
[759] - Quote
Requoting a post I've made in this thread:
Quote:Right now conquering the system does give no rewards at all, and is being ignored by many. CCP has actually introduced a new contesting system to EVE: Incursions!!!
Make FW contesting like incursions. Make systems gather contest points normally. At half contest value the incursion script kicks in and rope pulling game begins. Defending side will try to decontest system while offending side willl push for a victory. Players who participate in this tug of war get LP counters on their journals. When offending side wins and conquers the system the offense side players gain that LP. When defending side wins and decontests system defensive side players gain that LP.
Also make sure that the systems initially have minors only...as the contest amount rises minor plex amounts decline and we get more meds....as the contest amount approaches max major plexes will begin to spawn and we'll get less and less medium plexes and no minor plexes at all. (Make sure you somehow nerf my rifter being able to speedtank amarr majors without any problems)
The systems that have incursion script active should be shown in the journal (like incursions) and playes should be able to see the progress. So that when a fw player logs in he should be able to know where to go....current FW button in stations doesn't provide necessary intel conveniently.
This, combined with Caerain's idea of NPC removal and introcudtion of alarms, will result in a good dynamic for territory control in FW. Even if you include 0.0 alliances in the list, since most of the plexes do not allow for caps/battleships, you are not going to get supercap blobs. On the other hand a frigate blob fight in a minor plex would be something...well....different :)
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.07 14:19:00 -
[760] - Quote
Hans I don't mind if you want to discuss this in a separate thread. But you are getting fights by baiting missions for a few reasons that really have very little to do with the npcs:
1) Most importantly you are getting fights because there is a beacon that lights up in local.
2) To the extent you are getting more fights in missions than you are in plexes that is because other pilots are blindly thinking you will all be pve fit. That view will not last forever. I have done some of this mission baiting before as well.
3) The amarr rats are extremely weak if a faction cruiser can tear up a level 4. Are we going to leave the rats that weak? If the amarr rats posed any sort of danger you need substantially more numbers than the invading force (at least a dedicated aggro speed tanker that won't always work for new spawns.) In my experience for amarr when we bring enough ships that we can tank the rat spawns the opposing militia does not want to come in because they are substantially outnumbered. After all they donGÇÖt know how many rats are left in there. If the missions do not remain easy to do solo in stealth bomber then this will become more of a problem.
Ok the only reason having to do with rats being there that is helping is the second point. But like I said this can never be more than a novelty not a long term source of good fights. Once the novelty wears off the enemy/pirates will not jump in with a jaguar when they see 5 faction cruisers in a mission. Once the novelty wears off then you will be in there with a few extra ships than the enemy gang because of the npcs. The enemy won't know if how much damage the npcs are doing or even if they are already killed. So they will likely take a pass on fighting outnumbered.
Not knowing how many rats are in there or how much damage they are doing will always make the decision to go in more clouded chilling the prospects of pvp. It will also make the result of the pvp based more on luck. As it turns out we jumped in after all the npcs were pretty much dead so our smaller force got welped.
You want ccp to artificially boost the reward because you do the same task with more pilots. I donGÇÖt think that is a good idea.
1)What you propose is that you should be able to make more money because you are doing fw with the safety of numbers. This is directly the opposite of risk versus reward. The missions are already pretty well balanced risk versus reward but perhaps a bit too safe. You want them to be even safer?
When you are doing missions in a group you are much safer. So the per account awards should drop.
2)Moreover the whole notion of getting higher pay just because you are using more people is not realistic.
I tell a kid I will pay him $20 to cut the grass. Now letGÇÖs say he tells me "well I can either do it alone for $20, or I can bring 4 other friends to help me, but then you need to pay us each $30." ItGÇÖs the same job. Why would I pay $300 instead of $20?
3) If they add artificial reward increases but don't increase the difficulty of rats people will just bring alts. Forcing people to dual/triple box alts in order to be competitive is not my idea of a great game mechanic. If they do increase the difficulty of rats then you will need to outnumber the enemy even more. This doesnGÇÖt solve any problems it just slides them over.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
245
|
Posted - 2012.01.07 17:38:00 -
[761] - 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? |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 03:53:00 -
[762] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.
As long as they keep all 170 systems in play there is plenty of room, and blobbing won't be an issue.
But if they do go with some sort of restrictions on where meaningful plexing can happen (border ideas or something) then it will indeed be blob wins.
My corp is currently based near a relatively remote end the minmatar side of fw. We can plex in todifraun and surrounding systems if we like. Its been nice change of pace from the same old stuff in and around kourm.
I don't mind if they reduce the systems you can plex in but I do hope they keep them all spread out throughout the map and not all bunched together. So if they said you could plex in half of the systems and randomly picked wich those were so they were spread out that would be fine. But if they make all the plexing happen in and around kourm or arzad then the side that doesn't have the numbers will have nothing they can do plexing wise. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
245
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 09:25:00 -
[763] - 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
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 13:38:00 -
[764] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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
If you are not going to plex then you can go where ever you want in the 170 systems. Even if a few big sov holding alliances join they won't leave their sov space empty and bring *everyone.* I'm pretty sure there will be places that will tend to have your number of pilots.
The only problem will be if they bring allot more pilots in *and* make it so you can plex in only a few clusters.(which can be easilly covered by 2 or 3 blobs) If they do that then the side with fewer numbers will have nothing they can do in the occupancy war.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
744
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 02:19:00 -
[765] - Quote
Cearain wrote: If you are not going to plex then you can go where ever you want in the 170 systems. Even if a few big sov holding alliances join they won't leave their sov space empty and bring *everyone.* I'm pretty sure there will be places that will tend to have your number of pilots.
The only problem will be if they bring allot more pilots in *and* make it so you can plex in only a few clusters.(which can be easilly covered by 2 or 3 blobs) If they do that then the side with fewer numbers will have nothing they can do in the occupancy war.
This is an interesting point, because I sincerely doubt any Alliances are going to converge onto the FW zones and enlist just to take part of the joyful activity that plexing is at the moment :) It's just not going to be the draw.
My *guess* is that the ones that will join will be for one of two reasons -
1) Role play, though I'm fairly sure those like CVA and UK have said they might not join militias even if they could, for various reasons.
2) The opportunity to have an instant pool of seemingly easy targets to shoot at, in a concentrated area. AKA - the "Puppy Kickers" (Who will most likely be surprised at what they find).
Its possible Alliances could flood in an tip the scales in the plex war one way or another, but I doubt this is high on any Alliance's To-do list. Even if they did, its all the more reason for CCP to be focusing on fixing the entire system first, before changing the participation levels.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
216
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 15:20:00 -
[766] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Count NULL wrote:Make it possible to kick out known spies. While not most pressing issue, there is nothing more annoying than to have a roaming fleet to be followed by a spy: who is in your militia, who you can't kill without loosing standing for yourself and your corp. Make it possible for general militia to vote them out without possibility to comeback for 3 month. This will go a long way towards making militia channels useful for anything else besides trolling. As it stands right now newbies are being kept in dark about all the action going on closed channels. Being able to kick people out of militia is just as important as letting them in.
Second thought: Add an other faction BS to LP store. It's stupid when everyone has to grind missions just to flood market with same item (i.e. Navy Domies ) as it gives best Isk/LP ratio. If you want to have more people in FW then you have to make sure that LP items market doesn't collapse, as it will force people to grind even more missions (or what ever else you replace them with) to support their PVP. Being able to kick spais would be awesome, though probably problematic to put into practice - how do you get a militia wide vote? is it just a certain number of votes?
There are really 2 opposite ways ccp can address spys in fw. (I'm just addressing the occupancy part of the game, not the fights that are just for the fun of it.)
1) try to keep the relevant intel from them
2) make the intel so freely available that spys really accomplish nothing.
Its when you try to go down the middle that the problems occur.
Personally don't think its possible to exclude spys in fw so I don't think they can go with the first option even if we wanted. Moreover, since the first leads to the sort of null sec politics many in fw hate I would go with the second option.
The second option makes spys fairly harmless. If everyone in miltia knows what plexes are getting attacked by what size forces based on a game mechanic notification system then the ability of spys to screw you over has pretty much been eliminated. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 15:11:00 -
[767] - Quote
I demand more Burger kings to be erected in the FW zones to spice things up WHOPPER STYLE!!!! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
761
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 18:04:00 -
[768] - Quote
Galatica789 wrote:I demand more Burger kings to be erected in the FW zones to spice things up WHOPPER STYLE!!!!
Maybe they can be the official "food service" of the newly remodeled 24th Imperial Crusade station Shalee Lianne's been bargaining to obtain the construction permits for the last few months. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
761
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 18:27:00 -
[769] - Quote
Cearain wrote: One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.
This is hands down the possible outcome that I am MOST cynical about, given the current environment.
Unity amongst the Faction Warfare corps is not only difficult to achieve, but also useless in and of itself if there isn't miltia-wide goals to be pursued. Right now, no organized groups of militia corps care enough about "winning" FW enough to make concerted, strategic, cross-timezone and cross-corp efforts to seize and hold occupancy.
There are little pushes here and there, little victories and losses, but no long-term strategic objective.
With a lot of corps scattered geographically, pursuing various territories and engaging a wide range of targets beyond just the enemy faction, there is a lot of room for disagreement and ego-driven disputes about how resources shoudl be shared, decisions made, blues adjusted, etc.
I say we need to get the war started again in earnest for their to be enough incentive for corps to set aside their individuality and self-sufficiency to work together across corp lines.
This could be entirely from my bias as a Minmatar pilot, it may not be the case in other militias.
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
117
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 03:19:00 -
[770] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote: One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.
This is hands down the possible outcome that I am MOST cynical about, given the current environment. Unity amongst the Faction Warfare corps is not only difficult to achieve, but also useless in and of itself if there isn't miltia-wide goals to be pursued. Right now, no organized groups of militia corps care enough about "winning" FW enough to make concerted, strategic, cross-timezone and cross-corp efforts to seize and hold occupancy. There are little pushes here and there, little victories and losses, but no long-term strategic objective. With a lot of corps scattered geographically, pursuing various territories and engaging a wide range of targets beyond just the enemy faction, there is a lot of room for disagreement and ego-driven disputes about how resources shoudl be shared, decisions made, blues adjusted, etc. I say we need to get the war started again in earnest for their to be enough incentive for corps to set aside their individuality and self-sufficiency to work together across corp lines. This could be entirely from my bias as a Minmatar pilot, it may not be the case in other militias. Confirming we have no goals or objectives. Hence this is why Dal, Siseide. Lantorn, Vard and Auga are now under Amarr control
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
|
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
9
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 14:28:00 -
[771] - Quote
I also demand Whopper and Whopper jr. RP!!!!!!!!!!!! Let my demands be heard CCP!!! |
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
16
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 19:04:00 -
[772] - Quote
Updates? Still waiting for the dev blob.... it's only been a few years since we got one about fw. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
762
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 19:42:00 -
[773] - Quote
Draco Rosso wrote:Updates? Still waiting for the dev blob.... it's only been a few years since we got one about fw.
Well, I don't think we're getting one that was only about FW but Guard said they were working on a video blog that would "shed light on the upcoming FW changes". A FW-specific dev blog would be RAD though, I hope CCP considers it.
Its entirely possible that the controversy that ensued when we found out one of the updates would be Alliances joining FW has caused them to reconsider if / when that change would be implemented, though I'm not sure about any others. That's been the only concrete change described so far, other than Soundwave mentioning they are looking into the reward / consequence system for occupancy, but that's a summer thing, not something that would have been in the upcoming blog anyways.
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... |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
2589
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 19:45:00 -
[774] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote: One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.
This is hands down the possible outcome that I am MOST cynical about, given the current environment. Unity amongst the Faction Warfare corps is not only difficult to achieve, but also useless in and of itself if there isn't miltia-wide goals to be pursued. Right now, no organized groups of militia corps care enough about "winning" FW enough to make concerted, strategic, cross-timezone and cross-corp efforts to seize and hold occupancy. There are little pushes here and there, little victories and losses, but no long-term strategic objective. With a lot of corps scattered geographically, pursuing various territories and engaging a wide range of targets beyond just the enemy faction, there is a lot of room for disagreement and ego-driven disputes about how resources shoudl be shared, decisions made, blues adjusted, etc. I say we need to get the war started again in earnest for their to be enough incentive for corps to set aside their individuality and self-sufficiency to work together across corp lines. This could be entirely from my bias as a Minmatar pilot, it may not be the case in other militias.
This is why I suggested giving FW an effect that would actually matter (sec status change eventually leading to NPC soverignty change). If the goals are essentially trivial, then people aren't going to really commit to them. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
762
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 20:00:00 -
[775] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: This is why I suggested giving FW an effect that would actually matter (sec status change eventually leading to NPC soverignty change). If the goals are essentially trivial, then people aren't going to really commit to them.
Well, to be fair, Har Harrison's right in that other militias HAVE been more unified and cooperative than the Minmatar Militia. historically.
Even though they'll never admit it all the MM's best PvP corps (Ka Pow Pow, for example ) are actually filled with dedicated role players who would rather play the role of warring tribes out for their own glory than unite behind any kind of coalition with a common goal. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
252
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 20:17:00 -
[776] - 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
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
762
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 20:35:00 -
[777] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: or deliberately ignoring us, also as usual
I don't really think this is the case anymore, thankfully! |
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
9
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 14:32:00 -
[778] - Quote
French Fries are required also |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
763
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 15:43:00 -
[779] - Quote
Galatica789 wrote:French Fries are required also
You better start contributing something useful, next time I'll flag you just as I would anyone else spamming off-topic chatter! Keep it to corp chat.....a lot of people have put a lot of hours into this thread and FW discussion in general.
You're a good pilot and experienced in the warzone - I welcome your input and feedback on where FW should go - but if you're going to post here, please put your SRS BIZNESS hat on first. Thanks. |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 18:35:00 -
[780] - Quote
I think my biggest problem with were FW is going right now is with alliances being allowed. (at least on sisi for now) What will this mean for the very identity of FW. I got bad feelings about this being a huge game changer (this coming from me the the guy with all the hair brained ideas he wants just thrown in the game) and rule a breakerGÇá. I believe that this will bust all the right things and my very well be a plot to kill this feature intentnaly by CCP ( I know, I know every one get your tin foil hats) as its going to harm each faction in an areas that they are already hurting in.
1)Amarr, the ground work has been done, the CVA has put its thumb in the pie before but will they again? If they do they will they absorb parts of the existing groups and then proceed to ignore the rest well splitting there time between flooding the war zone and F***ing of to null the rest of the time leaving a huge vacuum ware they were. If they don't the "mimalente republreation" most likely will play whack-a-mole with them every time more than 5 are in one place at one time as it stands there are less of them then any one else. As a group pride is a strong point of theirs (Amarrians and pride..go figure lol) but one the call is sent for order who will speak and will take a knee?
2)Caldari, they already have a problem with chest thumping, lack of centralization, shortage of role players that mean it and know what they mean*, throngs of non-PvPers, highest in game new player influx, and lastly the exclusive access buy proximity and nationality to the games largest market hub**. What will happen on the day the flood gates open? keep in mind that by population alone they of all factions will get washed out with PvE alliances, ego driven war-dec alliances, and null-sec spin-off alliances. Meany will try to lead most will not heed all will be frustrated.
*dumar is an exption and his level of role playing is only equaled buy his level of crazy....if such a thing CAN be. **this pulls any one on a fence to there corner, as it stands there LP rewards tho they have a high demand also have the lowest price. it can only go down.
3)Galente, we as it is have the attention span of starved wolves with AD HD. One we plex we take every thing and one we chase you you have to go back to hi-sec to lose us. Our leadership is centralized some what but has no grand plan. Witch is great for what we are now but poison for alliances. Our blood lust will be our undoing. We as a group will take any consideration of alliance formation solely based on fights. Weather this means a merger with republic forces or out side groups, if the payment is in blood the vote will be swift and decisive. If our opposing faction folds the former will happen "mimalente republreation" and our presence in black rise will fade, we will become the Amarr's problem. If the CVA go Amarr, or any huge group(s) go Caldari we will make any deal with the devil to get in on the bloodbath.
4)Minmatar, gifted with a already establish low-sec ecosystem, sold player base, easy to identify role playing MO, and strong PvP drive have achieved a good thing as is, how can you add to it and not lose some thing else? You can't they will get spoiled, weather growing to large for the Amarr alone, or an Amarr and CVA/other merger blowing Amarr militia's size up over nite, or just getting watered down buy the influx of new groups to the point were they revert back to the pirates they are.
GÇáWe ARE in an alliance with the empire we serve. Dose this not break some CONCORD and/or faction's laws regarding pod-pilot's, there corporations, sovereignty, and economic power getting this involved?. From a "fluff" stand point this whole game is them "real humans" keeping us busy and appeased. Buy most citizens ideals we should be wiped out as the deathless abominations we are. The factions need us as a buffer so here we are, driving there economy's paying there taxes with one rule. We deal with each other and leave there space under there control. How can us having the ability to dogpile in to their wars en mass not be a threat to there ruler ship if one side were to "win".
Now enuff of my opinions and on with the conspiracy theory!!!!!!
Of all the things they could do, of all the things suggested and proposed, and with the amazing DEVS they have THIS is their "fix". Remember the round table? Remember the rumor of internal CCP hate for FW. This stinks of wiggling the table the deck of cards is built on. It seems like a small thing, and it is. Of all the ways to let FW break it's self this is the simplest. To make FW a useless shadow of null, to make a reason to scrap it. To destabilize it in such a way that the only recourse is to over hall it as a feature to the exclusion of all others, some thing only a minority of the player base would want.some thing they need not cater to because the shouts of the other larger player base will be there shield, no further reason for the scrap will be needed. FW will die the way we all wanted it to, in a huge F***ing bloody mess.
TL:DR evil wizards are after our gold |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
763
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 19:07:00 -
[781] - Quote
Cearain wrote: Again you seem to refer to documents not even written by ccp employees to somehow prove ccpGÇÖs intent. We have the mixture of pvp and npcs with plexes. It fails. You seem to think the solution is to make plexing pay more isk and create consequences. But paying more isk for a bad boring mechanic does not improve the game a all. It makes it worse.
You're absolutely right, those documents were written by the CSM, not by CCP. I referenced those because I assume that those statements, votes, etc. were created as a result of, not in spite of, with conversations with the developers, and that the CSM isn't just pulling those statements about CCP out of thin air. It is entirely possible that they did.
But since you're challenging me to dig deep, I'll do just that. I present to you CCP's clear vision for Faction Warfare - straight from their own mouths. And yes, its been all about smaller-gang warfare, systems built to resist blobbing, and always hardcore PvP-centric - not "PvP lite". I agree with this vision completely, and believe this document should continue to provide the framework for further development. As you've said all along - CCP's intentions for a FW system that is PvP focused does NOT mesh well with the resulting FW mechanics that involve a ton of PvE instead. I don't want to be misunderstood here - shooting rats is not how I want to advance in FW either. My current rank of Valklear General is utterly meaningless - it means I spent a week running missions. That's a shame, and I look forward to that being changed.
Quote:You claimed that missions and plexes should try to mix pvp and pve but the only reason you give for this is some anecdotal stories how you got a few fights that way. However, as I explained it is unlikely that you got those fights because of the npcs. You got those fights because of the beacons in local. You have never offered any sort of analysis of how npcs promote pvp.
I haven't claimed missions AND plexes should mix PvE and PvP, I've agreed all along plexes should be about PvP, I simply maintain that the missions can be done in a way that enables PvP to be done there as well, and not only by solo players.
Quote:I have posted numerous reasons explaining why npcs decrease pvp opportunities.(forced pve fits, forces your fleet to have many more ships so the other side wonGÇÖt engage etc. etc.) There has never been any decent arguments how they will increase pvp in the long run. Just your stories about how a few times you got some fights by baiting others while you were doing missions.
You're right, its NOT the NPC's that drive PvP, it never has been. I've always referenced the fact that the missions are on public overview. That will continue to be the case - as long as missions are on overviews, they will attract PvP, and pilots will use them to bait PvP. What I've responded to is the fact that the PvP they attract is interceptor chasing bombers. Boring, and lame. By tweaking the NPC AI, we can change the dynamic from interceptors chasing bombers to any number of ship compositions that are viable for completing the missions. Should missions be the main thing driving PvP throughout the warzone? Of course not. Should we adjust them so that the inevitable PvP that ends up inside them (as a result of the overview, not the NPCs) becomes more varied and less stale? Absolutely.
Quote:Seriously, Hans think it through. Get a concrete idea of how fw could be great or let it be. DonGÇÖt just keep repeating half-baked ideas and saying well GÇ£some think this some think that.GÇ¥ Shooting rats sucks. Admit it. Paying people more isk to shoot more rats in fw plexes is a **** idea. If you donGÇÖt realize it yet, figure it out. Get a clear understanding of what needs to be done, before you push for change.
There's no need to get accusatory here - I think you keep reacting to a misunderstanding about what I'm saying. The bottom line is some do think one way, or another. I've worked hard to allow a dialogue to take place in the various threads, rather than simply club everyone's ideas down with my own because I think they're superior. I will continue to play that role.
NPC's do NOT drive PvP, I agree. Your assessment of this is correct. All I've ever said is that FW pilots need isk income, missions are fine for that purpose, lest plexing and other *PvP-based* occupancy activities devolve into a farmed income themselves. My point has consistently been that every aspect of FW should be PvP-related, and that includes the missions. That is why I praise the fact that you must publically expose yourself to PvP when running them as a FW pilot, and argued only that they should encourage more varied ship compositions for completion than the standard bomber setup people abuse nowadays.
If you want to know what MY vision of FW is, just read the Dev blog that I linked to above. They are one are the same. The reality of FW falls short of this - in many ways.
I kindly ask that you not read too much into my defense of posters like Esna that are sharing their opinions, because everyone here deserves a voice. You misinterpret my defense of payouts for plexes as me endorsing an NPC-based system. That is not how I feel at all. By leaving NPC's inside plexes, and than paying pilots to complete them, you are cloning missions, not promoting PvP. I ONLY think payment or other direct economic motivations for plex completion are acceptable under the provision that they are a PvP-based system, the gameplay inside must be seperate and distinct from that of traditional missions. Ultimately, paying people for PvP victories is by far the cheapest, and least dynamic way of encouraging warfare. It's one solution, but certainly not the best. |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 19:26:00 -
[782] - Quote
P.S. In my heart of hearts I feel the answere is plexs, they limit ship type and make a way to jump in to a fight with out having to be completely blind, thus cheep thrills. More plexs, more types of plexs, may be with more than one entrance is what i want. They don't even need rats. It's function would sole be for "terrain" to fight around. Like in table top gaming and laser tag it would need to be fancy to be fun. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
216
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 20:33:00 -
[783] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:Cearain wrote:You have never offered any sort of analysis of how npcs promote pvp... I'll use an example: Lost (Griffin) and I (Punisher) came across an open minor in Sifilar I think it was, we start timer just as three (3) Thrashers show on short range .. instinct says run, yes? Due to an aborted speed tanking attempt by a minnie, there was an NPC group within 30k of entrance so we decide to stay with me on warp-in and Lost keeping timer running .. 2nd-3rd Thrasher are intermittently jammed by Lost while I work on the first who can't overcome my active tank thanks to NPC eWar .. End result: 3 Trash cans and the biggest damn adrenaline high I have ever experienced. In short: They allow one to fight against superior numbers/ships .. sometimes...
I'm not sure which side I would take on that fight. Since you could scram the first thrasher right at the warp in its not surprising you won. And yes I think you likely did get that fight because they underestimated npc tracking disrupters GÇô and likely underestimated griffins. I can agree that the npcs helped bring that fight about. But in the long run it doesn't.
What do you think they learned? From their perspective they now know that if that plex is full of npcs they will die horribly if they only have 3 thrashers versus a punisher and griffin. So they won't come in again unless they have 4 or 5. But those npcs aren't always there. So it will just lead to this overkill for nothing. This will mean you will likely be warping out or they wonGÇÖt be coming in under the same circumstances.
Are they supposed to add npcs to their overview and scan in the plex and try to remember all the different goofy names of npcs and how much ewar and damage they do and add that into their analysis of the pvp ships? Are they supposed to just jump in blindly not knowing what is there?
Thats the problem with npcs they are just adding randomness to the fight. To the extent the fight is random itGÇÖs not based on skill. To the extent the results of a game are based on randomness instead of skill itGÇÖs not worth playing.
Hirana Yoshida wrote:Cearain wrote:We have overwhelming evidence that npcs hurt pvp opportunities... Anecdotal evidence cannot, by its very nature, be overwhelming. Fact is that NPC both hurts and benefits PvP opportunities in roughly equal measure .. the current slant towards 'hurts' is due to differences in eWar (ie. NPC balance).
I explained that we have more than anecdotal evidence that npcs hurt pvp. Read the part you left out of my quote. In sum there are logical reasons why one would expect npcs in plexes to reduce the amount of pvp in them, and in fact we find that most pvp happens outside of plexes.
Why do you think ewar/imbalance makes us think it hurts pvp? The ewar helped you right?
The thing is, to the extent the npcs have an effect they tend to work against pvp, and often the ewar has the biggest effect. If the rats did more dps that would also discourage pvp.
As far as using drakes for soloing level 4 missions I have done that (and likely will in the future) for amarr missions but it is pretty hard. I often have to warp out repair and come back to finish the mission. (everytime you have to do this there is a chance there will be company at the accel gate or warp in) Also I have been caught several times at accel gates and in the mission itself. Its my experience running amarr missions in a drake that tells me amarr missions are very well balanced risk versus reward. On the whole you will make slightly more than level 4s in high sec. But you will have to be much wiser on and focused on what is happening around you. Plus you will suffer some embarrassing losses for that isk you earn. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
97
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 20:39:00 -
[784] - Quote
Quote:At Factional Warfare's initial release; it will contain everything that will make factional warfare a complete system that will hopefully be a lot of fun to play. But this is only the beginning, Factional Warfare will undergo constant revision, with releases being added to it periodically, as we study and observe and see how we can improve and expand it.
Constant Revision |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
763
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 20:56:00 -
[785] - Quote
Yeah, that's pretty hilarious to read in light of what we've seen instead :) But that argument is over now, CCP is owning up to the fact they've failed in that way and is working to reverse the trend, thankfully.
Cearain, Hirana - I think we could debate about the nuances of NPC's and how they affect PvP activity till they shutdown Tranquility for good - but I think we need to avoid getting stuck with the idea that NPC AI is something unmoveable, unchangeable.
Hirana is correct in that NPC's can *potentially* help to balance numbers, or support PvP activity in some situations, but they do a **** poor job at this given their current state. They are dumb, easy to kill, provide zero challenge, and do nothing to train players to shoot other players instead.
As I see it, one of the greatest weaknesses of this game is that the NPC AI is so poor that the norm is a room full of trash mobs that are easily nukeable, and missions / plexes are done in whatever ship can tank the entire room on its own, through armor, shield, or speed. This issue will affect Dust 514 as much as it will EvE - because I'm certain there will be PvE in Dust 514 to farm for isk when you don't feel like a PvP match.
Given that standard - Cearain's arguments about mixing the two are quite sound. But I think we limit ourselves when we say the two MUST be kept separate at all times, under any circumstances - 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.
But if that step isn't going to be taken, and we operate under the assumption that plex / mission NPC's remain the same, than I stand with Cearain in that they do more to detract from PvP in the greater scheme of things than they do to encourage it. |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 20:56:00 -
[786] - Quote
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. *fixed
as far as plexs go (hell any thing-ships-modules-missions-story) why give up what we have, why not more? I would be happy if in the "pipe' of the war zone every system was a maze of static and scan down sites with multiple entrances, multiple rooms, some with navy NPC's, some with pie NPC's, some with effects similar to worm holes, hell even crazier stuff like Tama and OMS both having a 19 room static plex with navy NPC's in 1 room pie NPC's in another room some room no MWD allowed one that allows no cloaking and a gate at the end to the other system that's all the way across the pipe. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
252
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 21:14:00 -
[787] - 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. |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 21:33:00 -
[788] - Quote
Oh one thing quick and with no sarcasm, spite, or mischievous smile on my face.
Can we all agree to not discuss the removal of any thing from faction warfare unless it is so broken you could cut your self on it. We already are using an expansion with vary shallow content, it's already barely more than black rise, a new NPC LP store, and a way to prove you were in a system/constellation for 30 min.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
216
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 21:52:00 -
[789] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Given that standard - Cearain's arguments about mixing the two are quite sound. But I think we limit ourselves when we say the two MUST be kept separate at all times, under any circumstances - 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. .
I think ccp could make npcs so hard no one could compete with them. All the ships and mods could be input in a database and the ships would react immediately and exactly as they should given the other ships etc. The computer wouldn't be fumbling around with a clunky drone ui or trying to zoom in and out to figure out which direction it needs to travel for the right transversal etc.
Chess is a game of skill that computers already dominate. But no one likes playing a computer ai. Not when the ui is strong and not when the ui is weak.
I am not sure I can entirely explain it but its true. 99.9% of chess players can download a free chess program that will beat them everytime.(or they can set it where they win all the time half the time whatever) Yet millions of chess players will never bother with that and instead pay money to play on chess servers or in clubs so they can play against other human players.
People want to compete against other people not against a computer. Its our nature. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
763
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 22:23:00 -
[790] - Quote
Cearain wrote: 99.9% of chess players can download a free chess program that will beat them everytime.(or they can set it where they win all the time half the time whatever) Yet millions of chess players will never bother with that and instead pay money to play on chess servers or in clubs so they can play against other human players.
People want to compete against other people not against a computer. Its our nature.
Agreed. This is why I love Hirana's idea of NPC's that are a bit tougher to chew on, but that scat out of there the minute players arrive. This is a potential middle-ground solution that would satisfy those like SuperChair (an experienced FC who very much likes to PvP yet still maintains there should be SOMETHING to do in a plex if no players rise to the bait) and yourself, who feels the best solution to fixing plex warfare is the removal of NPC's entirely, on the basis they interfere with PvP.
I hate to see pilots who all want the same thing in the end (more fights, more places, more often, less waiting) get bogged down too much in arguments over NPC's when there are viable solutions that may address concerns on both sides of the debate.
+1 for creative solution of the day, Hirana! I salute you for your originality.
o7 |
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
252
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 22:29:00 -
[791] - 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
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
216
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 22:36:00 -
[792] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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
Its come up before and its better than the current situation where the rats just keep pounding you. But if you are passive tanked (most of my pvp ships are passive tanked) you will likely still have to warp out repair your tank and warp back in.
CCP has some options on this, and some options have been discussed in this thread and others. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
776
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:27:00 -
[793] - Quote
Everyone here will be happy to see that the CSM6 December Summit minutes have arrived, and they have some substantive ideas on the table for Faction Warfare's future. Obviously there will be lots to debate here, but I am excited to see CCP thinking BIG when it comes to expanding the feature. Our message of adding consequence and meaning to Faction Warfare, is definitely reflected in the conversations that took place.
Here is the link, for those that want to read the whole thing.
And the TL:DR version:
*CCP would like to inject drama by possibly having in-game elections of Admirals / militia leaders. Admirals could set things like tax rates in stations they control, and set strategic goals for their faction.
*Factions could earn their own revenue, managed by taxes on stations, and possible use that revenue to add upgrades to systems, such as increased LP payouts.
*Other upgrades could include making probes less effective - providing more use for sniping fleets and other tactics currently not seeing much use these days.
*CCP suggests in the long term, they'd like to see Factions able to take over nullsec systems, as well as highsec systems, turning them into Faction controlled systems, with enough tenacity and force.
*CSM suggests CCP use FW as the testbed for nullsec sov overhauls, since we're a bit smaller scale.
*CSM did present the list of community-requested items I gave them to CCP, confirmation is in the minutes. At least now we can say they know what we want.
*Current issues with criminal flags and GCC will likely be addressed in the Crimewatch code overhaul CCP is planning, so they may be delayed for the time being until released as part of a larger package of aggression mechanics tweaks. |
Othran
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
137
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:37:00 -
[794] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
And the TL:DR version:
*CCP would like to inject drama by possibly having in-game elections of Admirals / militia leaders. Admirals could set things like tax rates in stations they control, and set strategic goals for their faction.
*Factions could earn their own revenue, managed by taxes on stations, and possible use that revenue to add upgrades to systems, such as increased LP payouts.
*Other upgrades could include making probes less effective - providing more use for sniping fleets and other tactics currently not seeing much use these days.
*CCP suggests in the long term, they'd like to see Factions able to take over nullsec systems, as well as highsec systems, turning them into Faction controlled systems, with enough tenacity and force.
*CSM suggests CCP use FW as the testbed for nullsec sov overhauls, since we're a bit smaller scale.
*CSM did present the list of community-requested items I gave them to CCP, confirmation is in the minutes. At least now we can say they know what we want.
*Current issues with criminal flags and GCC will likely be addressed in the Crimewatch code overhaul CCP is planning, so they may be delayed for the time being until released as part of a larger package of aggression mechanics tweaks.
Inject "drama". Uhuh and FW doesn't have enough drama already?
FW as a testbed for null sov - oh lovely I can see just how that's going to go.
Rather you than me Hans, last time I bother looking now but the very best of luck to you all.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
220
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:57:00 -
[795] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:**CSM suggests CCP use FW as the testbed for nullsec sov overhauls, since we're a bit smaller scale.
Not much good there, but the above was exceptionally bad.
If you like Null sec sov do null sec sov. Don't make all of eve aim at the same playstyle.
I like how they suggest we could weaken probes to help us do missions. I guess no one realized fw missions show up as a beacon on the overview.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
776
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:06:00 -
[796] - Quote
Othran wrote:
Inject "drama". Uhuh and FW doesn't have enough drama already?
FW as a testbed for null sov - oh lovely I can see just how that's going to go.
Rather you than me Hans, last time I bother looking now but the very best of luck to you all.
I should have bet isk on the amount of time that would elapse before the first "Oh ****, we're frakked" post was thrown down.
I want to emphasize though, that we as a community should not be quick to decry this is as news of our imminent destruction.
A few things to remember:
1) These are just ideas, not concrete development plans. Its still liquid at this stage, and subject to influence and feedback. Much more so than, say, Alliances joining FW, which sounds more or less a done deal at this point.
2) The talks were conducted by a nullsec-driven CSM, who will be out on a couple months. The actual oversight of the summer expansion will be conducted by a new set of leaders, so there's most certainly room for a FW candidate to be elected so that they can be directly monitored to ensure that FW doesn't lose its unique identity.
3) Drama exists, but more of the chaotic, destructive kind. Having a well-respected leader on each side coordinating militia-wide activity could have a more unifying influence, assuming there's worthwhile goals to pursue in the first place.
4) Current abuse of the FW system economically stems from payouts coming at the individual level, inviting solo alt farmers to do the bulk of the work. This could mean that someone who wants to simply farm missions has little control over how much income he makes, those that reap the most rewards could be the ones actively working to protect and secure systems for their side. Obviously there must be ways for solo players to make money, but I think the idea of really boosting income at the militia-wide level is a good opportunity for players to be out PvP-ing if they want to make the most of their mission time.
5) Saying FW could be a testbed for sov mechanics in null could be an idea squashed immediately if an actual FW pilot sat on the council, and pointed out that the two are and should be fundamentally separate in structure and design.
All that to say, I hope no one reads one page of a document and makes up their mind to stay or leave the game as a result - its all in the theory stage at this point, so we have a lot of time still to speak up, share our thoughts, get involved with the council, and make the most of this.
These are the FIRST serious high-level discussions we've seen in YEARS regarding FW. It shouldn't be a surprise that there's bad ideas mixed in with the good, and it shouldnt be surprising that there's a bit of a nullsec influence given the council make-up. Its good to see CCP thinking big, and not just in the mindset of half-assed tweaks or small things designed to appease us. I'm relieved and thrilled to see they want to attack the core issues here, even if we may disagree on some things generated in the first pass at brainstorming. |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
89
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:13:00 -
[797] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 5) Saying FW could be a testbed for sov mechanics in null could be an idea squashed immediately if an actual FW pilot sat on the council, and pointed out that the two are and should be fundamentally separate in structure and design.
CCP doesnt want ot design two new systems (fw and 0.0 sov) so they just smash em togther and code one crap mechanic.
Sounds lazy.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
776
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:18:00 -
[798] - Quote
Cearain wrote:
If you like Null sec sov do null sec sov. Don't make all of eve aim at the same playstyle.
Agreed, and its good that this was a CSM suggestion and not a CCP suggestion. I am far more wary of the ideas the developers propose, as those have far more potential for becoming reality. However, its hard to add ANY consequence to occupancy (besides just throwing more money at players) without it being argued in some way that it takes us closer to nullsec. I think its safe to say *most* FW pilots wish that there was a point to occupancy besides merely flipping the name of a system. Eve has ultimately always been developed in the trajectory of giving more freedom and power to players, I expect this to be the case with FW as well.
The other way to see this is that if the advice was taken, WE would see improvement and overhauls sooner than nullsec. Thats totally fine by me, we've waited for a long time now, longer than Dominion's been out. We deserve it first, our problems have been around longer than theirs!
Quote:I like how they suggest we could weaken probes to help us do missions. I guess no one realized fw missions show up as a beacon on the overview.
Where did they say probes help with mission? I must have missed that. I just see them talking about being able to lessen probe effectiveness in general, they mentioned it as a boost to sniper fleet effectiveness, but didn't bring up missions that I saw. |
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
16
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:21:00 -
[799] - Quote
I read the minutes and my head exploded. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
776
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:23:00 -
[800] - Quote
Muad 'dib wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 5) Saying FW could be a testbed for sov mechanics in null could be an idea squashed immediately if an actual FW pilot sat on the council, and pointed out that the two are and should be fundamentally separate in structure and design.
CCP doesnt want ot design two new systems (fw and 0.0 sov) so they just smash em togther and code one crap mechanic. Sounds lazy.
This was not a CCP suggestion. It was a CSM suggestion. Lets not jump to hasty conclusions here.
It's very possible CCP couldn't use FW as a proper testbed, as they may have a very different idea in mind for a nullsec overhaul planned already.
All that comment was a reflection on is that the *CSM* sees FW as nullsec-lite. That is NOT necessarily how CCP sees us, nor should it be taken that way. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
776
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:24:00 -
[801] - Quote
Draco Rosso wrote:I read the minutes and my head exploded.
/emote hands Draco Rosso a towel. And a new head. |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
89
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:24:00 -
[802] - Quote
why are 0.0 CSM calling the shots on low sec FW again? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
776
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:44:00 -
[803] - Quote
Muad 'dib wrote:why are 0.0 CSM calling the shots on low sec FW again?
They're not, I assure you.
The CSM has no real authoritative power in the end, they cannot force CCP to implement anything even if they wanted to. They exist today as a sounding board, a place to bounce ideas off of and engage in a dialogue so that players have a voice with regards to upcoming development.
As for why the 0.0 CSM is speaking about Faction Warfare, the answer is simple:
1) There is a 0.0 CSM because not enough players voted for non-0.0 candidates. Voting in the upcoming election has never been more crucial if we want to change that demographic.
2) They are speaking about FW because CCP placed that item on their itinerary for discussion. They also delivered on the promise that they would deliver our list of wishes and desires to CCP during the discussion. I asked them to do that, they did, so I personally owe them some thanks. At least CCP now has some community feedback, from Faction Warfare pilots themselves, in their hands. This is progress however you slice it. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
220
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:50:00 -
[804] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Muad 'dib wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 5) Saying FW could be a testbed for sov mechanics in null could be an idea squashed immediately if an actual FW pilot sat on the council, and pointed out that the two are and should be fundamentally separate in structure and design.
CCP doesnt want ot design two new systems (fw and 0.0 sov) so they just smash em togther and code one crap mechanic. Sounds lazy. This was not a CCP suggestion. It was a CSM suggestion. Lets not jump to hasty conclusions here. It's very possible CCP couldn't use FW as a proper testbed, as they may have a very different idea in mind for a nullsec overhaul planned already. All that comment was a reflection on is that the *CSM* sees FW as nullsec-lite. That is NOT necessarily how CCP sees us, nor should it be taken that way.
"They would like to merge the FW and 0.0 sov system capture mechanics somewhat, but are not happy with either of the current mechanics"
Here I think the "they" is referring to ccp.
I agree with Hans we need to speak up about this to let ccp know its better to keep different mechanics that will cater to different playstyles. I am not sure why they would want to reduce the number of playstyles in the game.
FW should be frequent quality small scale pvp. Sov null sec should should be large and relatively infrequent pvp where politics has a bigger hand than combat. Both appeal to large groups of people, but they are different groups. Why combine them so neither will be very appealing for anyone? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
777
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:01:00 -
[805] - Quote
Cearain wrote: "They would like to merge the FW and 0.0 sov system capture mechanics somewhat, but are not happy with either of the current mechanics"
Here I think the "they" is referring to ccp.
I agree with Hans we need to speak up about this to let ccp know its better to keep different mechanics that will cater to different playstyles. I am not sure why they would want to reduce the number of playstyles in the game.
FW should be frequent quality small scale pvp. Sov null sec should should be large and relatively infrequent pvp where politics has a bigger hand than combat. Both appeal to large groups of people, but they are different groups. Why combine them so neither will be very appealing for anyone?
Ahhh yes, good point. And yes, the two should absolutely be separate systems in terms of gameplay. The only common thread between the two is that both systems have the same predicament - broken mechanics lead to stagnation and lack of player participation.
However, just because we are both in the same situation does not mean there is a one-size-fits all solution. Your question is powerfully phrased - why would we want to decrease variety in EvE?
Thankfully this is just in the "stuff needs to be fixed" stage of the convo, we shouldn't all panic that we are having nullsec crammed down our throats.....yet.
Please keep the pitchforks sharp and under your bedsides, folks. You'll know when to bust them out when the time comes....though hopefully it won't come to that. |
Deen Wispa
Screaming War Eagles Incorporated
75
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:13:00 -
[806] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Muad 'dib wrote:why are 0.0 CSM calling the shots on low sec FW again? They're not, I assure you. The CSM has no real authoritative power in the end, they cannot force CCP to implement anything even if they wanted to. They exist today as a sounding board, a place to bounce ideas off of and engage in a dialogue so that players have a voice with regards to upcoming development.
Are you sure the Nullsec CSM isn't calling the shots, Hans?
From page 23 of 44 on the minutes;
Quote:Some ideas that were put forth by the CSM: - Using faction warfare as a test-bed for nullsec sov
. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
220
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:21:00 -
[807] - Quote
Deen Wispa wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Muad 'dib wrote:why are 0.0 CSM calling the shots on low sec FW again? They're not, I assure you. The CSM has no real authoritative power in the end, they cannot force CCP to implement anything even if they wanted to. They exist today as a sounding board, a place to bounce ideas off of and engage in a dialogue so that players have a voice with regards to upcoming development. Are you sure the Nullsec CSM isn't calling the shots, Hans? From page 23 of 44 on the minutes; Quote:Some ideas that were put forth by the CSM: - Using faction warfare as a test-bed for nullsec sov
To be fair, CSM 6 has been pretty respectful of the fact that they don't know much about low sec or faction war. So I don't think they were pushing any big agenda here. It doesn't sound like CSM said allot.
But yeah the one thing they did say was pretty terrible. We just need to let ccp know that.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
777
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:39:00 -
[808] - Quote
Cearain wrote:
To be fair, CSM 6 has been pretty respectful of the fact that they don't know much about low sec or faction war. So I don't think they were pushing any big agenda here. It doesn't sound like CSM said allot.
But yeah the one thing they did say was pretty terrible. We just need to let ccp know that.
Yup, CSM has been respectful both of the limitations of their own knowledge, and willing to communicate our ideas to them, even if they offered some of their own apparently.
The Mittani in particular has been open about saying Faction Warfare needs love, as well as casual PvP in general.
I dont see them as the enemy. They may not be the best people in place to speak about our feature in particular, but hopefully the upcoming elections will change that. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
220
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:37:00 -
[809] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Cearain wrote:
To be fair, CSM 6 has been pretty respectful of the fact that they don't know much about low sec or faction war. So I don't think they were pushing any big agenda here. It doesn't sound like CSM said allot.
But yeah the one thing they did say was pretty terrible. We just need to let ccp know that.
Yup, CSM has been respectful both of the limitations of their own knowledge, and willing to communicate our ideas to them, even if they offered some of their own apparently. The Mittani in particular has been open about saying Faction Warfare needs love, as well as casual PvP in general. I dont see them as the enemy. They may not be the best people in place to speak about our feature in particular, but hopefully the upcoming elections will change that.
Yes I have to agree Mittani seems to see the gap that FW can fill.(Casual players need a quick action option - he mentions some sort of arena idea.) But I don't think he realizes how FW occupancy plexing can fill the gap. He's almost there.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=658801#post658801 Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 02:49:00 -
[810] - Quote
I see no need to be hostile to the idea that FW and nullsec sov could both use similar mechanics. Should FW plex capturing and meaningful occupancy prove a successful mechanic for system capture then why shouldn't it be used as a basis for nullsec sov mechanics?
It is interesting that they may tie meaningful occupancy with player controlled benefits (Admirals etc) and I look forward to seeing hisec systems become occupiable. Although I suspect the war will continue to have no effect on the non-FW player populations, even if Pator is occupied by the Amarr. |
|
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
11
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:33:00 -
[811] - Quote
My views on what was written in the CSM Meeting Notes.
Merging 0.0 and Faction Warfare Sov mechanics is annoying and means that CCP might still think FW to be a noob thing that people use to experience PvP on their way to Null Sec. This is untrue, I believe along with most of us in FW that 0.0 Sov mechanics and FW Occupancy are two seperate entities and should be treated as such. The fact that CCP still treats FW as a subordinate to Null instead of an equal shows that theres still work to be done.
As for electing leaders of Militia? HA I laugh at the idea. The system would be rife with corruption and any person elected to this position would not be neutral in anyway. Militia by nature is not supposed to be unified under a single leader. The individual corps and eventually Alliances working together of their own volition is what makes FW so enjoyable and unique. Any sort of unifying power a leader might have would be limited at best and would be outweighed by the obvious deficiencies and the fact that any amount of unsavory characters would claw their way into the position. Leave that kind of politics in 0.0 please.
in short still no meaningful ideas that I can see except the ones that stink of 0.0 influence. Can we just get to the elections so I can lobby for Hanz and actually have my voice heard for once.
Edit:Hanz for CSM I mean |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
80
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 12:01:00 -
[812] - Quote
I just don't understand how one I search the forums for Faction warfare I get hundreds of pages of information on FW from the people that use it. Yet none of what was discussed was any more than loosely based on things a majority of FW users want. I felt that ether we have all be using a noob-to-null devise improperly, or that they want this dead and will just change it to what ever we say we don't want. We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest And then theres this money thing I do want what we do and plexing to mean some thing but if you let alliances in and put money for having it in to play......
In the end I feel like FW as a hole is going some were i don't want to follow. |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
484
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 13:47:00 -
[813] - Quote
I do like the idea of giving more control to players in regards of strategy/focus and occupancy. - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
224
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 14:22:00 -
[814] - Quote
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:I just don't understand how one I search the forums for Faction warfare I get hundreds of pages of information on FW from the people that use it. Yet none of what was discussed was any more than loosely based on things a majority of FW users want. I felt that ether we have all be using a noob-to-null devise improperly, or that they want this dead and will just change it to what ever we say we don't want. We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest And then theres this money thing I do want what we do and plexing to mean some thing but if you let alliances in and put money for having it in to play...... In the end I feel like FW as a hole is going some were i don't want to follow.
This post nails it. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
224
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 14:28:00 -
[815] - Quote
Kade Jeekin wrote:I see no need to be hostile to the idea that FW and nullsec sov could both use similar mechanics. ....
Becasue the more game features that just clone the same mechanics means there is less true variety in eve.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
678
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 14:36:00 -
[816] - 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. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
224
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 14:41:00 -
[817] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote:CSM wrote:Here's a list of player suggestions regarding FW CCP wrote: Thanks. We'll file it alongside comets and system-wide asteroid fields
"The CSM presented a list of smaller issues that were raised by the FW community. CCP promised to look at the list, but pointed out that issues that had to do with Crimewatch (the system that manages aggression timers, security status hits, criminal flags and other lowsec mechanics) were unlikely to be addressed without the Crimewatch rewrite that CCP is planning."
WTF?
Not only is this response ridiculous on its face its untrue. CCP is going to fix the main bug with repping people in fw.
How they could look at this thread and come up with that response is beyond me. What was the actual list presented does anyone know for sure? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Draco Rosso
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 14:42:00 -
[818] - Quote
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:I just don't understand how one I search the forums for Faction warfare I get hundreds of pages of information on FW from the people that use it. Yet none of what was discussed was any more than loosely based on things a majority of FW users want. I felt that ether we have all be using a noob-to-null devise improperly, or that they want this dead and will just change it to what ever we say we don't want. We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest And then theres this money thing I do want what we do and plexing to mean some thing but if you let alliances in and put money for having it in to play...... 1+ In the end I feel like FW as a hole is going some were i don't want to follow. I'm trying really hard to stay optimistic about the proposed changes. Sometimes I wonder if ccp understands the mountain of gold$ they are sitting called FW. If don't properly FW could bring and sustain a large new player base. Is there a more direct way to contact the dev team working on FW to make sure they get the message? |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
25
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 18:04:00 -
[819] - Quote
Those minutes were pretty poor. Not at all in the direction of the entire player-base that has been speaking out so loudly.
I believe it's simply a case that next to no CCP employees, CSM, or anyone else of weight, has any genuine experience with FW. So they do actually see it as a "little thing" on the side that can be used as testbed.... that is so idiotic... *sigh*
I think there will be some positive results eventually though. I think letting outside alliances in is a terrible idea, but if that mechanic means that current FW corps can form internal alliances, that will be sweet. A leadership system could create more direction, although I hate drama, and it will surely produce some of that too... one of the reasons I'm in FW is to avoid drama... thanks CCP.
All I can do is hope some changes will allow me to have more (or at least equal) fun in FW. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
25
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 18:18:00 -
[820] - Quote
Has this discussion ever come up? (especially with the plethora of plexes spawning everywhere now)
How would people like it if say only one (MAYBE two) plexes of a certain size could be open in a system at any given time?
I have found that sometimes there are targets in the system, but something like 12 plexes open with 5 of the same size. If I want to try to initiate PvP via the plexes, it's going to take forever to either find the one with enemies, or for the enemies to find me. And more likely, the enemy will have the same reaction to the situation as me... "I'm not going to spend a bunch of time running around to all these plexes looking for someone, nor am I going to sit in one for 15mins tanking NPCs (if my fit even allows that) hoping they find me".
This is a big reason why I often don't bother even warping to them. But if only one plex of each size could spawn at a time, you would know that if there is a ship of equal size to yours, it could very likely be at the only plex that makes sense for it.
This is a little hard to describe, but I think people will know what I mean.
Thoughts? (has this come up already?) |
|
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:25:00 -
[821] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:
I have found that sometimes there are targets in the system, but something like 12 plexes open with 5 of the same size. If I want to try to initiate PvP via the plexes, it's going to take forever to either find the one with enemies, or for the enemies to find me. And more likely, the enemy will have the same reaction to the situation as me... "I'm not going to spend a bunch of time running around to all these plexes looking for someone, nor am I going to sit in one for 15mins tanking NPCs (if my fit even allows that) hoping they find me".
In a vast majority of cases I haven't found this to be the case. Plus if someone wants a fight in a plex they will stay inside and give you time to select the correct one on D-scan. The more flighty plex runners will be warping out as soon as you're on short scan anyway.
The plethora of plexes is much more desirable over the old mechanic where plexes were absent.
I also question the association between FW and casual PvP. Personally, I find small skirmish warfare to be much more demanding on individual pilots where the weakest link is quickly weeded out. In general I think more FW pilots have been exposed to close fights than much of the PvP that happens in null which is heavily dependent on fleet composition, logistics (not the ship type) and pure attrition. From my experience in 0.0, only a fraction of the population regularly engages in solo or skirmish pvp, and usually only fights during large fleets or CTAs.
As far as the carrot on the stick is concerned, LP can be a major draw, but currently the main issue in FW is the risk/reward balance. The current mission types (particularly L4s) are far too easy to run without an engagement. Plexes offer a greater chance of engagement, but offer no LP. While the highest risk - actual PvP - offers a negligible amount of LP. ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:53:00 -
[822] - Quote
Fidelium Mortis wrote:In a vast majority of cases I haven't found this to be the case. Plus if someone wants a fight in a plex they will stay inside and give you time to select the correct one on D-scan. The more flighty plex runners will be warping out as soon as you're on short scan anyway.
This is true, but that can still be a pain if the system is large and requires multiple warps just to d-scan all the plexes. Also, keep in mind that I'm not talking about reducing the total number of plexes that can spawn in a day or per hour, only the number that can be open and warpable simultaneously in a single system.
Fidelium Mortis wrote:I also question the association between FW and casual PvP. Personally, I find small skirmish warfare to be much more demanding on individual pilots where the weakest link is quickly weeded out. In general I think more FW pilots have been exposed to close fights than much of the PvP that happens in null which is heavily dependent on fleet composition, logistics (not the ship type) and pure attrition. From my experience in 0.0, only a fraction of the population regularly engages in solo or skirmish pvp, and usually only fights during large fleets or CTAs.
This is bang-on.
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
226
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 20:23:00 -
[823] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:Fidelium Mortis wrote:In a vast majority of cases I haven't found this to be the case. Plus if someone wants a fight in a plex they will stay inside and give you time to select the correct one on D-scan. The more flighty plex runners will be warping out as soon as you're on short scan anyway. This is true, but that can still be a pain if the system is large and requires multiple warps just to d-scan all the plexes. Also, keep in mind that I'm not talking about reducing the total number of plexes that can spawn in a day or per hour, only the number that can be open and warpable simultaneously in a single system..
With a dscan search you will see if there are any ship out there. Once you know the type of ship you often know what plex it is likely to be in. You also know if you can engage that type of ship.
The problem I have is not once I'm in the system finding the plex. The problem I have is that there could be someone doing a plex 2 systems away and I won't even know it.
Fidelium Mortis wrote:I also question the association between FW and casual PvP. Personally, I find small skirmish warfare to be much more demanding on individual pilots where the weakest link is quickly weeded out. In general I think more FW pilots have been exposed to close fights than much of the PvP that happens in null which is heavily dependent on fleet composition, logistics (not the ship type) and pure attrition. From my experience in 0.0, only a fraction of the population regularly engages in solo or skirmish pvp, and usually only fights during large fleets or CTAs.
I agree with everything you say.
By casual I don't mean unskilled. I mean I want to be able to sign on for an hour or 2 and get some good fights and sign off.
I don't want to sign on and have to wait hours for some big CTA fleet to form only to spend that time shooting a pos, because I want to be in alliance that rules all of new eden. Nor do I want to get involved with metagaming/spying/lying to people on vent so I can win a computer game. Nor do I want to get into socializing/kissing ass so that I can become a director of some player organization. Some people do want that but I don't consider them casual gamers. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
784
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 20:26:00 -
[824] - Quote
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote: We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest
OOrrrah!!
Very well put, this sums up my feelings exactly. What we have here is a clear case of a group of individuals who don't understand us, representing us.
Is Faction Warfare a sinking hole? Depends on how you look at it. Every day I can undock and get some fun kills, I hate to use words like that to describe it. Is it headed somewhere we don't want to go? Not if we keep fighting. I'm not giving this up, I hope you all stick with me here until we see this thing to the bitter end. Like I said - these talks are just the beginning. We still have an opportunity to keep pushing harder, and higher up the chain to get our voices heard.
I am no way acquiescing to the vision of FW portrayed by the summit notes, but I still am partially pleased by the very fact we've gotten the conversation pushed this far. I just want to remind everyone a year ago we had CCP stand us up at our own fanfest circle, now we're the topic of private talks between the CSM and the lead game designer.
Have we elevated Faction Warfare in terms of visibility? Absolutely. Have we gotten their attention back on to one of the games most broken features? Absolutely. Are they actually going to dig into the code this summer and make some improvements? I personally believe so.
Are they completely in touch with the community's own wishes for the feature? Absoutely not.
The last part is the hardest, but it is still achievable. What I urge everyone in here to remember is this - We have a dying "feature", but a living community. CCP still doesn't see the latter, because one of our own isn't in those talks yet. I believe that will change.
In the meantime - we face a force of attrition. Many of you are weary from the forum warrioring, your energies are running out, patience is razor thin, and the notes are (rightfully so) only hurting morale. But this isn't over until we see patch notes containing it all - whether its OUR list, or THEIR list.
I can't tell you what having you all in here working to keep this thread bumped, active, and filled with excellent ideas has meant to me. Your tenacity is why I love and respect Faction Warfare pilots so dearly, everyone here wants to FIGHT, and you've taken that to defend the feature itself, not just your factions.
I started this thread three months ago - it is now 42 pages long and one of the most active threads in the forum. YOUR dedication is the only reason I believe that we even have CSM summit notes to complain about right now. I think we've already changed minds at the top, even if we haven't turned the heads far enough.
We will lose more players to apathy, hopelessness, anger, frustration, and disappointment, before Faction Warfare is finally overhauled. I hope we can all try to stay constructive, keep speaking up - because if its only a dozen of us in here, our words become the complaints of a bitter few, not the demands of the many. Bring your friends into the thread - we need more input, more voices standing together - to counteract those that inevitably will tire of the wait and move on to other games, or other scenes within New Eden.
The CSM notes do NOT describe a FW that reflects where we - the dedicated community who has invested EVERYTHING to keeping it alive when CCP abandoned it - want it to go. But that does not mean we are not making progress. Before we could ever hope to share our vision, we had to prove that Faction Warfare is desperately broken (mechanically), and we've accomplished that. We had to prove that fixing Faction Warfare will mean something to the rest of the game as well - we've accomplished that. As many pointed out, a council seat will be the next necessary step in our march forward.
There is still hope, there is still time. This is a first pass, the current CSM will come and go, and we will have the opportunity to correct the course - if everyone pitches in and keeps working together across all factions. Let the last year teach us all that change is possible, and that CCP does listen to its players.
I wouldn't keep posting day, after day, after day, If I really thought that the vision we read in the notes is really going to come to pass despite our attempts at intervention. If we give up now though, and call it day - I guarantee it will be.
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
118
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 23:37:00 -
[825] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Rel'k Bloodlor wrote: We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest
OOrrrah!! Very well put, this sums up my feelings exactly. What we have here is a clear case of a group of individuals who don't understand us, representing us. Is Faction Warfare a sinking hole? Depends on how you look at it. Every day I can undock and get some fun kills, I hate to use words like that to describe it. Is it headed somewhere we don't want to go? Not if we keep fighting. I'm not giving this up, I hope you all stick with me here until we see this thing to the bitter end. Like I said - these talks are just the beginning. We still have an opportunity to keep pushing harder, and higher up the chain to get our voices heard. I am no way acquiescing to the vision of FW portrayed by the summit notes, but I still am partially pleased by the very fact we've gotten the conversation pushed this far. I just want to remind everyone a year ago we had CCP stand us up at our own fanfest circle, now we're the topic of private talks between the CSM and the lead game designer. Have we elevated Faction Warfare in terms of visibility? Absolutely. Have we gotten their attention back on to one of the games most broken features? Absolutely. Are they actually going to dig into the code this summer and make some improvements? I personally believe so. Are they completely in touch with the community's own wishes for the feature? Absoutely not. The last part is the hardest, but it is still achievable. What I urge everyone in here to remember is this - We have a dying "feature", but a living community. CCP still doesn't see the latter, because one of our own isn't in those talks yet. I believe that will change. In the meantime - we face a force of attrition. Many of you are weary from the forum warrioring, your energies are running out, patience is razor thin, and the notes are (rightfully so) only hurting morale. But this isn't over until we see patch notes containing it all - whether its OUR list, or THEIR list. I can't tell you what having you all in here working to keep this thread bumped, active, and filled with excellent ideas has meant to me. Your tenacity is why I love and respect Faction Warfare pilots so dearly, everyone here wants to FIGHT, and you've taken that to defend the feature itself, not just your factions. I started this thread three months ago - it is now 42 pages long and one of the most active threads in the forum. YOUR dedication is the only reason I believe that we even have CSM summit notes to complain about right now. I think we've already changed minds at the top, even if we haven't turned the heads far enough. We will lose more players to apathy, hopelessness, anger, frustration, and disappointment, before Faction Warfare is finally overhauled. I hope we can all try to stay constructive, keep speaking up - because if its only a dozen of us in here, our words become the complaints of a bitter few, not the demands of the many. Bring your friends into the thread - we need more input, more voices standing together - to counteract those that inevitably will tire of the wait and move on to other games, or other scenes within New Eden. The CSM notes do NOT describe a FW that reflects where we - the dedicated community who has invested EVERYTHING to keeping it alive when CCP abandoned it - want it to go. But that does not mean we are not making progress. Before we could ever hope to share our vision, we had to prove that Faction Warfare is desperately broken (mechanically), and we've accomplished that. We had to prove that fixing Faction Warfare will mean something to the rest of the game as well - we've accomplished that. As many pointed out, a council seat will be the next necessary step in our march forward. There is still hope, there is still time. This is a first pass, the current CSM will come and go, and we will have the opportunity to correct the course - if everyone pitches in and keeps working together across all factions. Let the last year teach us all that change is possible, and that CCP does listen to its players. I wouldn't keep posting day, after day, after day, If I really thought that the vision we read in the notes is really going to come to pass despite our attempts at intervention. If we give up now though, and call it day - I guarantee it will be.
Words cannot describe how much I agree with this. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
33
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 02:00:00 -
[826] - Quote
We should have members of each faction pasting reminders here and there in the militia channels about this thread and the current action required by the community. I'll try to remember to remind people.
Also... I may be ******** here but... what deep-scan are we talking about here? 360-14AU directional scan? |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Retribution
35
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 02:13:00 -
[827] - Quote
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:I just don't understand how one I search the forums for Faction warfare I get hundreds of pages of information on FW from the people that use it. Yet none of what was discussed was any more than loosely based on things a majority of FW users want. I felt that ether we have all be using a noob-to-null devise improperly, or that they want this dead and will just change it to what ever we say we don't want. We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest And then theres this money thing I do want what we do and plexing to mean some thing but if you let alliances in and put money for having it in to play...... In the end I feel like FW as a hole is going some were i don't want to follow.
Rel'k for CSM!
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Retribution
29
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 02:17:00 -
[828] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:I just don't understand how one I search the forums for Faction warfare I get hundreds of pages of information on FW from the people that use it. Yet none of what was discussed was any more than loosely based on things a majority of FW users want. I felt that ether we have all be using a noob-to-null devise improperly, or that they want this dead and will just change it to what ever we say we don't want. We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest And then theres this money thing I do want what we do and plexing to mean some thing but if you let alliances in and put money for having it in to play...... In the end I feel like FW as a hole is going some were i don't want to follow. Rel'k for CSM!
Hurrraahh!!!! commrade!! |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
122
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 03:57:00 -
[829] - Quote
Been a bit late getting to this thread, but just wanted to say that when I read about the "Can we use FW as a testbed for null sov", my initial reaction was
NO - GTFO
My slightly longer one was
NO - GTFO of MY FW!!!
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Cromwell Savage
The Rock Hard Roosters
27
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 04:24:00 -
[830] - Quote
As I stated in the W&T thread about the minutes...
I AM NOT IN FW TO PRETEND TO BE IN 0.0!
|
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
258
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 05:39:00 -
[831] - 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 |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
346
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 05:53:00 -
[832] - Quote
just bumping this to say how clueless CCP is regarding FW. they are completely out of touch with what makes the idea of FW so amazing: small gang pvp, easy to get into, drama-free. small scale pvp allows for a huge variety of fits to blossom. no drama means people are just about getting out there to pew pew. and easy to get into means it's casual. this creates mass appeal. people RUN from nullsec bullshit.
i dont want FW run by nullsec monkeys. maybe CCP should have come out to that FW panel last year to get their edumacation. |
Marlona Sky
EntroPrelatial Vanguard EntroPraetorian Aegis
367
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 05:59:00 -
[833] - Quote
The CSM telling CCP to use FW as a test bed for null is not at all surprising to me tbh.
Why doesn't FW have a full representative on the CSM anyways?
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
122
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 07:00:00 -
[834] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:The CSM telling CCP to use FW as a test bed for null is not at all surprising to me tbh.
Why doesn't FW have a full representative on the CSM anyways?
Because faction war gets a bad rap. Elitist 0.0 dudes talk down faction war as much as they can and then there's the FW community itself talking about the broken plex mechanics. However, every single guy I see join militia after a year or so in 0.0 asks "why haven't I come here sooner?". Fact is most people haven't tried faction war, or they joined and couldn't get into fleets often enough. Faction war is kind of like fight club for a player that joins an NPC corp. You sit at the door and wait until you're called for and then you're in. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
122
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 07:01:00 -
[835] - Quote
And because of that bad rap, there aren't enough players to vote in a CSM |
Deen Wispa
Screaming War Eagles Incorporated
80
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 07:12:00 -
[836] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:We should have members of each faction pasting reminders here and there in the militia channels about this thread and the current action required by the community. I'll try to remember to remind people.
Also... I may be ******** here but... what deep-scan are we talking about here? 360-14AU directional scan?
I agree. Can we get all FW pilots to post to general militia and/or chat about this post? And if Hans intends on running for CSM, we can point them to that thread? . |
Frozen Fallout
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 09:02:00 -
[837] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Templar Dane wrote:Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:I just don't understand how one I search the forums for Faction warfare I get hundreds of pages of information on FW from the people that use it. Yet none of what was discussed was any more than loosely based on things a majority of FW users want. I felt that ether we have all be using a noob-to-null devise improperly, or that they want this dead and will just change it to what ever we say we don't want. We say casual they say drama We say small scale they say alliance We say not like null-lite they say nulls test bed We say quik PvP they say popularity contest And then theres this money thing I do want what we do and plexing to mean some thing but if you let alliances in and put money for having it in to play...... In the end I feel like FW as a hole is going some were i don't want to follow. Rel'k for CSM! Hurrraahh!!!! commrade!!
Page 42 :) where we learned the meaning of FW.
|
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
86
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 09:05:00 -
[838] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote: Rel'k for CSM!
As far as me for CSM gos there are people better for the job who would want to do it.
But If I will be listened to buy even 2 of you I have a few things to say. 1)we should all lay off attacking each other in FW related threads for now, we need to sound more like one voice. If you still need to smack find an different thread to smack them in. 2)Do not talk about removing features . 3)end post/signature with some thing you want.
I'll even for now lay off my "there trying to kill it on purpose" talk for now.........though I still want to see pickled heads or singed writing to the contrary.
I would like to see More plexes, and may be Incerson style events that go with the teritory control features. |
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 14:37:00 -
[839] - Quote
Minmatar, Amarr and Gallente unite!!!!! |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
228
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 15:34:00 -
[840] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:The CSM telling CCP to use FW as a test bed for null is not at all surprising to me tbh.
Why doesn't FW have a full representative on the CSM anyways?
I'm not surprised by the CSM saying that either. They are completely out of touch with anyone who actually enjoys small scale pvp in eve.
Not 100% sure why we don't have a rep but I think its because FW players often not as diehard computer gamers who can take several weeks off to travel to iceland plus do the other work required to be on csm. So last election no fw players even ran.
Plus fw players, like most eve players tend not to follow the csm politics. But unlike the null sec lemmings, they won't just vote for whoever they are told to vote for.
Lots of people have left fw because its core mechanic - occupancy plexing is most efficiently done as a pve sytem.
Finally there is some disagreement about what should be done.
Sure there is a consensus that CCP shouldn't just make FW into the same thing as null sec sov. But only a complete idiot would think they should. Should we strive to have more things to do in eve or fewer? CSM and CCP's answer: Fewer. Instead of having 2 different things to do 1)null sec sov warfare and 2)FW, lets make it so both mechanics are pretty much the same! That way players will have fewer options in eve.
It used to be that the only consensus was that fw needs to be fixed. Now it seems lots of people are saying its fine. I guess reading the stupidity contained in these minutes made them backpedal. Some people want more/stronger npcs some want no npcs etc etc.
I think Han's original post here is about as much of a consensus as we have ever gotten as to what we actually want to happen. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 16:09:00 -
[841] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Sure there is a consensus that CCP shouldn't just make FW into the same thing as null sec sov. But only a complete idiot would think they should. Should we strive to have more things to do in eve or fewer? CSM and CCP's answer: Fewer. Instead of having 2 different things to do 1)null sec sov warfare and 2)FW, lets make it so both mechanics are pretty much the same! That way players will have fewer options in eve.
Am I a complete idiot for considering that maybe a revamped nullsec sov system and revamped FW occupancy system could share elements of mechanics? I would suggest that the consensus is that both systems are broken or in need of more development. If CCP is able to produce a mechanic that can be applicable to both, then why not?
If you look back to the time that FW was still in development it was suggested that FW occupancy could be a good testing ground for nullsec sov changes. It's not a new suggestion.
Also, bear in mind that if CCP decide to take that route then FW will definitely get some development, rather than waiting for nullsec to be sorted first.
FW becoming a niche destines it to obscurity. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
260
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 18:17:00 -
[842] - 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. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
230
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 19:10:00 -
[843] - Quote
Kade Jeekin wrote:Cearain wrote:Sure there is a consensus that CCP shouldn't just make FW into the same thing as null sec sov. But only a complete idiot would think they should. Should we strive to have more things to do in eve or fewer? CSM and CCP's answer: Fewer. Instead of having 2 different things to do 1)null sec sov warfare and 2)FW, lets make it so both mechanics are pretty much the same! That way players will have fewer options in eve. Am I a complete idiot for considering that maybe a revamped nullsec sov system and revamped FW occupancy system could share elements of mechanics? I would suggest that the consensus is that both systems are broken or in need of more development. If CCP is able to produce a mechanic that can be applicable to both, then why not? .....
The reason I think they shouldn't do that is because different people want different things out of eve. But if all the mechanics are the same then eve won't be able to provide that.
Null sec provides opportunities for people who want to be involved in politics/drama and spying/lying on vent. It provides opportunities for people who don't mind waiting around for hours in order to form a huge fleet and have a huge fleet fight. It provides opportunities for people who don't mind that their assets may be lost if someone in their leadership suddenly doesn't like them, or an enemy comes and destroys there stuff. All of these things are things that allot of players like.
But then there are players who don't want that. Instead of waiting hours for some big fleet to form they want to go out and do small scale stuff. They don't want drama out of a computer game. They basically don't want allot of what people in null sec think are great parts of the game.
Now if you make both mechanics the same you won't please both crowds. You might please one crowd but you will alienate the other.
Why not keep the 2 systems different by implementing different mechanics to achieve the different playstyle preferences?
CSM likes the null sec part of the game. So of course they were thinking they would be doing us a favor by making fw similar to what they think is great.
But really instead of making things the same ccp should be thinking how can I make this feature unique so that a wider audience can find something they like in eve.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
39
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 20:11:00 -
[844] - Quote
Ahhhh Soudwave.... I had a little lol this morning reading the latest dev blog:
"Alliances can now join faction warfare. This is the first of a series of Factional Warfare iterations CCP Ytterbium is working on. WeGÇÖll tell you more as we get closer to fanfest, but weGÇÖre working on Factional Warfare. In other news, a flying pig just passed my window." |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 22:01:00 -
[845] - Quote
My main is in FW, this is mainly down to my available play time and the nature of it allowing me to do High Sec and Low sec play in shorter periods.
I am pleased that CCP seem to have made a real commitment to Faction Warfare.
I think it is important to remeber that some of the suggestions in the munutes and points being discussed in this thread are CSM not CCP opinions.
Regarding any FW/Nullsec mechanics, for me (and this is the problem with the meeting minutes, it lacks details) it comes down to the details of the mechanic, if a good small gang system occupancy mechanic with consequences for occupancy is developed then I think we would all welcome that, also if that system is then built on and scaled up for Nullsec then does that really matter?
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
794
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 01:04:00 -
[846] - Quote
Deen Wispa wrote:Damassys Kadesh wrote:We should have members of each faction pasting reminders here and there in the militia channels about this thread and the current action required by the community. I'll try to remember to remind people.
Also... I may be ******** here but... what deep-scan are we talking about here? 360-14AU directional scan? I agree. Can we get all FW pilots to post to general militia and/or chat about this post? And if Hans intends on running for CSM, we can point them to that thread?
There is no "Hans for CSM" thread at this point and time, at least not that I'm aware of!! Right now our focus should be on speaking up about the current issue at hand (By now it should be clear the Alliances-in-FW issue is off the table, we'll all just have to learn to accept that) which is the CSM summit minutes. We should strike while the iron is hot and while the feedback is at its most relevant. If you want to post a MOTD in your chat channels (Great idea!) than link them here.
The best thing everyone can do for now is to provide strong, honest feedback in the proper response thread to the CSM minutes release. I want everyone to chime in and let CCP know what the community feels NOW about the direction they discussed.
As you can see in the recent Dev Blog, they've already got a list of ideas, and CCP Ytterbium is now the one managing FW updates. Right now lets focus on making sure that by the time CSM elections come around, CCP developers aren't already headed down a course we can't help to correct at that point in time. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
126
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 02:53:00 -
[847] - Quote
I wrote a letter to some guys in the CSM via in game. Hopefully they play the same game (or at least log into) the same client as I do. If not, here it is. My plee:
Quote:Greetings, I am a FW player for about two years and I'd like to bring to the attention of the CSM/CCP some of the concerns of the FW community has voiced. First and foremost I would like to state that faction war players enjoy the variety faction war has to offer. You can hop into a destroyer and plex one day and a few hours later be participating in a battleship on battleship fight with caps, logi, etc. You can solo, you can blob. FW offers an environment for all types of players. Faction war in itself is not fundamentally broken. There is a reason why players have been participating in FW, despite years of neglect. I hope CCP keeps the small gang elements in place (plexing) while still having mechanics for larger fleets to fight over (moons, poses, bunker busts, whatever). CCP/CSM wanted to inject drama, spying, metagaming, etc into faction war. There already is spying, some metagaming, some drama between corps within a militia. All you need is to inject some things to fight over (station rights, moons, taxes, whatever) and you will see a lot more of all of this. This proposed "in game election" idea for militia leaders is ********. There, I said it. It's a ******** idea. What are the prequisites for someone to be en eligible voter for such a leader? Simply a member of a militia? If that is the case you will see the goons or another large alliance just make/move alts into faction war on election day and vote in one of their alts to siphon tax isk to their alliance and there isn't a damned thing the FW community could do about it. It becomes a numbers game, a matter of population, and not about deception or people making the mistake of trusting you. "Meta"-gaming like this is just ********. Meta gaming should be about actually having to earn the trust of those you're attempting to infiltrate, and those who you're attempting to infiltrate make the mistake of actually trusting you. I would rather be done in by a classy PL spy by making the mistake of trusting them, than having the unwashed masses of goonswarm makes alts and vote in a mittens alt on election day with this "in-game election" mechanic that was proposed. Do not implement this. You are taking out player choice and the consequences of those choices if you implement this. Faction war players won't have a choice who is "their leader". Pursue a different route if you think there should be some sort of "leadership" within a militia. Perhaps it could be what corp/alliance has the most "victory points" (whoever defends a militias systems/captures systems for your militia the best) within a militia over a recent time period to become an executor corp or bid for station tax rights or whatever. There are better ways to go about this. Meta gaming in eve should be about trust and the betrayal of that trust. It's about betrayal. Having a bigger entity make alts and join your militia (which militias cannot control who joins them) and then elect a puppet leader is a complete contradiction of what meta gaming in EvE is to me. All that being said, I hope CCP and the CSM listen to the faction war community before moving forward. There should be consequence of losing systems, and rewards for gaining them, but please listen to the FW community. We are not in nullsec for a reason. The FW community does not want FW to become lowsec. Do not homogenize EvE. You can look at the following thread for feedback regarding what the FW community thinks about the recent CSM summit minutes and some of the proposed ideas here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=58742&find=unread a lot of the players feel that CCP and the CSM is out of touch with the faction war community. All of this being said I (and the FW community) are greatly appreciative that faction war is getting iterated upon. I don't want to sound like a completely whiny ***** but please, we ask that you guys get "in touch" with the faction war community before moving foward. Get feedback that isn't just the CSM. Get in touch with this community. Do not repeat the mistakes of the past. I personally would like it if a dev would take the time to post on the above linked thread, even if it's just a "hey, we're listening" one liner. It would be greatly appreciated by the FW community. Thank you for your time. -Super Chair
Here's to hoping! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
795
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 03:50:00 -
[848] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:I wrote a letter to some guys in the CSM via in game. Hopefully they play the same game (or at least log into) the same client as I do. If not, here it is. My plee:
Thanks, Super Chair!! That letter is awesome. That's exactly what we need - a flood of emails just like that one going straight to CSM leaders. Coming from a wide number of DIFFERENT militia pilots, not just the same few of us repeating the same thing.
This is exactly the kind of pro-active work we need to see more of in the days ahead - we must give CCP and the CSM no chance to not be 100% clear on what we want and how we feel about what they want to do with our feature.
Much appreciated.
+1 !! |
Corpse Swallower
0uter Ring Excavations Outer Ring Excavations Syndicate
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 04:01:00 -
[849] - Quote
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.
Awesome idea! |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
324
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 04:21:00 -
[850] - Quote
And in other news...
Independent low sec organizations from the militia need representation in some way as well! Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
|
Krawdad
The Racket
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 04:24:00 -
[851] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:I wrote a letter to some guys in the CSM via in game. Hopefully they play the same game (or at least log into) the same client as I do. If not, here it is. My plee: Quote: ... The FW community does not want FW to become lowsec. ...
-Super Chair
Here's to hoping!
Was definitely a good letter, hope it helps get their attention.
Just one slight typo I saw (you meant nullsec, right?)
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
128
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 05:43:00 -
[852] - Quote
Krawdad wrote:Super Chair wrote:I wrote a letter to some guys in the CSM via in game. Hopefully they play the same game (or at least log into) the same client as I do. If not, here it is. My plee: Quote: ... The FW community does not want FW to become lowsec. ...
-Super Chair
Here's to hoping! Was definitely a good letter, hope it helps get their attention. Just one slight typo I saw (you meant nullsec, right?)
Yeah, I meant nullsec. Too much calculus homework today |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
128
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 05:44:00 -
[853] - Quote
I urge everyone to spam the CSM's mailboxes. Voice your opinion, they'll either do something or turn on auto reject. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
41
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 06:41:00 -
[854] - Quote
Who exactly is best to send these kinds of letters to? I am in Factional Warfare and it needs lots of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
132
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 08:02:00 -
[855] - Quote
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Members_of_the_sixth_CSM
Here is a list of the current CSMs (CSM 6). For spammy goodness, you need only to remember their ingame character names. Sadly I did not spam some of these guys on the list. I'll be sure to do that. |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
89
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 08:06:00 -
[856] - Quote
So here is my 10 things I would love for faction war
1) A new FW exclusive ship, a navy frigate. This would help people and groups new in have a way to turn the LP from 1-3 level missions around faster. Thus encouraging them to put money in to ships for pew pew, well staying small and semi difficult to farm. Also add a little spice to frig sized plexing
2) make the FW only ships in the LP store have a BPC version. My self as an example works for Gallente militia and have 0 Gallent BS skills so I've only ever sold 1 navy domi as I can't fly a domi to the LP store or fly the navy domi to market. BPC's would help us all make a little more for our time and help the market as a whole I believe.
3) Up the reward for PvP. Weather its isk bounty's for killing ships on the other side, or LP.
4) Allow us to AT LEAST go in to .5 systems of our opponents or scale back the navy response NPCs.
5) Over haul FW missions, they are not balanced buy any definition, and are a little to easy to do a level 4 solo in a cheep T2 frigg for some sides.
6) A yearly Event. Now I know we just got alliances so we could do the tournament BUT that isn't what were about IMHO. (flaunting money and pilot skills to show off/scare competitors) There is plenty to work with, hell if memory serves me there is still a Caldari titan 20 AU from the Gallente home world..........
7) NEVER allow cross faction alliances
8) More divers and larger plexes. (So serpentis can throw up a 5 room site with gates and towers in a few hours to cook some meth, but the Caldari navy's biggest endeavor is a box in space.....)
9) bonuses for taking space, that are non monetary. I don't want a reason for out side groups to come in, I want a reword for us to use (like gang link type bonus or LP or pulling opposing missioners to the conquered space thus putting them in danger for letting it fall ect ect)
10) Adding in the the pirate factions to FW, not as whole new factions to join but as partners in crime. The enemy of my enemy is my friend sorta thing. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
797
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 08:19:00 -
[857] - Quote
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:So here is my 10 things I would love for faction war
6) A yearly Event. Now I know we just got alliances so we could do the tournament BUT that isn't what were about IMHO. (flaunting money and pilot skills to show off/scare competitors) There is plenty to work with, hell if memory serves me there is still a Caldari titan 20 AU from the Gallente home world..........
CCP Dropbear has done some very cool in-character Live Events recently - I could see him concocting some really cool PvP-based scenarios once or twice a year that give FW pilots something fun to do, that also enhances the Faction War story for the rest of the players of the game to enjoy.
|
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
89
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 08:47:00 -
[858] - Quote
Ya advancing the story would be nice. Kinda wierd that the Caldarri/Gallenta thing is still just sitting there. And that concord station is still in ruins too. Is there a wierd thing like a titan laying around in amarr or minnmatar space as well? |
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 15:23:00 -
[859] - Quote
I was thinking that shoud the whole system occupancy thing ever start impacting on local taxation etc then adding the Pirate factions to the mix would really be cool. Imagine the Angel Cartel militia occupying Amamake? It would be similar to the Skarkon incident.
Who would welcome the new pirate overlords? |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
233
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 15:43:00 -
[860] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:So here is my 10 things I would love for faction war
6) A yearly Event. Now I know we just got alliances so we could do the tournament BUT that isn't what were about IMHO. (flaunting money and pilot skills to show off/scare competitors) There is plenty to work with, hell if memory serves me there is still a Caldari titan 20 AU from the Gallente home world..........
CCP Dropbear has done some very cool in-character Live Events recently - I could see him concocting some really cool PvP-based scenarios once or twice a year that give FW pilots something fun to do, that also enhances the Faction War story for the rest of the players of the game to enjoy.
One nice thing about the elections of some sort of admiral would be we could then have someone who could choose our team to either enter an alliance tournament or have our own fw tournament.
A faction war tournament could revolve around capturing a fw plex. Each side could get a team for each type of plex and do a defense and an offensive plex so each faction would have 12 fights.
Ok it may not have the crowd of the alliance tournament or the rewards but it would give the following benefits:
1) it would be more realistic than the alliance tournament. The Alliance tournament doesn't allow warp outs and has an artificial barrier that never really exists in game. This could be a demonstration of the straight up game mechanics.
2) It highlights one of the best parts of eve - fw plex mechanics. And very likely generate interest in FW. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
Shukuzen Kiraa
0uter Ring Excavations Outer Ring Excavations Syndicate
41
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 21:45:00 -
[861] - Quote
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.
Best...idea....EVER! +1 |
Laerise
PIE Inc.
9
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 07:59:00 -
[862] - Quote
Shukuzen Kiraa 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. Best...idea....EVER! +1
Yeah, right, take away the only drawback of FW. Actions should have consequences, or as it was said in the CSM minutes "EVE is not a game for wusses". |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
806
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 11:28:00 -
[863] - Quote
Shukuzen Kiraa 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. Best...idea....EVER! +1
The reason that Faction Warfare pilots are against this change is simple - one of the most badass things you can pull off in Faction Warfare is a high sec kill - and its badass precisely because you have to brave both enemy pilots and enemy NPC's make your kill.
The danger and challenge of pushing into enemy highsec and still achieving a kill brings a much greater high and a much greater respect level for those who pull it off.
Removing NPC's would mean there was no difference between low sec and high sec for Faction Warfare pilots, and eliminate one of the most difficult and rewarding ways to prove your combat prowess.
Pilots like Jalmon that live like Rambo behind enemy highsec lines, stacking solo kills in a more challenging environment than he would ever face in lowsec - become heroes in their respective factions. There is no need to nerf the difficulty level of half the territory where miliitia pilots can already freely travel and fight - IF they truly have the balls and the skill.
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Retribution
33
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 16:57:00 -
[864] - Quote
Corpse Swallower 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. Awesome idea!
terribad idea. if anything increase the npcs in highsec. they should **** your **** up when you enter enemy highsec.
if you remove npcs from highsec. thats gonna make as much sense as flying threw planets. |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
97
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 17:00:00 -
[865] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Corpse Swallower 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. Awesome idea! terribad idea. if anything increase the npcs in highsec. they should **** your **** up when you enter enemy highsec. if you remove npcs from highsec. thats gonna make as much sense as flying threw planets.
i think having the faction police in opposing high secs, i just think they need ot be toned down a little more and should scale with larger gangs better.
Right now you NEED a craptonne of reps to do anything in a 1.0 for any amount of time, it should be hard for a solo guy but not near impossible and scale up wiht more gang members and reps.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
264
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 17:27:00 -
[866] - 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 .. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
15
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 22:03:00 -
[867] - Quote
I say remove the NPCs, people are already circumventing them anyway. But gate guns and faction owned station guns should fire on the enemy WTs. And enemy WTs shouldn't be given permission to dock at stations that the guns are firing on them from. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 04:55:00 -
[868] - Quote
Schalac wrote:I say remove the NPCs, people are already circumventing them anyway. But gate guns and faction owned station guns should fire on the enemy WTs. And enemy WTs shouldn't be given permission to dock at stations that the guns are firing on them from.
There is no reason to open up more space for the current number of pilots to fight in. Plus we'd be accepting that the war means nothing to the faction's space you're in... go ahead Gallente, run around and shoot some Caldari in our space, we have no Navy to oppose you with...
The only reason this would ever make any sense, both logistically and story-wise, is if war participation grew beyond the point of being geographically sustainable in low-sec, and factions could actually attack and take over high-sec systems.
The effort required to circumvent the NPCs is pretty balanced with the reward. It's not particularly easy to get everyone organized to do it, but when you do, you have more opportunity to catch people off guard.
Station guns firing on enemies could be added to low and/or high sec in my opinion. That is an idea that could be fleshed out. I am in Factional Warfare and it needs lots of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
817
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 06:16:00 -
[869] - Quote
Nice signature BTW, Damassys. Thanks for supporting the cause! |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 06:59:00 -
[870] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Nice signature BTW, Damassys. Thanks for supporting the cause!
lol, I'm actually just grabbing the link to this thread to paste to militia chat right now ;)
Go team FW! I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
239
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 16:13:00 -
[871] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:How many militia raids on urban centres/capitals have you heard of in the entirety of human history?
We haven't been able to warp huge fleets of spaceships from solar system to solar system. If we could then there might be more attacks at capitals.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Retribution
33
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 17:18:00 -
[872] - Quote
Muad 'dib wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:Corpse Swallower 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. Awesome idea! terribad idea. if anything increase the npcs in highsec. they should **** your **** up when you enter enemy highsec. if you remove npcs from highsec. thats gonna make as much sense as flying threw planets. i think having the faction police in opposing high secs, i just think they need ot be toned down a little more and should scale with larger gangs better. Right now you NEED a craptonne of reps to do anything in a 1.0 for any amount of time, it should be hard for a solo guy but not near impossible and scale up wiht more gang members and reps.
muad they do scale with gangs. if you shot em more will arrive with as much dps as they need to kill the target that shot you in 8 seconds. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
16
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 18:42:00 -
[873] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:Schalac wrote:I say remove the NPCs, people are already circumventing them anyway. But gate guns and faction owned station guns should fire on the enemy WTs. And enemy WTs shouldn't be given permission to dock at stations that the guns are firing on them from. There is no reason to open up more space for the current number of pilots to fight in. Plus we'd be accepting that the war means nothing to the faction's space you're in... go ahead Gallente, run around and shoot some Caldari in our space, we have no Navy to oppose you with... The only reason this would ever make any sense, both logistically and story-wise, is if war participation grew beyond the point of being geographically sustainable in low-sec, and factions could actually attack and take over high-sec systems. The effort required to circumvent the NPCs is pretty balanced with the reward. It's not particularly easy to get everyone organized to do it, but when you do, you have more opportunity to catch people off guard. Station guns firing on enemies could be added to low and/or high sec in my opinion. That is an idea that could be fleshed out. You don't get it do you. We are supposed to be the ones that keep the enemy out of our highsec. Not the Navy. That is what a militia is and does. Reliance on NPCs is why cal mil is so sad to begin with. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
142
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 19:10:00 -
[874] - Quote
Schalac wrote:Damassys Kadesh wrote:Schalac wrote:I say remove the NPCs, people are already circumventing them anyway. But gate guns and faction owned station guns should fire on the enemy WTs. And enemy WTs shouldn't be given permission to dock at stations that the guns are firing on them from. There is no reason to open up more space for the current number of pilots to fight in. Plus we'd be accepting that the war means nothing to the faction's space you're in... go ahead Gallente, run around and shoot some Caldari in our space, we have no Navy to oppose you with... The only reason this would ever make any sense, both logistically and story-wise, is if war participation grew beyond the point of being geographically sustainable in low-sec, and factions could actually attack and take over high-sec systems. The effort required to circumvent the NPCs is pretty balanced with the reward. It's not particularly easy to get everyone organized to do it, but when you do, you have more opportunity to catch people off guard. Station guns firing on enemies could be added to low and/or high sec in my opinion. That is an idea that could be fleshed out. You don't get it do you. We are supposed to be the ones that keep the enemy out of our highsec. Not the Navy. That is what a militia is and does. Reliance on NPCs is why cal mil is so sad to begin with.
They shouldn't be "kept out", but rather its just dangerous to lead an incursion deep into enemy terroritory (such as their capital). Enter NPC Navy to do this. No where should be 100% safe.
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 21:27:00 -
[875] - Quote
The reason any militia is sad atm is because it's hard to justify fighting for something that has no consequences, not because there are NPCs in high-sec.
Having a level of protection is important because otherwise FW would turn into 100% griefing on stations where you are trying to buy ships to go out and do real PvP in the designated low-sec areas. THAT would be sad.
Having the occasional destroyer trying to gank at Jita station, or the occasional fleet rip through high-sec and catch inattentive pilots is one thing, perma-camping Jita and forcing people to rework their logistics is just a huge pain and would only hurt the fun, people would probably un-sub, and you'd have even less good fighting overall.... terrible idea in every way. I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
gunnergonk
Vectra Source Partnership
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 21:42:00 -
[876] - Quote
im a fw vet, reason i dont fly in fw fleets or fly in black rise is because you just cant fight fw. example, 6 caldari on a gate camp 11 neutrals in local, spys/intel says 4 gallente about to jump in great! as we take down the first 2 ships we get blobbed by 9 of the 11 neutrals and get slaughtered! so wheres the factional warefare in that? got bored of too many pirates in black rise, imho thats whats wrong with fw. fw should be fw. not planning for an fw fight then having a load of pirates and neutrals warp in and nail all the fw ships!
ok call me a coward but i signed up to foght the gallente and the minmatards not every tom **** or harry that flys in black rise and sees im in a fight so decides to add some dps!
gunner. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 00:05:00 -
[877] - Quote
double-post :( I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 00:05:00 -
[878] - Quote
gunnergonk wrote:im a fw vet, reason i dont fly in fw fleets or fly in black rise is because you just cant fight fw. example, 6 caldari on a gate camp 11 neutrals in local, spys/intel says 4 gallente about to jump in great! as we take down the first 2 ships we get blobbed by 9 of the 11 neutrals and get slaughtered! so wheres the factional warefare in that? got bored of too many pirates in black rise, imho thats whats wrong with fw. fw should be fw. not planning for an fw fight then having a load of pirates and neutrals warp in and nail all the fw ships!
ok call me a coward but i signed up to foght the gallente and the minmatards not every tom **** or harry that flys in black rise and sees im in a fight so decides to add some dps!
gunner.
That's a problem in high-sec boarder systems and other pie headquaters. But I don't find that to be a big problem if you're roaming around the pipes. Sometimes you run into other roaming pirate gangs, but you can never fully avoid that. I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Lubomir Penev
Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 07:09:00 -
[879] - Quote
gunnergonk wrote:im a fw vet, reason i dont fly in fw fleets or fly in black rise is because you just cant fight fw. example, 6 caldari on a gate camp 11 neutrals in local, spys/intel says 4 gallente about to jump in great! as we take down the first 2 ships we get blobbed by 9 of the 11 neutrals and get slaughtered! so wheres the factional warefare in that? got bored of too many pirates in black rise, imho thats whats wrong with fw. fw should be fw. not planning for an fw fight then having a load of pirates and neutrals warp in and nail all the fw ships!
ok call me a coward but i signed up to foght the gallente and the minmatards not every tom **** or harry that flys in black rise and sees im in a fight so decides to add some dps!
gunner.
From someone in a corp that made its name killing AFK Gallente pilot in Genesis highsec, that's rich.
|
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1310
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 07:19:00 -
[880] - Quote
gunnergonk wrote:im a fw vet, reason i dont fly in fw fleets or fly in black rise is because you just cant fight fw. example, 6 caldari on a gate camp 11 neutrals in local, spys/intel says 4 gallente about to jump in great! as we take down the first 2 ships we get blobbed by 9 of the 11 neutrals and get slaughtered! so wheres the factional warefare in that? got bored of too many pirates in black rise, imho thats whats wrong with fw. fw should be fw. not planning for an fw fight then having a load of pirates and neutrals warp in and nail all the fw ships!
ok call me a coward but i signed up to foght the gallente and the minmatards not every tom **** or harry that flys in black rise and sees im in a fight so decides to add some dps!
gunner.
well as long as people plays it .. such behavior is to be expected. People are ******. |
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
239
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 11:31:00 -
[881] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Restrict FW store access to active FW pilots (tie to VP/LP/Kills), ...!
I put a thread up in assembly hall for this idea. I think its a good one.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=60820&find=unread Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 14:19:00 -
[882] - Quote
Alliances Tommorw!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Nachshon
Buccaneer's Brotherhood
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 15:05:00 -
[883] - Quote
There are two major areas of FW that I think need improvement:
1. Occupancy. Right now, it's just cosmetic. There need to be substantial changes that actually make it worthwhile. One idea would be to incorporate POS's. Perhaps the kind of permit needed changes with occupancy - and militia pilots don't need permits at all in friendly territory.
2. Rank. It should mean something beyond your standing. I once suggested that pilots be able to call in NPC support based on rank. |
ShardowRhino
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 16:23:00 -
[884] - Quote
Nice, a big thread about FW. I think the most fun I have had in this game was small empire wardecs. That is followed by the time in FW where I could fly cruisers, frigates, and destroyers and have a fight against similar ships. It was no longer a matter of getting tons of isk just to pvp as I could mine here and there and build some ships to run. It wasn't about months of training for a particular ship that is going to cost nearly 50-100mil and completely uninsurable. I think the biggest losses ended up being my pod without imps, but it was well worth it because of the fun factor of FW.
The fun part about FW is that you can jump into a fleet, get into a fight, get wiped out, podded, and go again without caring to much. Of course the isk I could pull in was a lot more then some new player could have a wet dream about. Its just a load of fun where there is the risk of losing isk, but without the constant paranoia that people get in 0.0, or even about being in 0.0. In empire most of the pvp I had got was defending a gate system. I missed all the big fleet fights and many of the roams resulted in zero action, unless we ran into a massive gate camp.
I think if CCP were to stop and think about it, they would realize that FW should not be treated like the afterbirth coming out after that redheaded stepchild, but instead a twist on their original game. There are plenty of people that are going to want to go to 0.0, thats great. But, there is also going to be a lot of people that would want to get into FW if it was treated like it was at least that redheaded stepchild, instead of the afterbirth. Why not cater to both groups that want to pvp in slightly different ways? Both lose ships and gear and fuel the market. Not only that but they fuel the producing of the T1 ships and hardware. Instead of just new players buying caracals and heavy launchers, or t2 manufacturers buying it, FW creates additional demand which allows new industrial players a way to make better money as they grow.
I plan on going to 0.0 soon, but would love to keep some lower SP alts in empire to get in on the FW fights for when I want a fight sooner then later, or without a huge hit to my wallet if i get popped. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
836
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 18:27:00 -
[885] - Quote
ShardowRhino wrote:Nice, a big thread about FW. I think the most fun I have had in this game was small empire wardecs. That is followed by the time in FW where I could fly cruisers, frigates, and destroyers and have a fight against similar ships. It was no longer a matter of getting tons of isk just to pvp as I could mine here and there and build some ships to run. It wasn't about months of training for a particular ship that is going to cost nearly 50-100mil and completely uninsurable. I think the biggest losses ended up being my pod without imps, but it was well worth it because of the fun factor of FW.
The fun part about FW is that you can jump into a fleet, get into a fight, get wiped out, podded, and go again without caring to much. Of course the isk I could pull in was a lot more then some new player could have a wet dream about. Its just a load of fun where there is the risk of losing isk, but without the constant paranoia that people get in 0.0, or even about being in 0.0. In empire most of the pvp I had got was defending a gate system. I missed all the big fleet fights and many of the roams resulted in zero action, unless we ran into a massive gate camp.
I think if CCP were to stop and think about it, they would realize that FW should not be treated like the afterbirth coming out after that redheaded stepchild, but instead a twist on their original game. There are plenty of people that are going to want to go to 0.0, thats great. But, there is also going to be a lot of people that would want to get into FW if it was treated like it was at least that redheaded stepchild, instead of the afterbirth. Why not cater to both groups that want to pvp in slightly different ways? Both lose ships and gear and fuel the market. Not only that but they fuel the producing of the T1 ships and hardware. Instead of just new players buying caracals and heavy launchers, or t2 manufacturers buying it, FW creates additional demand which allows new industrial players a way to make better money as they grow.
I plan on going to 0.0 soon, but would love to keep some lower SP alts in empire to get in on the FW fights for when I want a fight sooner then later, or without a huge hit to my wallet if i get popped.
I only wish the current council understood why we participate in Faction Warfare as well as you do! You've summarized our sentiments precisely.
Thank you for your contribution, its nice to have some fresh blood in this thread - far too many of the same people in here saying the same thing, even though bumps are always appreciated. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
16
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 21:08:00 -
[886] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:The reason any militia is sad atm is because it's hard to justify fighting for something that has no consequences, not because there are NPCs in high-sec.
Having a level of protection is important because otherwise FW would turn into 100% griefing on stations where you are trying to buy ships to go out and do real PvP in the designated low-sec areas. THAT would be sad.
Having the occasional destroyer trying to gank at Jita station, or the occasional fleet rip through high-sec and catch inattentive pilots is one thing, perma-camping Jita and forcing people to rework their logistics is just a huge pain and would only hurt the fun, people would probably un-sub, and you'd have even less good fighting overall.... terrible idea in every way. Did you read anything past my first statement? Seems to me you haven't and they wouldn't be able to camp Jita IV-4 because 1. it has lots of sentry guns and 2. they wouldn't be allowed to dock into it if they ran into trouble.
But you just saw me say "remove NPCs" and went with that. It's ok though I understand those that don't have reading comprehension trained past 1. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
837
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 22:43:00 -
[887] - Quote
Galatica789 wrote:Alliances Tommorw!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you for your contribution. And for stating the obvious. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 23:13:00 -
[888] - Quote
Schalac wrote:Damassys Kadesh wrote:The reason any militia is sad atm is because it's hard to justify fighting for something that has no consequences, not because there are NPCs in high-sec.
Having a level of protection is important because otherwise FW would turn into 100% griefing on stations where you are trying to buy ships to go out and do real PvP in the designated low-sec areas. THAT would be sad.
Having the occasional destroyer trying to gank at Jita station, or the occasional fleet rip through high-sec and catch inattentive pilots is one thing, perma-camping Jita and forcing people to rework their logistics is just a huge pain and would only hurt the fun, people would probably un-sub, and you'd have even less good fighting overall.... terrible idea in every way. Did you read anything past my first statement? Seems to me you haven't and they wouldn't be able to camp Jita IV-4 because 1. it has lots of sentry guns and 2. they wouldn't be allowed to dock into it if they ran into trouble. But you just saw me say "remove NPCs" and went with that. It's ok though I understand those that don't have reading comprehension trained past 1.
lol thanks for the unnecessary condescension. If you read MY post (jeeeez) you'd see I responded to your sentry gun reference, but I wasn't thinking in terms of combining the mechanics, mostly because CCP Soundwaves original suggestion of NPC removal was in fact only NPC removal. So, yes, combining the mechanics you cited wouldn't be quite as bad, but you are still left with the first problem, which is that you suddenly have a massive area (the entirety of empire) for the relatively small number of active pilots. There wouldn't even be a reason for Gallente to fight mainly Caldari, or Amarr/Min, because the specific low-sec bridge between their high-sec semi-havens would not be any more desirable a place to fight than any high-sec.
We'll see how much activity increases with alliances... personally I hope it doesn't turn into a cluster-eff :P I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
16
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 00:46:00 -
[889] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:Schalac wrote:Damassys Kadesh wrote:The reason any militia is sad atm is because it's hard to justify fighting for something that has no consequences, not because there are NPCs in high-sec.
Having a level of protection is important because otherwise FW would turn into 100% griefing on stations where you are trying to buy ships to go out and do real PvP in the designated low-sec areas. THAT would be sad.
Having the occasional destroyer trying to gank at Jita station, or the occasional fleet rip through high-sec and catch inattentive pilots is one thing, perma-camping Jita and forcing people to rework their logistics is just a huge pain and would only hurt the fun, people would probably un-sub, and you'd have even less good fighting overall.... terrible idea in every way. Did you read anything past my first statement? Seems to me you haven't and they wouldn't be able to camp Jita IV-4 because 1. it has lots of sentry guns and 2. they wouldn't be allowed to dock into it if they ran into trouble. But you just saw me say "remove NPCs" and went with that. It's ok though I understand those that don't have reading comprehension trained past 1. lol thanks for the unnecessary condescension. If you read MY post (jeeeez) you'd see I responded to your sentry gun reference, but I wasn't thinking in terms of combining the mechanics, mostly because CCP Soundwaves original suggestion of NPC removal was in fact only NPC removal. So, yes, combining the mechanics you cited wouldn't be quite as bad, but you are still left with the first problem, which is that you suddenly have a massive area (the entirety of empire) for the relatively small number of active pilots. There wouldn't even be a reason for Gallente to fight mainly Caldari, or Amarr/Min, because the specific low-sec bridge between their high-sec semi-havens would not be any more desirable a place to fight than any high-sec. We'll see how much activity increases with alliances... personally I hope it doesn't turn into a cluster-eff :P I like the "frontline is everywhere" mentality though. Yes FW has problems. Most of which I think are player made to begin with but you can't fix that. So why not just allow it to be a global wardec and remove the NPCs and make stations shoot at enemies. And if they couldn't dock at enemy stations all the better. Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
839
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 01:24:00 -
[890] - Quote
Schalac wrote: Yes FW has problems. Most of which I think are player made to begin with but you can't fix that.
I can guarantee you the problem isn't with the community. CCP developed a half-baked feature, the first in a line of many over the last few years, that they have now owned up to. Part of the reason we are now seeing change is two-fold. One, because of the restructuring of the company, now there are resources for FW again. Secondly, that we as a community have been extremely vocal starting about year ago when we were snubbed at Fan Fest, and we have rallied as a single voice to the developers especially over the last few months.
Shalee Lianne's excellent Sov Wars blog has dozens of quality interviews - if you want to know the number #1 reason that the players stick around, its the other players and the plentiful fights. (The fights, however, are waning) We enjoy fighting together, and we enjoy fighting each other.
The problem is that we're also reasonable people, with clever minds, and as boredom-prone as any other player in the game. Plexing with zero occupancy meaning can only be entertaining for so long....when faced with a lack of incentives, gameplay stagnates.
You can observe the exact same phenomena out in nulsec - totally different mechanical issues, but the same problem. Restlessness and boredom leftover from half-baked content pooped out in the Dominion expansion.
Faction warfare pilots inspire me. Their dedication has made the most of a crapass feature because they ran with it, making the best of the least and fighting wherever and whenever they could. Even when CCP put all the spawns at down time, FW pilots continue fighting round the clock, even with nothing of any substance to fight over.
But seriously. Its three years. Three years of bugs, three years of no consequence to victory, and most importantly - three years of failed promises on behalf of CCP. Wouldn't you get discouraged too?
And yes, I know I'm a bit riled up here. But I'm taking precious time away that I could be out fighting because I care too damn much about the players here to just give up and allow FW meet its fate in the hands of CCP and the current CSM. So when I hear misconceptions like this, I'm gonna get testy!!
I know you didn't mean any harm with it, but I just have to fix that statement for you.....
Schalac wrote: Yes FW has some awesome things going for it. Most of which are player made to begin with because someone had to finish the job after CCP gave up.
|
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
839
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 01:57:00 -
[891] - Quote
Schalac wrote:So why not just allow it to be a global wardec and remove the NPCs and make stations shoot at enemies. And if they couldn't dock at enemy stations all the better. Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?
Alrighty. Now that I've taken a moment to get that off my chest, I'm happy to address the other ideas here!
As for stations shooting at enemies, this to me is a no-brainer. I have yet to hear any opposition amongst FW pilots, and its the very first "simple fix" I'd push for if I ever was in the same room as a developer.
Docking games suck. Having enemy factions loitering on your station in your system sucks. It makes no sense gameplay wise, breaks immersion, and allows the WORST kind of engagements to persist.
As for docking, people are more split. I personally am opposed because FW pilots enjoy their freedom, their mobility. Just as we don't enjoy 0.0 because of the thought of waking up in someone elses space and not being able to access your own belongings, neither do we relish the idea of working hard for ships to wake up the next day and not be able to blow them up. Locking people out of their ships to me just seems like an unnecessary shackle to frequent, quality PvP.
I AM however, in favor of restricting docking services. If you have to make an emergency landing in enemy station, or wake up to find that your faction's station is now being occupied by the enemy, you shouldn't be able to repair your ship, purchase insurance, and use medical services. (Ok, from a RP standpoint even enemy stations might still provide med services to POW's as part of mutual agreement).
This way, there is a real sense of "our space" and "their space", along with estabishing home "turfs" that gather fleets together, foster cooperation (without forcing it) and provide a safe place for newer players (of which FW will always be involved with on some level) to undock and prepare to fight with a minimum of random attacks.
The bottom line is, some of the stuff that makes 0.0 "hardcore" really would just slow down our primary goal - fast, everyday, quality, small-scale, PvP. We are more than willing to give up some of the more major consequences, and give up some of the rewards of networked resources and forces leadership decisions, all in the name of the almighty pew.
We're not very disciplined and we don't take orders well...we just like to hang out in the borderlands making sure pilots of the enemy race can't TAKE AWAY OUR FREEDOMS!!
This is probably the best way to explain our culture:
We are not the military. We are the militia. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
16
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 04:18:00 -
[892] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Schalac wrote:So why not just allow it to be a global wardec and remove the NPCs and make stations shoot at enemies. And if they couldn't dock at enemy stations all the better. Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?
Alrighty. Now that I've taken a moment to get that off my chest, I'm happy to address the other ideas here! As for stations shooting at enemies, this to me is a no-brainer. I have yet to hear any opposition amongst FW pilots, and its the very first "simple fix" I'd push for if I ever was in the same room as a developer. Docking games suck. Having enemy factions loitering on your station in your system sucks. It makes no sense gameplay wise, breaks immersion, and allows the WORST kind of engagements to persist. As for docking, people are more split. I personally am opposed because FW pilots enjoy their freedom, their mobility. Just as we don't enjoy 0.0 because of the thought of waking up in someone elses space and not being able to access your own belongings, neither do we relish the idea of working hard for ships to wake up the next day and not be able to blow them up. Locking people out of their ships to me just seems like an unnecessary shackle to frequent, quality PvP. I AM however, in favor of restricting docking services. If you have to make an emergency landing in enemy station, or wake up to find that your faction's station is now being occupied by the enemy, you shouldn't be able to repair your ship, purchase insurance, and use medical services. (Ok, from a RP standpoint even enemy stations might still provide med services to POW's as part of mutual agreement). This way, there is a real sense of "our space" and "their space", along with estabishing home "turfs" that gather fleets together, foster cooperation (without forcing it) and provide a safe place for newer players (of which FW will always be involved with on some level) to undock and prepare to fight with a minimum of random attacks. The bottom line is, some of the stuff that makes 0.0 "hardcore" really would just slow down our primary goal - fast, everyday, quality, small-scale, PvP. We are more than willing to give up some of the more major consequences, and give up some of the rewards of networked resources and forces leadership decisions, all in the name of the almighty pew. We're not very disciplined and we don't take orders well...we just like to hang out in the borderlands making sure pilots of the enemy race can't TAKE AWAY OUR FREEDOMS!! This is probably the best way to explain our culture: We are not the military. We are the militia. I say BS. You can leave militia any time you choose and if you wake up one day and have a ship or item you need but can't get because you are in the enemy militia. Leave militia and get it. That is all you would need to do. But after seeing Loren kill countless comrades and then run to a station in my highsec when I have the capability and the manpower to smite him down and then JC out of there I say no. Have I docked in enemy territory before? Yes I have, but I feel that if you have the audacity to raid an enemies high sec you should be shown no quarter in that space.
You choose the join FW. It is not forced upon you. Therefore if you choose a side that is in opposition to the area you would like to live then you have a problem. I feel it would make FW more meaningful if you couldn't enter enemy highsec and dock at their stations. I feel there would be more meaning to killing those that invade my space and I feel that it was a bad choice to not add stations docking rights to lowsec FW players in conquered systems. In lowsec anyone can erect a POS. Good you have a POS in tama. Now you would have a place to hide when the system is owned by the enemy.
I also feel that Caldari and Gallente should be able to conquer Minmatar and Amarr space respectively. We are allies right? So why can no Caldari pilot go to Amarr/Minny lowsec and conquer a Minmatar system?
Maybe CCP need to add more outlying systems like Khanid. A buffer where none of the main races own it and it still has high/lowsec.
So you would have no docking rights in enemy highsec, and station guns firing at you. No docking rights in lowsec pipeline conquerable systems for the side that doesn't own it. 2.5 more regions where they are highsec but not one of the 4 races. No faction navy NPCs shooting you. A reason to plex. A reason to get other trade hubs known other than Jita.
If anything I think that my ideas would make for a much better game all around coming from a FW pilots point of view. |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:26:00 -
[893] - Quote
Things I do agree with you on:
Schalac wrote:I also feel that Caldari and Gallente should be able to conquer Minmatar and Amarr space respectively. We are allies right? So why can no Caldari pilot go to Amarr/Minny lowsec and conquer a Minmatar system?
Allied assistance would definitely be nice.
Schalac wrote:A reason to plex
mmmhhmmmmm
However:
Schalac wrote:I say BS. You can leave militia any time you choose and if you wake up one day and have a ship or item you need but can't get because you are in the enemy militia. Leave militia and get it. That is all you would need to do.
This is one of the points that has frequently been made against station lockouts. Flip-flopping in and out of militia and changing your allegiance frequently, and thus wildly varying the number of pilots in a given militia, would only upset the war in a completely unproductive and unnecessary way. I share Hans' (and many others') opinion that restricted station services is much more balanced an appropriate for FW.
Schalac wrote:Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?
As for this, I don't think the dynamics of null should be considered when discussing FW at all. It is completely different, and I hope it only grows more-so, not more similar to null-sec.
If high-sec is opened right up like you envision, it sounds a lot like a pair of war dec'd alliances fighting in high-sec. We have that mechanic, so I think FW should continue on the path of being something unique in EVE. I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:33:00 -
[894] - Quote
double-post again ... :(:(:( I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
94
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:46:00 -
[895] - Quote
I still think they should scale the faction police back one step EX-.5 have none and 1. would be like how .9's are. the .5's would give use all a place to only fight each other only, no hot drops, no pie's, and no wham null alliance. I know as a Gallente pilot this would hurt us as Villor is a .5 but I still think it would be worth it! At least part of the reason fights have gone down in black rise at lest is the quagmire of neutrals that may or may get involved. |
Lord Meriak
Amarrian Retribution
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 08:19:00 -
[896] - Quote
As far as fliping stations, I can see where locking a station down and cant get any of your stuff would be bad for fw.
I would like to see if the station / system is flipped you would lose access to the agent and perhaps if you undock or go to dock timer is increased say 2 minutes to dock for the opposing side. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
144
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 09:14:00 -
[897] - Quote
Lord Meriak wrote:As far as fliping stations, I can see where locking a station down and cant get any of your stuff would be bad for fw.
I would like to see if the station / system is flipped you would lose access to the agent and perhaps if you undock or go to dock timer is increased say 2 minutes to dock for the opposing side.
Just deny station services (such as fitting/repair) to anyone but the militia that owns the system. I am personally against any form of completely denying access to ones assets (at least via in game mechanics, if a player wants to camp a station so you can't get stuff out thats totally fine) in lowsec/npc null. Nullsec sov should have its own flavour, and I think that flavor is losing access to assets if you lose in the most "hardcore" space. Lowsec and npc null are different and should remain to be different from this. |
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 11:40:00 -
[898] - Quote
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. |
Baneken
Hyvat Pahat ja Eric The Polaris Syndicate
74
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 12:36:00 -
[899] - Quote
I think what would really make some interest for FW would be allowing corps/alliances of at least 50members in size to allow moon mining in "higher" low sec or perhaps even in high sec. Limit would be minimum 50 members and the combined 9.0 alliance/corp standing for the said faction or mining stops and your moon drills go would go offline immediately.
Of c. question is how to make this non-exploitable and while were at it these elite corps migh also be granted a priviledge of using bubble in low sec as long as the standings are met ? This of c. would call for harsh standing penalties for invoving agressing those not involved in enemy faction, for shooting eggs, agressing your own militia and so forth. Maybe free custom gantries for involving FW as well or extra rewards for high standings with your faction.
Locking 0.4 and lower sec stations from your FW enemy as default might be good as well.
but what i'm trying to say is that there should be tangible rewards for fighting for your faction instead of getting a free for all war dec and some plexes with missions to grind. |
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
72
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 12:45:00 -
[900] - Quote
On subject of Alliances, I think it might of been interesting if CCP had come up with a way to allow alliances between corps in their sister Militia. It might of made for an interesting way to broaden the fighting landscape if groups from Minmatar & Gallente or Amarr & Caldari were able to form an official alliance.
This could have the potential to broaden the aspect of the wars if various groups had added interest in one another's wars for something other than just extra targets if your area of space was too dead on a particular night. We are already technically on the side of our allied alliance, so it could be interesting to have a tie in to both fights in one Alliance. |
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
690
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 13:13:00 -
[901] - 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. |
Lord Meriak
Amarrian Retribution
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 13:18:00 -
[902] - Quote
The navy npc should stay in game as they our part of the whole eve. If they go then what ccp our saying is Pod pilots are the empires only defence which does not fit in the story of eve.
Also as an alliance if you pick a side you have to choose as there is a penelty in high sec.
|
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
34
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 14:34:00 -
[903] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Corpse Swallower 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. Awesome idea! terribad idea. if anything increase the npcs in highsec. they should **** your **** up when you enter enemy highsec. if you remove npcs from highsec. thats gonna make as much sense as flying threw planets.
I believe they should come out in force, but right now the navy response is a bit too concord-like. Going into enemy high-sec is too focused on the NPC mechanic, and the actual PvP is practically overlooked - either bring some speed tankers or a cap boosted BS with decent range. In particular the NPC EWAR seems a bit "unnatural." ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
841
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 15:16:00 -
[904] - Quote
Schalac wrote:I say BS. You can leave militia any time you choose and if you wake up one day and have a ship or item you need but can't get because you are in the enemy militia. Leave militia and get it. That is all you would need to do. But after seeing Loren kill countless comrades and then run to a station in my highsec when I have the capability and the manpower to smite him down and then JC out of there I say no. Have I docked in enemy territory before? Yes I have, but I feel that if you have the audacity to raid an enemies high sec you should be shown no quarter in that space.
You choose the join FW. It is not forced upon you. Therefore if you choose a side that is in opposition to the area you would like to live then you have a problem. I feel it would make FW more meaningful if you couldn't enter enemy highsec and dock at their stations. I feel there would be more meaning to killing those that invade my space and I feel that it was a bad choice to not add stations docking rights to lowsec FW players in conquered systems. In lowsec anyone can erect a POS. Good you have a POS in tama. Now you would have a place to hide when the system is owned by the enemy.
Ahhhh we had a misunderstanding there. I wasn't referring to enemy highsec, I was referring to the militia-controlled stations populating lowsec.
As others have pointed out though, we are not the force that protects the innermost Empire spaceGǪ.there is a distinct difference between the factional military, and the factional militia.
Unless theyGÇÖre going to rewrite all the history (which they absolutely should if any of what you are proposing would ever come to pass) so that the factions are actually at war with each other, there is a specific reason that the militias only get to take their aggression out on each other in lowsec.
Officially, the four factions are at GÇ£peaceGÇ¥ with each other, its only the die-hard militant paranoid patriots that carry on a war of their own, but have to do it away from the public view. Extending FW into highsec is a radical revamp of the very story that binds the EvE world together.
The REAL reason that we are a ways off from this (though it certainly has its merits) is that there just isnGÇÖt the population of FW participants to sustain extending the warzones to all of highsec.
We can barely cover all the lowsec territories we fight over, with the dwindling FW population that has shrunk due to apathy and frustration with CCP over unfixed mechanics and broken promises.
Extending the existing FW populations to all of highsec would spread us so thin its even harder to find fights. And being able to quickly and consistently log on, undock, and fight is the cornerstone of what FW is all about.
As I mentioned before, the FW community is different than your nullsec crowd because to us, easy fight access is our highest priority. You bring up very valid points about realistically how war should work, but the community as a whole has always been willing to sacrifice depth and realism for the ability to find quality, casual, PvP. This is what we are desperately trying to explain to the CSM and CCP, before they impose more 0.0-style complications on us as proposed in the recent summit minutes.
Until we are so overloaded with activity in lowsec that it causes problems, I see no advantage to spreading us out into high sec. Hopefully future FW improvements will build the population up to a point where your vision is viable. |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
94
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 15:52:00 -
[905] - Quote
I don't think we should be able to lock stations. In null those are player built and/or alliance owned. The stations in NPC 0.0 and low sec are owned buy NPC corps. The only one I could see this with is specifically a faction owned station, then I think you should just never be allowed in the other sides if your in militia. As far as letting us in to each others hi-sec Hans has a point. This dose not change my opinion in the posts above tho, just one step of enforcement back not the whole thing open to us.
P.S. i have a plexing idea here--> in this FW thread Come tell me how bad it is or what parts you hate the most. I am in Factional Warfare. Have been from day one.-á-áI will never work for a mega corp in null-sec. Do not make FW like null-sec.-áMake FW worth our time. Reword us for what we already do.Give us some more activities to do. |
Uppsy Daisy
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
59
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 15:55:00 -
[906] - Quote
You need to update point 3) on the first page. It is fixed in Crucible 1.1 (patch notes here http://www.eveonline.com/updates/patchnotes.asp?newpatchlogID=3382).
"Using assistance modules on a Factional Warfare buddy who is an outlaw or has a Global Criminal Flag will no longer result in a standings hit from your own faction" |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
841
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:24:00 -
[907] - Quote
Thanks for the reminder, Uppsy.
I won't stop till we get the entire list taken care of. Even if this thread is 150 pages by than!! |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
267
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:37:00 -
[908] - 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! |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 01:04:00 -
[909] - Quote
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:I still think they should scale the faction police back one step EX-.5 have none and 1. would be like how .9's are. the .5's would give use all a place to only fight each other only, no hot drops, no pie's, and no wham null alliance. I know as a Gallente pilot this would hurt us as Villor is a .5 but I still think it would be worth it! At least part of the reason fights have gone down in black rise at lest is the quagmire of neutrals that may or may get involved.
I would completely accept this. Variation and balance is key. If you like one style over another, you can choose where to look for fights.
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.
I interpret this as a very null-oriented opinion. The problem again, is that in FW, you can simply quit your militia for a day or use an alt to recover your items. So the system is very easily circumvented, unlike the null mechanic. I believe people would accept a station service ban and work with/around it in order to stay active in their militia, but the flip-flopping in a station-lockout environment would be awful and useless. I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
42
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 01:09:00 -
[910] - Quote
Also, apparently we have been "grumbling" a lot... and all I have to say in response is "yes, please touch us... touch us in the good places ;)"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzR2FyJZTzg&feature=uploademail I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
128
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 03:45:00 -
[911] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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! 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... I have a thread adverting this and seeking to find out who is going and what we should be discussing
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=703856
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
692
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 10:38:00 -
[912] - 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. |
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 15:06:00 -
[913] - Quote
Bout damn time |
Ocih
Space Mermaids
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 17:41:00 -
[914] - Quote
Faction War should also get free clones and if you die on duty you get a combat version of noob ship - worth losing, worth undocking in, not uber even by T1 standard. One you will PvP in, like it or not so if someone wants to contract them, the dummy buying it is a bullseye if he undocks.
- Based on Rank Clone discount to clones are free.
- Based on Rank, replaced faction issue frigate, cruiser battleship. They can die but they are free. It will promote redonculous PvP inside the faction groups and will be ... get ready? Fun!!! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
848
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 21:05:00 -
[915] - Quote
Ocih wrote:Faction War should also get free clones and if you die on duty you get a combat version of noob ship - worth losing, worth undocking in, not uber even by T1 standard. One you will PvP in, like it or not so if someone wants to contract them, the dummy buying it is a bullseye if he undocks.
- Based on Rank Clone discount to clones are free.
- Based on Rank, replaced faction issue frigate, cruiser battleship. They can die but they are free. It will promote redonculous PvP inside the faction groups and will be ... get ready? Fun!!!
Interesting ideas, about the only thing I have to say about the clone thing is that most of us have little to no issue with clone loss. Warping a pod out of danger is one of the first skills I teach new pilots, and one of the reasons we all enjoy lowsec is lack of bubbles, so we can put in fancier implants and give ourselves a little more PvP edge if we can afford it.
And I agree about replacing losses - IGÇÖll tell you my own personal flavor of reward improvement. If this were my call, IGÇÖd institute some LP-based insurance supplements to Faction Ships. (lets ignore rank for now since rank is meaningless IMHO until they fix it, it says you can carebear and nothing more)
LetGÇÖs say youGÇÖre cruising around in your fleet stabber. Assuming you are an Minmatar pilot, and you are killed by an Amarr pilot, maybe youGÇÖd get 10,000 LP back in addition to your Pend Insurance. This would ONLY be valid to FW-on-FW kills. YouGÇÖd never get full amount back, so thereGÇÖs no reason to ever blow these up for insurance purposes, but it would reduce the isk loss for legitimate FW PvP and keep more pilots fighting more often, with less need to go grind for isk.
The reason I suggest it for losses rather than kills is that no matter how you slice it GÇô top damage, final blow, initial point GÇô someone in an engagement gets shafted. I think just supplementing people on the loss end is an easier way to compensate, because if you die than obviously you were participating in the fight. To me this is superior than having 5 people help to take down a target and only one person (who may not have lost anything) gets the reward, and bickering over fairness. Most good FW pilots throw all PvP loot to the losers in the fleet anyways, even if it was their own fault. We're pretty nice people.
Experienced, ace pilots have less issues keeping enough isk around to keep fighting. Those who are new can enjoy less downtime between fights, because its easier for them to go buy a new ship.
It also directly moves some of the payout from PvE directly to PvP, which to me is even better than tying it to plexes, which could still be farmed without PvP.
ItGÇÖs not perfect, it wouldnGÇÖt fix everything, but it gets people back in the fight, provides a little incentive for more FW pilots to use faction ships (which is good for immersion) and reduces the amount of plex grinding or mission grinding one has to do to keep their hangar stocked.
(I'm sure I said this before somewhere, maybe even in this thread, 20 pages back!) |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
848
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 21:38:00 -
[916] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: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! 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... I have a thread adverting this and seeking to find out who is going and what we should be discussing https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=703856
BTW, I'm extremely jealous. I wish I could be there to lead the charge. I'm sure you'll do an excellent job though, Har, you've been one of FW's most stalwart defenders. Keep in touch, I'll most certainly have a list of stuff for you to ask them on my behalf!! (Not that I have much to say besides stumping for the top issues in the thread).
I'll definitely check in on that thread when I have some time (still keeping with 789 other threads atm) and see whats being tossed around....but i'm not worried. We all want the same thing in the end, more or less. |
ShardowRhino
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 07:36:00 -
[917] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I only wish the current council understood why we participate in Faction Warfare as well as you do! You've summarized our sentiments precisely.
Thank you for your contribution, its nice to have some fresh blood in this thread - far too many of the same people in here saying the same thing, even though bumps are always appreciated.
In a way I think that CCP has a split personality. On one hand they want to have this image of these big empires that are either at each others' throats, or on the verge of. At least that was what I was made to believe when I entered the game when it had the title of "cold war", I thought of the real cold war, but wondered why the playerbase was not participating in it. They want to produce novels, CCGs, and board games. They want to churn out stories set within the "universe", videos depicting events taking place, yet the only thing cold war about the game was the temperature CCP had to letting us in on it. We were banished to the sidelines, unable to participate making the game feel as though we were doing our own thing with an old 1950's movie studio paper backdrop in the background.
CCP wants the game to be pvp in every possible way. Every possible way but when it comes to the storyline. If you wanted an ounce of a feeling of being part of the game instead of someone wondering in the background detached to the story, you had to run missions. Even that is a joke of a means of participation. If you liked the universe's lore then you had no other choice. If you wanted to shoot at other players you had to go to low or null sec and participate in fights not of the big 4 empires, but of player run groups looking for individual gains and glory within the game. The closest an alliance got was that mimtar rebel based alliance that allowed anyone to rat in their space.
It seems almost hypocritical of CCP to peddle storyline based goods and produce fiction posted on the site and a supposed dedication to pew, yet create this great rift between interaction with the game universe and the player base that want to be a part of it. It is like going to an amusement park and being told "NO!" when attempting to get on a ride and then being directed to go play in the parking lot and be grateful for it. It is even more hypocritical when players say that want to pvp, but have CCP ignore them because they are not the favored children.
CCP has made great efforts to incentivize 0.0 play, moon mins for billions of isk with little effort, player owned stations, pos dreamland, big fat tastey rats with officer loot, the best ores in the game, drone regions, capital ships, super capital ships, no obnoxious gate guns, the best sites. The list continues to grow. |
ShardowRhino
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 07:41:00 -
[918] - Quote
I understand empire space as it is, the reduced potential gains are balanced by the greatly reduced risks, though one of you bloody annoying goons popped an alt of mine in a 1.0 system the other day. Things balance out for the most part. Yet, FW is a hybrid that CCP created, yet CCP has yet to truly understand. A slight buff to rats in low sec was a good start, but beyond that I had not heard of anything that can be considered an attempt by CCP to incentivise FW combat to the playerbase. IF CCP was as hellbent on having as much pvp as possible, and CCP likes to give more and more to those in 0.0 in an attempt to draw players out of empire space, and if pvp is part of the risk and reality of 0.0 gaming, then why not incentivize FW combat? Get the hardcore empire carebears that have never risked a single frigate, never lost a pod, never shot another player out of hate, anger, spite, rage, fear, or just pure fun in an attempt to destroy them into pvp by giving them reason to take a step in that direction. The worst part of pvp is taking that step of undocking to put your isk on the line, its not the actual loss of the ship, its that first step. Its far to easy to say " maybe tomorrow" or "when I make a few more million/billion isk" or " some day when I have the SP to compete". If they can stay in empire, have the chance of being shot and of shooting others, but having a safezone to retreat to, it could get more out of the their shell.
Of course, if CCP was as hellbent on pvp eveywhere and in every possible way, we wouldn't have to be posting about this. They would make it so that FW was seen as something to get into within a month or two of joining the game. I noticed that since I returned to the game and got dumped into an npc corp because the one i was in last folded while I was unable to get into the game due to a lack of shader 3, that I lose 11% of my isk to a corp tax. Thats a good way to nudge players to get into player corps so that they can be wardec'able. A reverse of something similar could be done to get more into FW, meaning more strictly PVE players into PVP, at least on a part time basis. Remove the tax for those in FW, those that operate within X many jumps from an empire's low sec gates. It could scale based on the depth of the player's position. A bonus could be given to FW players that rat or mission closer to 0.4 gates then those doing so in 1.0 systems. The closer to the front they are, the higher the chances of raid catching them off guard. Yet, those risks are balanced out by the additional gains being made by being near the front.
Those that are near the front but are not popped and profit will have more isk to risk in pvp. Anyone being a chicken but attempting to abuse the FW bennie will likely become a target eventually, but then again I remember seeing some serious chicken **** in 0.0 where players who were constantly seen farming all day continued to farm all day regardless of screams for help in various systems. Kind of surreal to hear about all this 0.0 crap of everyone having balls to pvp, yet cruising through in a BS I couldn't afford to lose to go support players I barely knew at all while cruising through the system and asking the farmers if they were heading out, if so I could wait for them because we could travel as a pack instead of just me at my best possible speed only for them to laugh it off and tell me that it wasnGÇÖt their problem. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
131
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 12:10:00 -
[919] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote: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. They'd better...
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
131
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 12:12:00 -
[920] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Har Harrison wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: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! 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... I have a thread adverting this and seeking to find out who is going and what we should be discussing https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=703856 BTW, I'm extremely jealous. I wish I could be there to lead the charge. I'm sure you'll do an excellent job though, Har, you've been one of FW's most stalwart defenders. Keep in touch, I'll most certainly have a list of stuff for you to ask them on my behalf!! (Not that I have much to say besides stumping for the top issues in the thread). I'll definitely check in on that thread when I have some time (still keeping with 789 other threads atm) and see whats being tossed around....but i'm not worried. We all want the same thing in the end, more or less. I intend to keep them honest Having some clear things to discuss/explain to CCP would definately be of benefit.
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
|
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
99
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 15:31:00 -
[921] - Quote
Ocih wrote:Faction War should also get free clones and if you die on duty you get a combat version of noob ship - worth losing, worth undocking in, not uber even by T1 standard. One you will PvP in, like it or not so if someone wants to contract them, the dummy buying it is a bullseye if he undocks.
- Based on Rank Clone discount to clones are free.
- Based on Rank, replaced faction issue frigate, cruiser battleship. They can die but they are free. It will promote redonculous PvP inside the faction groups and will be ... get ready? Fun!!!
I like the noob ship idea. All it would take is to make it one you join Faction Warfare that your noob ships always comes filly fit with civilian stuff. Not awesome just useful in a pinch. no miner, just fully fit so you can dock and undock and help, cuz its your job. May be even a civilian level point with a bad range like 3-5k and a civilian DCU in the low. I am in Factional Warfare. Have been from day one.-á-áI will never work for a mega corp in null-sec. Do not make FW like null-sec.-áMake FW worth our time. Reword us for what we already do.Give us some more activities to do. |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
105
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 13:48:00 -
[922] - Quote
Well I don't think this tread should die. Time for some Necromancy.
So how do we have an influence on the war zone and not have SOV.? any ideas? I am in Factional Warfare. Have been from day one.-á-áI will never work for a mega corp in null-sec. Do not make FW like null-sec.-áMake FW worth our time. Reword us for what we already do.Give us some more activities to do. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
860
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 15:10:00 -
[923] - Quote
Don't worry, this thread isn't going anywhere. Our work is by no means done....
I think if anything its only resting a bit because of the heated discussions that flared up over in Warfare & Tactics that have temporarily held the focus of the usual FW suspects. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
271
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 15:19:00 -
[924] - 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. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
860
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 16:14:00 -
[925] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote: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.
I know the biggest predictable fear will be the side-flipping argument, but I think in the long run if Faction Warfare becomes enticing overall as a feature and invigorates the community again while drawing in more pilots there will always be a core group in each militia that doesnt flip-flop.
The self-balancing factor is that most of us here are in it for the quick fights and plentiful PvP. The worse times are those when you vastly outnumber your opposing faction, because it means there's no one to shoot at. In the two years I've fought for the Minnie Militia - I'd say roughly 90% of the pilots switching factions in our warfront have gone from the "winning" faction to the side of the underdogs, not the other way around. I can't speak for Gallente / Caldari but I'm assuming its no fun for them either when you have twice as many people as your foe.
You're right, I think the consequences need to be more subtle than 0.0, merely a stronger carrot to encourage plexing and foster participation across time zones. I personally think "occupancy" is a better term to use to describe what we should be fighting over, more so than Sov which has too many nullsec connotations and really is a more permanent description of system control.
For example, if we seize Huola obviously we're not going to be replacing the entire 24th imperial crusade station overnight, but it should be classified as "TLF Occupied" and be able to shoot the now unwelcome former residents.
POCO's are of course another obvious area for impact, If militia corps own POCO's in a system but their enemy wins occupancy, it only makes sense that it would affect POCO operations to some degree, the first thing that comes to mind is a tax penalty. That way there is incentive for POCO cartel corps to make sure the enemy never seizes the system, because losing control would impact customer relations.
I'm also partial to agents in occupied stations being held hostage as POW's, but the economic consequences of this must be considered heavily to prevent total victory where a losing faction gets completely shut out from such an important income source. Too heavy an income penalty and you WILL see faction defection for purely economics reasons.
One solution might be to partially shift some of the LP rewards to plexing or PvP kills, and have a law of diminishing returns where the more systems a particular faction occupies, the less payout there is for a plex victory or player kill. That way, a faction that is being overwhelmed and may not be making much isk because their agents are being held at gunpoint can at least make up for this by being more highly rewarded for taking their territory back. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
244
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 20:59:00 -
[926] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Hirana Yoshida wrote: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. I know the biggest predictable fear will be the side-flipping argument, but I think in the long run if Faction Warfare becomes enticing overall as a feature and invigorates the community again while drawing in more pilots there will always be a core group in each militia that doesnt flip-flop....
I actually don't think that many people will flip flop. (although some already have done that for the easier missions) I do think players who are new to faction war will tend to join the side that has the better benefits. Why would anyone decide they will join the side that can't make as much isk or has allot of system wide nerfs to their ships?
BTW I don't think the idea that ship attributes would be nerfed for the losing side ever had much support at all.
I wasn't there but I had heard that about the time caldari occupied all of gallente fw space the number of gallente pilots was extremely low. Caldari on the other hand, had large numbers of active pilots.
If this is true, then we need to consider that this sort of piling on the winning team already happened even though there was no benefit.
On this topic though there have been suggestions to counter everyone joining the same side. Such as making it so the losing side can start fitting larger ships in plexes etc. That would definitely help the side with fewer numbers. There were a few other suggestions in this regard as well. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Runawaypally
The Stampede.
7
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 04:06:00 -
[927] - Quote
Blog? Dev note regarding FW? Something mentioned in a Vid Blog? Something other then non-descript notes from a meeting that had little to do with it? (hell it wasnt even important enough to get its own topic) |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet Villore Accords
112
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 10:33:00 -
[928] - Quote
So crazy thought at random time in the morning. What if they made a frigate that like the cruiser and battleship we can get, was a lower tier hull and cheaper than the existing one. Use each races mining frigate add the "navy" bump and change it's bonuses to- race's small remote repper range 30% and race defence* bonus per frigate level, Roll bonus 50% reduction in cap need or small remote reps?
*Like 5% resist for some 10% one type of HP for others?
It would give both the PvP and PvE groups in faction war some thing to get. Would give lower level players a chance to work together and achieve goals larger than them selves.(in and out side of FW) FW pilots could use it in smaller plexes.(every one else could use it in small plexes of the NPS's/WH's) Allows the game to explore new ideas of fleet composition in smaller hull types.
Thoughts? I am in Factional Warfare. Have been from day one.-á-áI will never work for a mega corp in null-sec. Do not make FW like null-sec.-áMake FW worth our time. Reword us for what we already do.Give us some more activities to do. |
Galatica789
Autocannons Anonymous
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 13:12:00 -
[929] - Quote
Give the Amarr more alliances to drop on us :3 |
Laerise
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
15
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 16:35:00 -
[930] - Quote
Galatica789 wrote:Give the Amarr more alliances to drop on us :3
Sorry, that's impossible. I'm enjoying taking apart your corpies way too much.
Death to the blob and "gfgf" !
Edit: Considering that I might have come across like an *** above my sincere best wishes to your lads! Its nice to see that there are still TLF'ers out there with the balls to bring it. |
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
43
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 07:50:00 -
[931] - Quote
How are people finding the addition of alliances in general? I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet Villore Accords
122
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 09:06:00 -
[932] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:How are people finding the addition of alliances in general?
We know all have alliance chat to pretend to be the "serus spachip biznes" channel. Did I say that we have a extra chat channel? well that's about it, for now.... I am in Factional Warfare. Have been from day one.-á-áI will never work for a mega corp in null-sec. Do not make FW like null-sec.-áMake FW worth our time. Reword us for what we already do.Give us some more activities to do. |
The Snowman
xLegion of the dammedx.
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 16:18:00 -
[933] - Quote
Have any alliances joined fw? I mean, at all? |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
245
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 16:24:00 -
[934] - Quote
What about the idea of making our allied faction easilly discernable? We get the orange tag for the two factions we are at war with but we don't seem to get anything for our allied faction.
Can we agree this would be a good change?
It's pretty minor but it would make travelling to the other front for a change of scene easier and better.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
871
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 17:43:00 -
[935] - Quote
Cearain wrote:What about the idea of making our allied faction easilly discernable? We get the orange tag for the two factions we are at war with but we don't seem to get anything for our allied faction.
Can we agree this would be a good change?
It's pretty minor but it would make travelling to the other front for a change of scene easier and better.
I completely agree. If the Gallente and Minmatar are allies enough that both enemies appear the same to us, than we should be purple to each other as well.
This is a fantastic common sense solution.
+1
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
871
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 17:51:00 -
[936] - Quote
The Snowman wrote:Have any alliances joined fw? I mean, at all?
To my knowledge, none have at all. It was pretty much what I expected.
Several militia corps have formed their own alliances, for purposes of shared comms and intel, but that's about it.
I'm glad to see that there were no doomsday scenarios here as predicted, but we can also hardly call this a real "Faction Warfare improvement" if the whole scene more or less stays the same.
This has been the critical problem - CCP is progressing forward with a slate of FW changes that were discussed by the developers and the CSM, neither of whom have demonstrated that they have taken the least bit of time to ask the community what we want.
Its as if CCP feels like they did their due diligence, by talking with the CSM. But those of us in Faction Warfare know better than most that talking with the CSM does NOT constitute "listening to players" if the CSM isn't willing to defend our values and propositions. Instead, they proposed ridiculous ideas for the next set of Faction Warfare iterations that have no bearing on what players have been asking for, and exposed their own bias in the process. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
245
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 20:45:00 -
[937] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: This has been the critical problem - CCP is progressing forward with a slate of FW changes that were discussed by the developers and the CSM, neither of whom have demonstrated that they have taken the least bit of time to ask the community what we want.
Its as if CCP feels like they did their due diligence, by talking with the CSM. But those of us in Faction Warfare know better than most that talking with the CSM does NOT constitute "listening to players" if the CSM isn't willing to defend our values and propositions. Instead, they proposed ridiculous ideas for the next set of Faction Warfare iterations that have no bearing on what players have been asking for, and exposed their own bias in the process.
Hans Will we ever have anyone supporting fw even run? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
137
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 02:44:00 -
[938] - Quote
Get behind Hans for CSM
http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/2012/02/07/an-open-letter-to-militia-from-shalee-lianne-hans-jagerblitzen/
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
882
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 04:30:00 -
[939] - Quote
Thank you, Har! Yes, its time to get this dog and pony show public I guess. We've the hard part done already.
Stay tuned everyone, there will be a full Jita Park statement to come, along with a downloadable platform document for interested voters, and the simultaneous launch of my new blog.
Follow me on Twitter for real-time updates. @HansShotFirst
I just wanted my militia supporters and friends to hear it all first, those that weren't already on-board and in the loop.
It's game time!! |
Krios Ahzek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
464
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 04:34:00 -
[940] - Quote
Allowing the Capsuleer alliances to participate in the Great War between the Empires is a great start. They were previously an untapped resource. Some of the largest alliances possess humongous reserves of Titans and capital ships, enough to glass the surface of thousands of worlds and obliterate entire sector fleets before any defense could be mustered. Unfortunately, Concord's Jovian regionwide cynosural jammers still operate in high security space, preventing us from significantly upsetting the balance of power and perhaps even wiping an Empire from the face of the galaxy. |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
882
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 04:37:00 -
[941] - Quote
Krios Ahzek wrote:Allowing the Capsuleer alliances to participate in the Great War between the Empires is a great start. They were previously an untapped resource. Some of the largest alliances possess humongous reserves of Titans and capital ships, enough to glass the surface of thousands of worlds and obliterate entire sector fleets before any defense could be mustered. Unfortunately, Concord's Jovian regionwide cynosural jammers still operate in high security space, preventing us from significantly upsetting the balance of power and perhaps even wiping an Empire from the face of the galaxy.
That's a pretty tragic story. |
Krios Ahzek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
464
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 04:41:00 -
[942] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Krios Ahzek wrote:Allowing the Capsuleer alliances to participate in the Great War between the Empires is a great start. They were previously an untapped resource. Some of the largest alliances possess humongous reserves of Titans and capital ships, enough to glass the surface of thousands of worlds and obliterate entire sector fleets before any defense could be mustered. Unfortunately, Concord's Jovian regionwide cynosural jammers still operate in high security space, preventing us from significantly upsetting the balance of power and perhaps even wiping an Empire from the face of the galaxy. That's a pretty tragic story.
Forsoothe! The entire cluster, nay, the UNIVERSE must learn to bow to the Clusterfornication Coalition. |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution
138
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 05:40:00 -
[943] - Quote
Krios Ahzek wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Krios Ahzek wrote:Allowing the Capsuleer alliances to participate in the Great War between the Empires is a great start. They were previously an untapped resource. Some of the largest alliances possess humongous reserves of Titans and capital ships, enough to glass the surface of thousands of worlds and obliterate entire sector fleets before any defense could be mustered. Unfortunately, Concord's Jovian regionwide cynosural jammers still operate in high security space, preventing us from significantly upsetting the balance of power and perhaps even wiping an Empire from the face of the galaxy. That's a pretty tragic story. Forsoothe! The entire cluster, nay, the UNIVERSE must learn to bow to the Clusterfornication Coalition. With great power comes great responsability!!!
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!!
Vote Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM 7 |
Lord Meriak
Amarrian Retribution
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 07:18:00 -
[944] - Quote
Ydyp (ARETR) Director at the time, Had a great time at fanfest , he came home Reported back CCP did not attend the roundtable and not long after quit eve. Har Harrison (ARETR) then started a thread for us all,When eve forums changed,
Hans picked up the ball and ran with it thank you on behalf of all fw player's
Mr Hans your running for Csm can we trust you to change and balance npc even thow it will make the Minny life harder and missions harder not just 1 sb in a plex for 1 minuite and off. Would you even be willing to join a Gal corp then a Cal and Amarr corp for say a month at atime.
To see Fw as a whole for the benfit of all?
LM
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
1076
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 00:07:00 -
[945] - Quote
Lord Meriak wrote:
Hans picked up the ball and ran with it thank you on behalf of all fw player's
Mr Hans your running for Csm can we trust you to change and balance npc even thow it will make the Minny life harder and missions harder not just 1 sb in a plex for 1 minuite and off. Would you even be willing to join a Gal corp then a Cal and Amarr corp for say a month at atime.
To see Fw as a whole for the benfit of all?
LM
Absolutely. I have said from the beginning, consistently, that even though I admittedly ***** FW missions in bombers to earn some coin, I think we Minmatar have it too easy.
The NPC balance is a critical issue, if we are to leave FW missions in the system at all. There should not be economic motivation to join one militia over another, as there is now because of the ease of the farmed missions.
Having easy missions hurts us, too. There are now so many farmers guys like me have to work way too much when I could be out PvP-ing instead. That's gotta change.
I appreciate you all being patient with me while I spend some time in my other thread in Jita Park. I hope you understand what we're up against, and why my efforts must be spent there at the moment. Making sure the EvE community knows about the disconnect between CCP and the customers, and why we need to elect a leader that can fight this, is the best thing we can do for Faction Warfare's cause right now, even more so than debating balancing details.
Feel free to keep up the discussion here though, I don't want this to become the Hans 4 CSM thread. We have another for that, and I like organized, focused forum behavior. I appreciate you keeping the "ways to improve FW" stuff here, and the campaign stuff over in Jita Park.
Thanks again for all the support, the community has been great, but than I again I always knew you were.....
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
43
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 19:54:00 -
[946] - Quote
Can you drop a link to your CSM thread so we can check it out? I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
254
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 21:58:00 -
[947] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:Can you drop a link to your CSM thread so we can check it out?
Here it is: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=66900
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
1139
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 23:00:00 -
[948] - Quote
Damassys Kadesh wrote:Can you drop a link to your CSM thread so we can check it out?
Sure thing!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=66900&find=unread |
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind
43
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 04:06:00 -
[949] - Quote
TY! I am in Factional Warfare and it needs a lot of work: -It's NOT a stepping stone to null -It DOESN'T have balanced risk/reward -It COULD EASILY be the best feature for small-scale PvP CCP, the players are speaking up, please take the time to listen carefully |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 06:49:00 -
[950] - Quote
All the talk about FW vs. Null in the CSM thread made me think about the only EHP grind we have and the eradication of same. Never liked the bunker-bust as it has not once in my time actually given the fights it was meant to and represents what I consider a failed development stratagem (EHP grind).
Two thoughts, one NPC based and one Player based.
1. Replace bunker with a Sleeper AI Carrier taskforce, the navy's last attempt at saving face after failing so hard in the plexes. - Announce system vulnerability (Navy are saps, so think of it as a distress call) to holding side. Can still blitz it but at much higher risk. Becomes a collaborate effort and should take longer than the 5-10 minutes that bunkers last these days so a defense has time to form.
2. Remove bunker; add three hour vulnerable period before system automatically flips (Why three you ask?). - Announce system vulnerability (Navy are saps, so think of it as a distress call) to holding side. No blitzing possible, attacker instead has the arduous task of preventing the enemy from taking a plex for what is a significant amount of time .. should yield some ferocious plex fights.
Which is better .. personally see the first as an ideal way of introducing rewards for flips (loot) but the second brings the pew which to me is reward in itself.
PS: Oh dear. Seem to have bumped the thread .. for shame! |
|
Runawaypally
The Stampede.
7
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 03:18:00 -
[951] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:All the talk about FW vs. Null in the CSM thread made me think about the only EHP grind we have and the eradication of same. Never liked the bunker-bust as it has not once in my time actually given the fights it was meant to and represents what I consider a failed development stratagem (EHP grind). Two thoughts, one NPC based and one Player based. 1. Replace bunker with a Sleeper AI Carrier taskforce, the navy's last attempt at saving face after failing so hard in the plexes. - Announce system vulnerability (Navy are saps, so think of it as a distress call) to holding side. Can still blitz it but at much higher risk. Becomes a collaborate effort and should take longer than the 5-10 minutes that bunkers last these days so a defense has time to form. 2. Remove bunker; add three hour vulnerable period before system automatically flips ( Why three you ask?). - Announce system vulnerability (Navy are saps, so think of it as a distress call) to holding side. No blitzing possible, attacker instead has the arduous task of preventing the enemy from taking a plex for what is a significant amount of time .. should yield some ferocious plex fights. Which is better .. personally see the first as an ideal way of introducing rewards for flips (loot) but the second brings the pew which to me is reward in itself. PS: Oh dear. Seem to have bumped the thread .. for shame!
+1 |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
269
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 03:39:00 -
[952] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:2. Remove bunker; add three hour vulnerable period before system automatically flips ( Why three you ask?). - Announce system vulnerability (Navy are saps, so think of it as a distress call) to holding side. No blitzing possible, attacker instead has the arduous task of preventing the enemy from taking a plex for what is a significant amount of time .. should yield some ferocious plex fights.
I really really like this idea. Did you just buy this character?
So you would have to prevent any plex from being taken for 3 hours. Even a minor plex? I really like the idea.
It could lead to some war heroes holding plexes or taking plexes. Perhaps if you take one of the plexes that save a system you would get a medal or a standings boost.
Maybe they could have the plexes spawn more often during this three hour period, but also say maybe no more than x could be taken by the enemy in the 3 hour time. I have been thinking through the details and am not sure where the balance should be, but the idea sounds awesome. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
151
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 09:01:00 -
[953] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:All the talk about FW vs. Null in the CSM thread made me think about the only EHP grind we have and the eradication of same. Never liked the bunker-bust as it has not once in my time actually given the fights it was meant to and represents what I consider a failed development stratagem (EHP grind). Two thoughts, one NPC based and one Player based. 1. Replace bunker with a Sleeper AI Carrier taskforce, the navy's last attempt at saving face after failing so hard in the plexes. - Announce system vulnerability (Navy are saps, so think of it as a distress call) to holding side. Can still blitz it but at much higher risk. Becomes a collaborate effort and should take longer than the 5-10 minutes that bunkers last these days so a defense has time to form. 2. Remove bunker; add three hour vulnerable period before system automatically flips ( Why three you ask?). - Announce system vulnerability (Navy are saps, so think of it as a distress call) to holding side. No blitzing possible, attacker instead has the arduous task of preventing the enemy from taking a plex for what is a significant amount of time .. should yield some ferocious plex fights. Which is better .. personally see the first as an ideal way of introducing rewards for flips (loot) but the second brings the pew which to me is reward in itself. PS: Oh dear. Seem to have bumped the thread .. for shame!
Sounds pretty good from an RP perspective. However, regarding 2: The attackers can just park alts in plexes after they've been captured to prevent despawning (thus preventing respawning) of plexes so defenders wouldnt have any plexes to take in that 3 hour timespan. Plexes should despawn immediatly upon capture. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
39
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 21:48:00 -
[954] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:All the talk about FW vs. Null in the CSM thread made me think about the only EHP grind we have and the eradication of same. Never liked the bunker-bust as it has not once in my time actually given the fights it was meant to and represents what I consider a failed development stratagem (EHP grind).
Two thoughts, one NPC based and one Player based.
1. Replace bunker with a Sleeper AI Carrier taskforce 2. Remove bunker; add three hour vulnerable period before system automatically flipse
I like both these ideas.
How do people feel about Secondary objectives? Spawn in target system and surrounding systems when the system becomes vulnerable, at least one in each before doubling up.
No NPCGÇÖs but some NPC structures, neutral support ships, just for fluff.
Orbit timer, timer completes after 1 minute, Timer has to be held; if no ships are within activation zone then timer counts down from 60, affect ends when timer reaches zero or enemy militia pilot enters activation zone.
The secondary objectives could be in the form of Minor, Normal and Major plexes, providing targets for smaller ship types.
Option A - Fleet style bonuses.
- Completing the timer provides a bonus to friendly militia pilots within target system
- Examples but details could be changed, more examples are probably needed and I am unsure of the bonus level provided to make it worthwhile capturing but not overpowered.
- Ship Maintenance Yard - 5% bonus to Armour and Shield Hitpoints
- Communications Relay- 10% bonus to sensor strength
- Power Relay station - 10% Bonus to ship Capacitor Capacity.
Option B - Affects applied to the Bunker/Carrier Taskforce affect applied depends on whether defender or attacker holds the objective.
- Instead of fleet bonus these make the capture of the system easier/more difficult
- Ship Maintenance Yard - Holding either boosts or reduces the resists of the bunker/NPC taskforce
- Communications Relay- Prevents or triggers NPC reinforcement waves
- Power Relay station - Starts or stops Bunker/Carrier Taskforce repair rates.
The basic ideas here are to spread the fight a little into adjacant systems and provide multiple small gang targets, hopefully resulting in multiple smaller engagements. I actually edge towards option B, Assuming the Attacker has the edge numbers wise they would not need the secondary objectives but the defender can make life more difficult by taking them and forcing the attacker to split his fleet and chase them down. Although if people like the 3 hour vulnerable period then maybe option A.
|
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
23
|
Posted - 2012.02.18 00:05:00 -
[955] - Quote
Cearain wrote:I really really like this idea. Did you just buy this character? Hahahahaha, I do have some nuggets you know
Cearain wrote:So you would have to prevent any plex from being taken for 3 hours. Even a minor plex? I really like the idea. Normal rules would apply, so it is a three hour period in which any plex capped by defenders makes system "contested" , essentially resetting the timer .. goal for me is to stop the stupidity of the locust swarm that allows systems to flip daily and to bring back the "good fight" over plexes that I know and love.
Not sure it is necessary to increase spawn frequency, still think it is too high to begin with to be honest. Having to cover three sizes for that amount of time would make it require effort consistent with the effect .. it is about occupying entire systems dammit! Balancing it is not the function of the idea, merely looking for a replacement mechanic to a part of FW which I (dare I say , We?) loathe - Bunkers.
Super Chair wrote:...Plexes should despawn immediatly upon capture. Wasn't that just done in null so they slaves there could have a constant stream of sanctums even if a griefing cloaker was around? Nothing stopping whatever code they used there from being applied to plexes to achieve the same effect.
Alticus C Bear wrote:...How do people feel about Secondary objectives?... Have wanted to spread things out constellation wide since Incursions showed it was possible, so I am all for something like that .. not sure any sort of bonuses are needed though, just some sort of feedback effect on a system being fought over. An increase/decrease in plex timers for doing "other stuff, elsewhere" would be enough for fights to break out I should think.
Unfortunately the momentum of the demand for change has waned and the "aim" of the once critical mass has been lowered to small stuff that CCP can do over lunch .. just to get something .. anything. Sad, but Realpolitik can be a right proper ***** sometimes |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
32
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 20:32:00 -
[956] - Quote
So once political office is aspired to the base/origin is neglected?
Eve being a real-life simulation is all fine and dandy, but really .. had to resort to the inferior search to even find the damn thing. You may be a minne and all, but surely the taste of freedom has invoked some sort of integrity in your decrepit soul!
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
299
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 20:36:00 -
[957] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:So once political office is aspired to the base/origin is neglected?
Eve being a real-life simulation is all fine and dandy, but really .. had to resort to the inferior search to even find the damn thing. You may be a minne and all, but surely the taste of freedom has invoked some sort of integrity in your decrepit soul!
Do not assume Hans is in yet.
If you are reading this then stop, right now, and go vote for him. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2049
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 20:41:00 -
[958] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:So once political office is aspired to the base/origin is neglected?
Eve being a real-life simulation is all fine and dandy, but really .. had to resort to the inferior search to even find the damn thing. You may be a minne and all, but surely the taste of freedom has invoked some sort of integrity in your decrepit soul!
Are you asking why I'm not in here commenting in this thread?? Missed an interview or debate? Check my CSM7 blog for details.
Many thanks to all of my friends and supporters for the kind words! |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
32
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 20:52:00 -
[959] - Quote
Already voted for the only non-sheep candidate available so that is sorted.
Problem I have is that said candidate seems to have forgotten what got the ball rolling .. just trying to keep the minnie honest .. honest! .. not a base bump of an eternally relevant thread! |
Har Harrison
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
158
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 10:16:00 -
[960] - Quote
Any last minute discussion/points of interest to raise with CCP @ fanfest???
Fix Faction Warfare CCP!!!
Vote Hans Jagerblitzen for CSM 7 |
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2061
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 15:20:00 -
[961] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote: Problem I have is that said candidate seems to have forgotten what got the ball rolling .. just trying to keep the minnie honest .. honest! .. not a base bump of an eternally relevant thread!
I do have a name, you know.
Point is, the best use of my time right now as far as helping the Faction Warfare community out, is to put all my energy into the election. I am in no way trying to neglect the group here, I look forward to not having election work to deal with so that I can back to talking about how we can fix the game. While I haven't had time to post much here, I've been following this thread as well as the FW-related threads and have continued to forward the community's ideas and feedback straight to the current CSM.
There's no way I could "forget" what got the ball rolling, because I've referenced this thread and the work I put into the community throughout my campaign. You guys are the reason it was possible, and I thank each and every one of you for participating in the discussion!
Just because I'm not here posting doesn't mean the conversation has to end, by all mean continue to share ideas and solutions, I'm still here, still watching, still taking notes!
Missed an interview or debate? Check my CSM7 blog for details.
Many thanks to all of my friends and supporters for the kind words! |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
304
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 19:54:00 -
[962] - Quote
Har Harrison wrote:Any last minute discussion/points of interest to raise with CCP @ fanfest???
1) Would it be too controversial to make it so tech3 cruisers can't go in plexes that tech2 cruisers can't go in?
These might be more controversial and not necessarilly as easy to accomplish:
2) Perhaps tech3 boosts won't apply in plexes where tech 3 cruisers can't go in. So your loki booster bonuses will not apply to your dramiel in a minor plex. But it would apply to your dramiel in a major plex. That might get more confusing, I agree, so it might not be a good idea.
3) Boost the tags (either quantity or quality) in minor plexes. Killing them is not worth the ammo.
Have a great time I wish I was going.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate Villore Accords
64
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 20:09:00 -
[963] - Quote
@Hans:
An easy request on behalf of FW - the show info option for FW alliances should list their FW affiliation just as it's displayed next to a corp's logo.
ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2061
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 20:52:00 -
[964] - Quote
Fidelium Mortis wrote:@Hans:
An easy request on behalf of FW - the show info option for FW alliances should list their FW affiliation just as it's displayed next to a corp's logo.
Duly noted. Thanks for the suggestion! Missed an interview or debate? Check my CSM7 blog for details.
Many thanks to all of my friends and supporters for the kind words! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2328
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 19:53:00 -
[965] - Quote
I've updated the original post to reflect the progress we've made so far! Many thanks to the community for all your ongoing feedback. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Damassys Kadesh
Eternal Damnation of the Woken Mind Templis Dragonaors
45
|
Posted - 2012.05.10 09:06:00 -
[966] - Quote
Right-on brotha Prepare to be cleansed |
Draco Rosso
22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
26
|
Posted - 2012.05.10 20:38:00 -
[967] - Quote
Victory! Today is victory DAY. VoV |
Draco Rosso
22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
26
|
Posted - 2012.05.12 16:39:00 -
[968] - Quote
All hail Hans Jagerblitzen. All hail Hans Jagerblitzen |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
427
|
Posted - 2012.05.22 17:05:00 -
[969] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 5.) Lack of highly visible alert or intel system for when territory is threatened. If Faction Warfare is meant to deliver pickup and play PvP, an alert system (Captain's Quarters TV screen?) would get fights much faster than relying on aimless wandering patrols. Even just adding alerts in real time in the militia office tab (like POS fuel notifications in your mail, or broadcast history in fleets) would be great and increase frequency of PvP fights. *FIXED!! Brand new Faction Warfare UI coming in Inferno]
They did a pretty nice updating the UI. But is there a "highly visible" alert or intel system for when territory is threatened? We see when an area goes contested but we saw that before.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Top Trending Major Underlying Issues "The Big Stuff"
3.) Faction Warfare missions easily farmable in a Stealth Bomber. Result is missions that encourage PvP as intended (by nature of being on overview), but do not encourage diversity of ship types or cooperative gangs to complete. GÇ£PvPGÇ¥ that surrounds current mission system is primarily limited to interceptors chasing bombers. NERFED!! Station Lockouts coming with Inferno will drastically reduce mission farming for the losing faction, forcing them to PvP in order to access agents again
Nerfed?? You are counting station lockouts as a nerf to stealth bomber mission farming? It seems to be a buff to cloaky ships. But yes the losing side will not be able to run many missions. That is true, but their lp is worthless anyway.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: 4.) Imbalanced EWAR fielded by mission NPC's means some missions are easier to run than others, resulting in imbalanced market value for faction items and causes certain militias to be flooded with mission farming alts. *CHANGES COMING!! Inferno brings a scalable LP store depending on Victory Conditions
I don't see what the scalable lp store has to do with npcs imbalanced ewar. Inferno's scalable lp store makes this less balanced in favor of the side that has the easier npcs because they can run plexes easier thus making their lp lmore valuable.
Inferno did address 2 of the 10 items you and the community raised. I think you are stretching inferno out of shape to claim it does more than that. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
1048
|
Posted - 2012.05.22 17:27:00 -
[970] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:I've updated the original post to reflect the progress we've made so far! Many thanks to the community for all your ongoing feedback. Thanks for the necro! Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
432
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 18:19:00 -
[971] - Quote
oops Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: [one page] |