Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Dagren Darius
Ice Fire Warriors
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:37:00 -
[91] - Quote
To go along with the station discussion. Why not just have a station in FW systems instead of a bunker that is flipable. 1 station in the middle of the system that is controlled by the faction that holds the system. That station is then only usable by that faction, guns shoot the opposing faction, it can have lp store for that faction as well. Then no neutral RR undocking from it from either side, guns make it harder to camp, and if you use the station alot you won't want to loose that system. Just an idea |

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 16:41:00 -
[92] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:Cearain wrote:The problem with the curent system (and why many people refer to fw as broken), achieving the overarching goal was based on pve skill not pvp skill so no one really cared about it. It wasn't an accomplishment people valued. Agreed. You agree and then want to use Incursion mechanics for occupancy? (PvE) I don't get it. Please explain.
Cearain's main point in two years of threads are that NPCs are bad and shouldn't be a part of the occupancy mechanic. He still wants ship limited combat and for people to orbit buttons for a set amount of time. The one decent idea he has is to notify militia that a plex has been opened, but what he nor anybody else does not quite comprehend is this:
Players don't fight if they don't think they can win.
What happens when the other side disengages and leaves you hanging with no pvp? Sit on timer like he suggests? That's where his proposals fall short every time.
Your suggestion w.r.t incursions is decent even though it involves NPCs because your group will have something rewarding to do if the other side decides not to fight.
You could do something similar with FW missions for example. Layering different ways of achieving occupancy would be great. 1. FW missions for occupancy - Agents send you out on missions with 80% chance of happening in a given constellation. 2. Poison pills in FW missions allow griefers to ruin mission.
This has all the elements of what an occupancy mechanic should be: 1. Conflict over resources, 2. decisive end game if mission team bails, 3. Rewards if defenders don't engage. (Plus, ship limited combat (L1 though L4 missions) )
Too risky for stealth bombing carebears. Players would have to band together in gangs/fleets to make isk. Very little modification in coding by devs.
|

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
64
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:08:00 -
[93] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Bloodpetal wrote:Cearain wrote:The problem with the curent system (and why many people refer to fw as broken), achieving the overarching goal was based on pve skill not pvp skill so no one really cared about it. It wasn't an accomplishment people valued. Agreed. You agree and then want to use Incursion mechanics for occupancy? (PvE) I don't get it. Please explain.
Incursion Mission System is NOT A PVE Mechanic.
The NPCs inside are PVE. The Incursion mechanic itself is FAR ABOVE and BEYOND that.
If you don't understand, then you haven't run Incursions. If you have run incursions and you can't separate the idea of shooting NPCs and Constellations being UNDER ASSAULT from the Sansha, then you're looking at it the WRONG way.
Imagine the Sansha could TAKE OVER the constellation if the players fail to conquer it. Forget about the PVE and PVP. Imagine that if you failed to defend a constellation, the next day you'd wake up in the solar system and SUDDENLY everything had Sansha mega NPCs running around ruining your day, making the system impossible to use.
FORGET about the idea that they're NPCs and focus on the idea of ATTACKING and DEFENDING a constellation, and having contestable plexes be the central focus for the fighting. Now imagine if players had a reason to attack and defend those plexes, and now you end up with PVP.
THE IDEAS PRESENTED IN MY CONCEPT THREAD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH PVE, NPCS, OR ANYTHING OTHER THAN GETTING PEOPLE TO COME TO THE SAME PLACE TO FIGHT EACH OTHER.
I'm tired of hearing people say that my ideas have ANYTHING to do with PVE as a central focus of FW.
I have added a disclaimer to the first post in this thread :
Quote:THIS THREAD MAKES REFERENCES TO THE INCURSION MISSION SYSTEM - THE CONTEXT IS TO USE IT TO GENERATE PVP, NOT PVE CONTENT. READ THE MATERIAL CAREFULLY. THANK YOU. NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:15:00 -
[94] - Quote
If a player doesn't shoot you (PvP), then what shoots you in an incursion? |

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
64
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:17:00 -
[95] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:If a player doesn't shoot you (PvP), then what does?
THIS THREAD MAKES REFERENCES TO THE INCURSION MISSION SYSTEM - THE CONTEXT IS TO USE IT TO GENERATE PVP, NOT PVE CONTENT. READ THE MATERIAL CAREFULLY. THANK YOU. NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:19:00 -
[96] - Quote
Quote:As you go in to start destroying industrials and NPCs with the new AI (who are scaled down in difficulty to properly represent a fair challenge, rather than an Incursion level challenge). Not saying your idea is bad (it's pretty good), just that it has PvE elements in it. |

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:35:00 -
[97] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Quote:As you go in to start destroying industrials and NPCs with the new AI (who are scaled down in difficulty to properly represent a fair challenge, rather than an Incursion level challenge). Not saying your idea is bad (it's pretty good), just that it has PvE elements in it.
The NPC references I made can be replaced by anything really and it would be the same thing. Shoot Objective A, Interact with Objective B, etc.
The goal is to generate PVP, not PVE. The goal is to make PVP interactable locations the focus of LP and ISK rewards. SItting on a timer is stupid and boring. Something that makes it more challenging to complete the objective would be preferential. If that means NPCs spawn for you to shoot, then let's do that, if it means Containers to drop stuff in, let's do that.
Writing it in a way that creates a story, in essence is going to require NPCs on some level. Faction Warfare is an NPC war, in the end. So, regardless of how much "you" care for that as an FW pilot in the war, it's just the inavoidable premise. If a pilot doesn't want to deal with NPCs on SOME level, then they need to stop complaining about NPCs and go to Null Sec and fight out there.
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 17:43:00 -
[98] - Quote
What I like about your idea is that it's objective based that doesn't involve orbiting a button for a set period of time. Also, when one side decides not to engage (which is going to happen quite a bit when the sides are not evenly matched), your side has something to do. |

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:00:00 -
[99] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:What I like about your idea is that it's objective based that doesn't involve orbiting a button for a set period of time. Also, when one side decides not to engage (which is going to happen quite a bit when the sides are not evenly matched), your side has something to do.
I think that's the major question in my system, which I am wondering why anyone hasn't really addressed. Regardless of NPCs or not, how often can you get a fight in there, balanced or otherwise, and how do you balance the ISK + LP rewards to match that. One idea is to increase ISK + LP reward for the more ships you end up competing with in the site - but then how do you make sure the system isn't "gamed" by both sides. "Take plex 1, we'll watch you complete, etc".
That is probably the more difficult question in my proposal idea.
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
50
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:38:00 -
[100] - Quote
That's the problem with adding direct rewards for plexing, it will be abused/gamed to hell and back within five minutes of going live unless the activity is made such a chore as to be utterly useless.
All hope is not lost though: Solution is to borrow the Incursions payout mechanic where the rewards are only paid out in case of a successful campaign. Set a time limit on how long a campaign has before being declared 'failed' (like Incursions time outs), combined with some way for us to specify where plexes should spawn and Bob's your uncle. |
|

Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:41:00 -
[101] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Bloodpetal wrote:Cearain wrote:The problem with the curent system (and why many people refer to fw as broken), achieving the overarching goal was based on pve skill not pvp skill so no one really cared about it. It wasn't an accomplishment people valued. Agreed. You agree and then want to use Incursion mechanics for occupancy? (PvE) I don't get it. Please explain. Cearain's main point in two years of threads are that NPCs are bad and shouldn't be a part of the occupancy mechanic. He still wants ship limited combat and for people to orbit buttons for a set amount of time. The one decent idea he has is to notify militia that a plex has been opened, but what he nor anybody else does not quite comprehend is this: Players don't fight if they don't think they can win. What happens when the other side disengages and leaves you hanging with no pvp? Sit on timer like he suggests? That's where his proposals fall short every time.
Of course, I comprehend players donGÇÖt fight if they donGÇÖt think they *can* win. I will fight some battles where I think the chances are against me but if I donGÇÖt think there is *any* way I can win then I wonGÇÖt fight.
Now to answer your questions: Lets say you are in a plex and I donGÇÖt fight you. Well maybe I need to get a ship for that plex and then I will come back and fight you. Then we both get to fight in this war and to the victor goes the spoils.
But letGÇÖs say I wonGÇÖt fight you in that plex in any ship because GÇ£I donGÇÖt think I can win.GÇ¥ Well I am pretty much conceding that you are better than me at pvp arenGÇÖt I?
Now maybe I am new to eve so that is why I donGÇÖt think I can win. So maybe someone else in my militia thinks they can win against you. Well they are notified where you are as well and therefore you will get your fight from them.
Now if everyone in my militia feels they cannot win against you, then you will count down every timer, receive the lp for doing that, and we will lose the war. Why will we lose the war? Because you are better at pvp. This is how it should be.
People thought fw was going to be about pvp. This is why many people started out in fw and why many people (who didnGÇÖt know the mechanics) were impressed with Caldari. But then posts by people like ank made people realize that GÇ£winning faction warGÇ¥ just proved you were a bigger carebear than the other faction. And now the occupancy mechanic is all but abandoned.
Side point: CCP should consider some ideas for the timers. They may want to make it so that if you blow up an enemy ship in the plex your timer not only goes down for the time of the fight but maybe and extra 90 seconds or so. That way people will be able to do slightly more plexes in the same amount of time if there are fights involved. (yes I know they will need to consider the possibility of people killing alts in the other militia but I think that can be considered)
X Gallentius wrote: Your suggestion w.r.t incursions is decent even though it involves NPCs because your group will have something rewarding to do if the other side decides not to fight.
We just disagree about this. I view npcs as nothing but floating bags of isk waiting to be broken open. Shooting them is not rewarding at all beyond the isk.
LetGÇÖs say ccp published the names of the players who shot the most npcs in the game. Sort of GÇ£best carebearGÇ¥ in the game list. Would you think highly of these players? I think people on that list would be ridiculed as much as they would be honored.
Puking npcs all over plexes just deters pvp. How many times does this need to be demonstrated before people will realize it? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:43:00 -
[102] - Quote
The mere fact that it's in low sec will encourage other militias (and pirates) to grief each other when the opportunity presents itself.
Quote:But letGÇÖs say I wonGÇÖt fight you in that plex in any ship because GÇ£I donGÇÖt think I can win.GÇ¥ Well I am pretty much conceding that you are better than me at pvp arenGÇÖt I? Yay. I win! Now what do I (or my gang of 10 buddies) do now that you've left system? Orbit a button for 29 minutes?
Edit again: The NPCs ought to provide some isk reward for your effort of winning, and you should be able to leave once they are killed - not by orbiting a button for another 29 minutes. |

Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
Dagren Darius wrote:To go along with the station discussion. Why not just have a station in FW systems instead of a bunker that is flipable. 1 station in the middle of the system that is controlled by the faction that holds the system. That station is then only usable by that faction, guns shoot the opposing faction, it can have lp store for that faction as well. Then no neutral RR undocking from it from either side, guns make it harder to camp, and if you use the station alot you won't want to loose that system. Just an idea
Dagren I don't think I understand.
How do you flip the station? 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
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 18:54:00 -
[104] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:The mere fact that it's in low sec will encourage other militias (and pirates) to grief each other when the opportunity presents itself. Quote:But letGÇÖs say I wonGÇÖt fight you in that plex in any ship because GÇ£I donGÇÖt think I can win.GÇ¥ Well I am pretty much conceding that you are better than me at pvp arenGÇÖt I? Yay. I win! Now what do I do now that you've left system? Orbit a button for 29 minutes?
Instead of posting before you read and considered everything I wrote addressing your concerns, perhaps you should read the rest of my post and find out.
But yes, in the end, if you, X-Gallentius, are such a fearsome pvper that no one in the entire opposing militia would dare enter a plex that you are in, then yes you will have a boring time winning plex after plex and the war.
Are you so sure that is what will happen?
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 19:53:00 -
[105] - Quote
I'm positive it won't happen often enough to keep me interested for a long enough period of time. I've been there, done that. Still do it (rarely these days) due to insanity. Running people out of plexes is fun. Sitting on plex button waiting for people to come in and fight is just too boring to do long term.
Let me know when your name appears on the following link: http://api.eve-online.com/eve/FacWarTopStats.xml.aspx
Then maybe your opinion on when, why, and how often people will fight in plexes will hold some weight. |

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
51
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:36:00 -
[106] - Quote
That link must be bugged, where am I on KillsTotal and VPTotal?
"Veshta Yoshida" should be third on both those lists but my name isn't even on it .. must remove entries if they don't contribute for X amount of days so if someone doesn't show you can't really put too much weight on it.
Cearain has never hidden the fact that he abhors plexing and that he has never done it to any great extent though, so that bit at least is valid enough 
Back on topic: I'd say that a defensive plex should have a short time-to-close and an offensive about the same as now. Puts the pressure on the attacker as he/she/it can no longer rely on a frig in every plex if a defender can close three for every one his "bravely-run-away" frig-swarm gets. Alternatively, the idea of defensive plexes should be removed entirely and the objective for the space holder is to hold the line by denying the attacker enough plexes per day/week by 'tagging' them (ie. instantly despawn). Also removes the idiocy of being able to max ones standing in a few days by doing nothing but cushy defense work
Both ways will foster conflict over just about all plexes in a targeted system/constellation. |

Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 20:40:00 -
[107] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:I'm positive it won't happen often enough to keep me interested for a long enough period of time. I've been there, done that. Still do it (rarely these days) due to insanity. Running people out of plexes is fun. Sitting on plex button waiting for people to come in and fight is just too boring to do long term.
You couldnGÇÖt possibly have done it. CCP never implemented a notification system that tells the other militia you are there taking a plex. You are assuming a change in mechanics will have no effect on players behavior.
When you sit in a plex now there is a good chance most of the enemy militia doesnGÇÖt even know you are there. I find it unlikely they all think you are such a fearsome pvper that no one will dare enter a plex you are in.
Plus they may think you do not want to be found and so you will run if they go in. (after all under the current system, without notifications, hide and seek plexing is a very effective way to plex.)
IGÇÖm not sure what this is. ItGÇÖs not coming in clear on my browser.
From what I can tell it looks like a web site that calculates among other things, how often you play and how many plexes people take. When I enter plexes I tend to not even bother taking them. I tend to move away from the rats so that I donGÇÖt waste my tank and have to warp away if a player comes in. So IGÇÖm not sure I will be making your list unless ccp makes occupancy plexing something that involves pvp instead of pve.
Moreover, I havenGÇÖt been playing eve all that much lately because there are very few mechanics that bring about frequent quality small scale pvp.
If these lists are supposed to have some other meaning then you will have to spell it out for me because I am missing it.
If you only want to hear from people like yourself who think fw is fine, and a GÇ£free war decGÇ¥ is the best we can hope for, then of course you wonGÇÖt think anything is wrong. Have fun shooting red crosses.
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
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:00:00 -
[108] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:Cearain has never hidden the fact that he abhors plexing and that he has never done it to any great extent though, so that bit at least is valid enough  ....
Just to be clear, abhor having rats force me or the other side to warp out. I love plexes. A substantial portion of my fw fights have occured in them and I never had a bad fight in one. Even if some of the fights were ugly. Pretty much all of my ships are named "fw plexxer" so people in local know where to find me.
I just never actually capture the plexes for several reasons: 1) I don't want rats shooting me in offensive plexes. 2) I don't want rats whoring my killmails in defensive plexes. and 3) after you do them they close. I would rather leave them open in case I come back that way.
A minor or medium plex in amamake should never be closed. I know allot of people are giving pl crap in these fw threads. But for me its been nice having them in amamake because they often come in to the plexes to fight. My last loss was in a plex to someone from sniggardly.
But I'm just a nickle and dime pilot so I don't mess with supercaps and all that.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 21:50:00 -
[109] - Quote
F'ing forum eating long winded posts.
1. My post was harsh, but point remains. 2. As stated many times before. You can notify, but after getting blueballed so many times, people will quit coming. This conclusion is based on experience. (see also Bad Messenger's comment on how to use proposed mechanics) 3. From your post it seems that you just want fights in plexes and care nothing for occupancy - otherwise you'd close the plexes. You're in it for the same reasons 95% of everybody in FW now - PVP! Higher goals... meh! Why would you close them in the future if you don't now?
|

Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 22:24:00 -
[110] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:F'ing forum eating long winded posts. 1. My post was harsh, but point remains. 2. As stated many times before. You can notify, but after getting blueballed so many times, people will quit coming. This conclusion is based on experience. (see also Bad Messenger's comment on how to use proposed mechanics) 3. From your post it seems that you just want fights in plexes and care nothing for occupancy - otherwise you'd close the plexes. You're in it for the same reasons 95% of everybody in FW now - PVP! Higher goals... meh!  Why would you close them in the future if you don't now?
1) I don't think anything you said was harsh but then again I am thick skinned. I'm not sure what the point of your last post was either. Seriously very few people engage in plexing anymore. Even Hirana has given it up. If you are still plexing and loving it, the conclusion would be that you are not entirely in touch with what the vast majority of people find fun. I don't mean that to be mean either. I recognize allot of things I enjoy others don't like. I'm just pointing it out.
2) The only people who will get blue balled are the people who want to hide and seek plex and run from every fight. They will start a plex and constantly get chased out of it. No one will ever have to chase them because they will simply be notified when they enter a plex.
I see you read Bad messengers comment but did you read the responses I gave? I gave a detailed response as to why it would work out well for pvpers. If you think I missed something then point it out but lets not keep backing up and covering the same ground.
3) I will run plexes and try to win occupancy when if it has merit. That is if and when ccp sets up a mechanic where occupancy is decided by pvp skill I will think poursuing it has merit. Yes its still a game but I will admit that I have some respect for people in this game who are good at pvp.
I don't mind people who only do pve. I am happy they enjoy it. But being good at pve is not something I respect. I have absolutely no inclination to prove to everyone that I am such a great pver by capturing a bunch of plexes from npcs. (sleeper ai or not) Nor do I have any desire to prove I can make a bunch of stabbed alts who can speed tank the rats.
And yes I am in it for pvp. And the system in fw should work to bring pvp about. The ssytem should not just sit their abandoned by 95% of those that join.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|

Dagren Darius
Ice Fire Warriors
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 00:45:00 -
[111] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Dagren Darius wrote:To go along with the station discussion. Why not just have a station in FW systems instead of a bunker that is flipable. 1 station in the middle of the system that is controlled by the faction that holds the system. That station is then only usable by that faction, guns shoot the opposing faction, it can have lp store for that faction as well. Then no neutral RR undocking from it from either side, guns make it harder to camp, and if you use the station alot you won't want to loose that system. Just an idea Dagren I don't think I understand. How do you flip the station?
I meant instead of shooting the bunker, you shoot the station. Then the station changes to the other faction. This could really suck if you had stuff in the station that you can no longer get to. So by flipable i meant when system changes occupancy the station does as well. If it only allowed militia pilots to dock in it gives incentives not to loose station since you can't even use neutral alts to get stuff out. |

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:11:00 -
[112] - Quote
Dagren Darius wrote:
I meant instead of shooting the bunker, you shoot the station. Then the station changes to the other faction. This could really suck if you had stuff in the station that you can no longer get to. So by flipable i meant when system changes occupancy the station does as well. If it only allowed militia pilots to dock in it gives incentives not to loose station since you can't even use neutral alts to get stuff out.
The idea is fine except shooting stations is boring and killed Null Sec. They need to do something else than shoot structures. NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |

Brant Sharkbait
Viking Brigade
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 01:39:00 -
[113] - 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 and 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. |

Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 02:26:00 -
[114] - Quote
Dagren Darius wrote:Cearain wrote:Dagren Darius wrote:To go along with the station discussion. Why not just have a station in FW systems instead of a bunker that is flipable. 1 station in the middle of the system that is controlled by the faction that holds the system. That station is then only usable by that faction, guns shoot the opposing faction, it can have lp store for that faction as well. Then no neutral RR undocking from it from either side, guns make it harder to camp, and if you use the station alot you won't want to loose that system. Just an idea Dagren I don't think I understand. How do you flip the station? I meant instead of shooting the bunker, you shoot the station. Then the station changes to the other faction. This could really suck if you had stuff in the station that you can no longer get to. So by flipable i meant when system changes occupancy the station does as well. If it only allowed militia pilots to dock in it gives incentives not to loose station since you can't even use neutral alts to get stuff out.
I like the idea of haveing some station guns on the miltia specific stations to prevent station camping.
But I think if the station could flip and I could lose my stuff I would probably base out of non flippable stations like ishukone. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

DocsGirl
Eerie Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:28:00 -
[115] - Quote
Cearain wrote:How do you flip the station?
EDIT: Sorry this became a longer thread than expected, but an idea bug hit me, and I don't think it sounds too unreasonable. So, please excuse the TL;DR.
If it is a station instead of a button/timer, I think it'd be a hell of a lot more realistic to have a full on station that can be flipped. How do you flip the station...?
Well, do it like when you take a POS down.
The station can have Sentry Guns and Missile Turrets, Shields, etc... This means a militia actually has to send REAL resources to take down that station, just like taking down a POS.
But, instead of going into Reinforced mode, the station then goes into rebuild mode. A state of "neutrality", where the system belongs to no faction.
So, if Gallente "flipped" a Caldari Capture Station (nice name eh??? =D), they had to deplete all it's shields, put all its turrets out of commission, and take it into .0001 of structure.
Depending on how realistic you want the system capping to be: 1. The station, when it hits that .0001 of structure, will start to rebuild its own structure, armor, shields, turrets come out of their incapacitated state etc... OR 2. The enemy has to do the rebuild themselves. The enemy has to bring in the hull reppers, the armor and shield reps, etc. Personally I like that idea better, because it requires resources, just like in real life. It's not just that everyone is PvP oriented, now a remote hull repper would be useful, remote armor repping and shield boosting would be a necessity, but you also need the resources to protect the logistics side of things.
Not only does this prevent an "immediate" flip, it makes it laborious process that actually means something and can't just be completed right after downtime.
Maybe a benefit of owning more systems could be reduced LP/Tag requirement for LP store goodies or better PvE (such as spawning sanctums, higher end DED complexes). Again, it is about incentive... "WHY ARE WE DOING ALL THIS?"
As far as a balancing act, not to throw things into a major imbalance of power, would be for the empire that is losing the war to have NPC support (like when Caldari militia enters Gallente Highsec), such as spawning militia NPC instead of pirates at gates and stations, station guns actually fire on the enemy if they're in enemy territory,the enemy can't park ships or even enter the enemy stations, etc etc.
This way, if the balance of power is purely based on the fact that time-zones don't match up, or one militia has 4000 players and the other only 2000, the disadvantaged faction isn't left completely in the dust and just over-run by the superior force. Of course this would have to be done on a scale of sorts, maybe base it on the number of systems an empire owns. If Minmatar own all 12 of their original systems there's only active station guns. If Minmatar drop to 8 systems, NPC Militia cruiser spawns start happening. If they drop to 4 systems, then NPC militia BS/BC/Cruiser spawn. If they drop to 3, then no enemy of the Minmatar can enter the stations at all, even if in a Pod. (Note that the numbers of systems were arbitrary.)
Something like this would help keep things balanced, but can also be rewarding for the enemy force as the NPC militia could have bounties/rewards attached to them such as ISK/LP/Tags/special drops. Again.... there's that concept of INCENTIVE.
Hell, you could have prices in High Sec market hubs be affected by how many systems that faction owns. If you own a lot of systems, then the price of items drops, if you don't have a lot of systems, the prices are higher due to the risks involved in getting everything to that hub through enemy territory. This would also then be an incentive for high sec carebears to take interest in what is happening in the militia. To either join the cause or support it in some way, because they too benefit from having a successful empire. This means you could REALLY have smugglers taking stuff from a successful faction's market hub, trying to run equipment/ships/materials and selling it for cheap (but much higher than what he bought them for on the cheaper market) in the factions market hub that is doing poorly.
I don't think this would be too hard to implement, the basics are really in place already. Stations spawn for missions all the time, NPC's spawn and can be assigned special loots,etc... It's just up to CCP to really sit down and put the incentive into being in the militia. |

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 14:38:00 -
[116] - Quote
I like your concept - the issue is that just like with the null sec dilemma, the devs are trying to move away from "shoot stations" for conquering anything.
It's BOOoooooooooooooooooooooooring.
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |

DocsGirl
Eerie Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:14:00 -
[117] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote: It's BOOoooooooooooooooooooooooring.
How so? You've got enemy militia buzzing about trying to prevent the system flip... how can THAT be boring? I guess I don't see how it's boring. Time consuming sure... but they can change how long it'd take to take out shields, armor and structure. It doesn't have to take long to take down... it could just take a while to bring it back up.
It's all about incentive... currently, there is NONE other than FW missions and making some isk. |

Dagren Darius
Ice Fire Warriors
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:29:00 -
[118] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:
I like your concept - the issue is that just like with the null sec dilemma, the devs are trying to move away from "shoot stations" for conquering anything.
It's BOOoooooooooooooooooooooooring.
My point was me already have to shoot a bunker. Just Change the bunker that's in the middle of PW systems to a station. The mechanic could stay mostly the same even. It's more like a dockable bunker that have station guns that shoot other militia and only holding militia of the system can use it. It's ment to be more of a safe zone that when you are out roaming and need to take a break you can go to one of your militias systems and not worry about 2-3 opposing militia guys camping undock waiting for you to come out.
Doesn't need to be a station per say could just be a dockable bunker, I mean they are already there anyway make them usefull rather than just shoot it when system goes vulnerable. |

Cearain
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:35:00 -
[119] - Quote
Dagren Darius wrote:Bloodpetal wrote:
I like your concept - the issue is that just like with the null sec dilemma, the devs are trying to move away from "shoot stations" for conquering anything.
It's BOOoooooooooooooooooooooooring.
My point was me already have to shoot a bunker. Just Change the bunker that's in the middle of PW systems to a station. The mechanic could stay mostly the same even. It's more like a dockable bunker that have station guns that shoot other militia and only holding militia of the system can use it. It's ment to be more of a safe zone that when you are out roaming and need to take a break you can go to one of your militias systems and not worry about 2-3 opposing militia guys camping undock waiting for you to come out. Doesn't need to be a station per say could just be a dockable bunker, I mean they are already there anyway make them usefull rather than just shoot it when system goes vulnerable.
That could be a decent staging place for fleets where others wouldn't be able to tell how many you have docked there. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 15:57:00 -
[120] - Quote
Shooting stationary structures (POS, Control Bunkers, NPCs, etc...) is boring if there is no opposition. This is the biggest challenge in designing a fun occupancy mechanic.
So the next step is to turn the activity into an isk making venture on the side to make it worthwhile for people to do it when they get blueballed.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |