EVE Search - Current FW mechianism is really bad

All Channels

Warfare & Tactics

Current FW mechianism is really bad

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 914	Posted - 2014.07.05 13:21:00 - [91] - Quote Rahelis wrote: Changes are exellent ... Truth. Metrics do not lie. Look at this forum now and compare to before changes: Now - Threads about killing people and/or fits, progress/fight reports and old-school chest beating. Then - Threads about which militia was best for making ISK and threads complaining about stabs/cloaks/farmers-in-general. Now that plex farming has been all but removed the next step should be to ensure that pew'ers can sustain a decent living (read: trying-and-dying) without too much grinding and without having to resort to gimmick fits. Looking forward to getting back in as soon RL lets up.
Master Sergeant MacRobert Space-Brewery-Association 24eme Legion Etrangere 81	Posted - 2014.07.05 16:55:00 - [92] - Quote Veshta Yoshida wrote: Rahelis wrote: Changes are exellent ... Truth. Metrics do not lie. .... >> the next step should be to ensure that pew'ers can sustain a decent living (read: trying-and-dying) without too much grinding and without having to resort to gimmick fits. Yes it's time to scratch heads on how you reward PvP a little. I think there should be an incentive in there. The current shared LP (altered by FW Tier) does not quite hit the mark. So far I have come up with what follows: Remove LP from kills all together. This does not work and it should not be a shared mechanic with the sov grind. What to replace it with.... ...I have been thinking a bit on this. I think the reward should be for the pilot (FW) dealing the final blow (on a FW target). I'd grant one of these rewards per killmail. FAQ: No Way this just means everyone will fly dps ships and noone will want to fly bait tank, kiting tacklers, ECM boats, logistics, etc.... I disagree with this thought. 1. I believe that these other ship fits are brought because it is essential for them in the setup chosen in order to win fights. 2. In addition, there would be no killmail without some dps and the ship with the highest dps does not always get the final blow. 3. This would be a boost to solo and small gang PvP. If you fly around with 30 guys ganking stuff on gates then well frankly I do not think you deserve as many rewards for your PvP as a soloist who risked all he had to obtain a kill or a team of 3 or 4 who risked being outnumbered easily. FAQ: So what do you propose these "rewards" are? I'd call them Honour (Honor / Honure) Stars. Yes I've tagged them Honour Stars. So you receive one for each final blow. Does not matter if the ship destroyed was large or small or well fitted. You get one. The target has to be from one of the opposing militia's. What do you suggest we do with these Honour Stars? I propose that they be used for a few things: 1. Create a parallel method to the rank system. For each rank, from 1 to 10, can be attained by either the accumulation of LP or now by the accumulation of HS. 2. Add HS to the cost of some of the items in the LP store (I'm thinking the ones that have too many tags for a start like Navy Heavy Neutralisers and Smartbombs). 2a. I am thinking Navy Faction Tech II ammo (at very high cost of LP and HS). 3. Add a new rank (number 11) to the ranking system that can only be achieved by the accumulation of HS. 3a. The new rank would be called "Elite blah blah blah" or something. 3b. When holding the new rank, you are rewarded with some benefits. 3c. Benefit one would be a discount to the cost in LP for upgrading a system level at the ihub. (Flat 10% sounds good). 3d. Benefit two would be a discount to the cost in LP for items in the LP store. 3e. Maybe a benefit number 3? 4. HS would be displayed on your decorations tab with a total of Number Awarded / Number Outstanding (unused) One problem I can see is that there is a possible exploit with exploding your own SP alt in a throw away ship in order to gain HS. So far my counter to this: 1. Perhaps rewarded one HS for each final blow placed on a pilot that is different to your previous final blow. 2. Do not receive any HS for kills on beginner ships 3. Do not receive any HS for kills of the same pilot within a set time period (say 4 hours or same day). Anyway, it does not look perfect but, there maybe a gem of an idea in there somewhere. It just needs some polish. Sarge "remedy this situation or you shall spend-áthe rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 915	Posted - 2014.07.05 20:02:00 - [93] - Quote Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: So far I have come up with what follows:... It is untenable to tear down everything and start from scratch, you'll never be able to sell such a concept. Build on and with what is available, then tweak until target (PvP'er self-sufficiency) is met. Example (pure brain farting): 1. Keep PvP payouts and its underlying value calculation with some light changes. 1a. Make empty and/or T1 fitted hulls worth zero. Actual loss beyond hull must be incurred (to minimize obvious mech. abuses). 2. Remove rank system as it exists today (ie. utterly meaningless) and instead base Rank on aforementioned value calculation. 3. Add a fairly harsh attrition modifier if a pilot for whatever reason goes hippie pacifist, say two ranks a month if no kills/assists are made. For extra evil incentive to kill, make it a semi-logarithmic scale so that every day (downtime needs something to chew on!) of inactivity in the blood bowl reduces the modifier and getting to that golden peak requires ever more blood in a fast'ish pace. 4. Use rank as a modifier to payouts in a similar way and of equal value as tier system (but in addition to), that is all payouts - kills, plexes and missions (maybe even a LP store % discount). 5. Tweak numbers to get whatever value is deemed "enough". Such a change would even allow the modifier for killing high ranking enemies to be increased dramatically thus helping to feed their kill ratio (and rank) by attracting gold-diggers
Rahelis Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 74	Posted - 2014.07.06 07:49:00 - [94] - Quote You can easily fund PVP with low sec annos, fw mission, fw offensive plexing and even wh`s. Of course PVP should get more influx on the warzone mechanism - and fw missions also need to be in the calculation. The only problem with the fw mechanic in its current form is when one milita get locked in t1 for a long period of time. It is not easy to balance all ths factors. What I want: BC plexes with a gate ! ! ! ! ! The unrestricted work fine now - but we NEEEEEED a BC sized plex for the unforgotten BC fights of old - bring the good stuff back.
Squatdog State Protectorate Caldari State 126	Posted - 2014.07.06 09:22:00 - [95] - Quote The only real problem with FW plexing at the moment is the ridiculous number of spawns in anything higher than a Novice. The whole idea of the previous rebalance was to encourage PVP by greatly reducing the number of NPCs, but now CCP have performed an abrupt about-face and turned plexing back into a PVE grind. Ideally, it should just be an initial spawn plus another for each 5min interval ie: 2 total spawns in a Novice, 3 in a Small and 4 in Med/Large
Val Erian Azure Horizon Federate Militia 21	Posted - 2014.07.06 16:15:00 - [96] - Quote People complaining about the one at a time npc when in past were dozens w/ECM I find amusing. The best solution is probably one from the past as we'll. It used to be the various named plexus .... Outpost Facility. Installation Stronghold Compound varied in amount of npc spawns and their strength. Outpost being easiest compound hardest. Was a real difference between them. A adjustment like that would still make it possible for newbies to plex outposts while keeping what appears to be current semi effective anti farmer mechanism.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos 2335	Posted - 2014.07.06 16:56:00 - [97] - Quote CCP now has two "dials" it can tweek - respawn rate, and rat strength. Surely they can find a balance in there somewhere. For me, line the rats up however you want and I'll adjust. Not a problem. But, IMO, respawn rate could be decreased slightly.
Super Chair Project Cerberus Templis CALSF 627	Posted - 2014.07.06 21:09:00 - [98] - Quote Val Erian wrote: People complaining about the one at a time npc when in past were dozens w/ECM I find amusing. The best solution is probably one from the past as we'll. It used to be the various named plexus .... Outpost Facility. Installation Stronghold Compound varied in amount of npc spawns and their strength. Outpost being easiest compound hardest. Was a real difference between them. A adjustment like that would still make it possible for newbies to plex outposts while keeping what appears to be current semi effective anti farmer mechanism. glazed over ptsd look major strongholds Project Cerberus is recruiting for the US Timezone, click here
Rahelis Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 75	Posted - 2014.07.07 11:07:00 - [99] - Quote Is it val - or the new owner of his char?
Christopher Mabata Dominion Tenebrarum 14	Posted - 2014.07.07 13:01:00 - [100] - Quote Yeah i like the new spawn mechanic and the tank on them. Plus its funny when small stuff warps in you tackle it and then the rat kills it before you do when Deplexing Is it bad if your friend says "that was a Metaphor" and you say "Meta 4? Get Tech II or faction" ?I love the sound of silent explosions in Space.-á
neo smith Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 36	Posted - 2014.07.09 19:00:00 - [101] - Quote "I'm in FW and the changes are fine , but we could decrease npc dps a little bit and increase their tank a little bit so rats would be irrelevant in pvp ( no dps against/for you) just a timer blocker. " ( though id leave there tank as is) "If there are militia capsuleer ships in the plex from the same faction, then the navy ships will not engage any opposing capsuleers. They will prefer to sit back and let the militia duke it out, rather than to risk their own lives." I like these two ideas and I can rum meds fine in a incursus. tho I doubt my maulus or merlin would fair so well if its going to be a close fight the little extra dps from the rat will matter. it will make some players less likely to engage and so less fw pvp leaving just the pie to fight just my 2 cents
Rahelis Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 75	Posted - 2014.07.09 21:05:00 - [102] - Quote Changes in FW are exellent. 4500+ ship kills in 24 hs - want do you guys want more, pvp wise?
Garr Earthbender Justified Chaos 213	Posted - 2014.07.09 22:50:00 - [103] - Quote Rahelis wrote: Changes in FW are exellent. 4500+ ship kills in 24 hs - want do you guys want more, pvp wise? Working as intended -CCP -Scissors is overpowered, rock is fine. -Paper
May Arethusa PillowBrigade Inc Heiian Conglomerate 9	Posted - 2014.07.10 03:29:00 - [104] - Quote While the changes are a step in the right direction, they're far from perfect. WCS really have no place inside a FW plex and should be disabled upon entry. Failing that, prevent ships fitted with them from entering entirely. Hull-based warp strength modifiers can remain active, forcing farmers to either combat fit their ship or resort to the Venture and give anti-farmers a base warp strength to work against. A flat ban on cloaking is ridiculous. Disable cloaks on non-covert ships within a plex, once again removing a level of safety from a farmer while allowing combat fit covert op/recon ships to operate normally. If a farmer wants to cloak in a plex, they should be made to train and pay that little extra to do so. On a similar note, the changes to the beacon are less than welcome. As a combat pilot, I shouldn't have to butcher my overview to have easy access to the warp-in point. Return the original beacon to how it was before, and have the new "@0" beacon disabled by default. Again, if a farmer wants to cloak, they should be made to work for it. Currently the mechanics only dissuade farmers from offensive plexing, which tips the balance in favour of the defender. It's great that CCP finally took steps to address the issue, but it seems like little consideration was given to the impact these changes would have upon those who actually fight inside the plexes.
Cearain Goose Swarm Coalition 1315	Posted - 2014.07.10 03:42:00 - [105] - Quote Garr Earthbender wrote: Rahelis wrote: Changes in FW are exellent. 4500+ ship kills in 24 hs - want do you guys want more, pvp wise? Working as intended -CCP The link between the recent changes and the even more recent increase in kills seems dubious. I had nothing to do with the whys or what fors of the huola campaign, but I doubt it went: "ccp made offensive plexing slightly harder, therefore we should go offensive plex huola." Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Crosi Wesdo War and Order Repeat 0ffenders 966	Posted - 2014.07.10 03:45:00 - [106] - Quote Cearain wrote: Garr Earthbender wrote: Rahelis wrote: Changes in FW are exellent. 4500+ ship kills in 24 hs - want do you guys want more, pvp wise? Working as intended -CCP The link between the recent changes and the even more recent increase in kills seems dubious. I had nothing to do with the whys or what fors of the huola campaign, but I doubt it went: "ccp made offensive plexing slightly harder, therefore we should go offensive plex huola." Just like your face!
Rahelis Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 76	Posted - 2014.07.10 05:53:00 - [107] - Quote Think it over at least twice, sir. I want some null sec loving dev give us BC plexes after the huola campaign. There has to be a bonus for providing game content. No stabs to be seen in huola plexes so far, with 20-50 ships running the button . . .
Thorr VonAsgard Never Surrender. 41	Posted - 2014.07.10 08:23:00 - [108] - Quote Working as intented and realy enjoyed of this :) Next upgrade will be to be unable to enter plex if not in FW OR NPC shooting on neutral entering in plexes (if pirate).
Christine Peeveepeeski The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 580	Posted - 2014.07.10 10:15:00 - [109] - Quote Cearain wrote: Garr Earthbender wrote: Rahelis wrote: Changes in FW are exellent. 4500+ ship kills in 24 hs - want do you guys want more, pvp wise? Working as intended -CCP The link between the recent changes and the even more recent increase in kills seems dubious. I had nothing to do with the whys or what fors of the huola campaign, but I doubt it went: "ccp made offensive plexing slightly harder, therefore we should go offensive plex huola." It went more like this. Alliance 1> We should blap Huola, bored now and I want it back. Alliance 2> Sure thing man, bored too, blap it hard! Rest of militia> **... THINGS BEING BLAPPED RAISE POS BLAP ** WTF WHATS HAPPENING BLAP THAT ANYWAY.
Baron' Soontir Fel Justified Chaos 199	Posted - 2014.07.10 14:31:00 - [110] - Quote It's absurd to think the recent changes have had any impact on major stronghold fights. Stabs? You've never ever seen those in fights. See Innia, Kehjari, or Eha campaigns. More PvP? No... again, see other stronghold fights. They happened before the changes and they will happen after. the changes have had only a slight impact on offensive plexing in force. The ONLY thing different is the inclusion of large plexes into the normal rotation. That said, I'm annoyed I can't use meta PvP Heron or LML Kestrel in plexes now.
Master Sergeant MacRobert Space-Brewery-Association 24eme Legion Etrangere 90	Posted - 2014.07.10 15:57:00 - [111] - Quote I pursued an Ushra'Khan pilot with dual stabbed thrasher out of a small in Kamela only last night. It is still being used. Particularly on alts working on systems away from the main battles. Trying to gain either LP (at low to negligible risk) or to put the contested status on systems up to dry and draw forces away from the main fight or hamper the resupply logistics. The motives are fine but, it should not be possible to do so with warp core stabilisers fitted. "Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
Anslo Scope Works 5944	Posted - 2014.07.10 16:04:00 - [112] - Quote Why should it not be possible? CCP have you the tools to handle stabs. Use them. -\_For the Proveldtariat_/-
Master Sergeant MacRobert Space-Brewery-Association 24eme Legion Etrangere 90	Posted - 2014.07.10 16:22:00 - [113] - Quote Anslo wrote: Why should it not be possible? CCP have you the tools to handle stabs. Use them. Read: It should not be possible to offensive plex (perhaps even to defensive plex) with warp core stabilisers fitted. I agree it must be changed. CCP do have the tools to either nerf the module (the current penalties are laughable and were a quick fix to a meta using Sensor Damp Ravens in days of old) or to control their use in combat plex's. Bring us the Gate restricted BC complex. NOW! "Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
Anslo Scope Works 5945	Posted - 2014.07.10 16:31:00 - [114] - Quote I meant YOU have the tools. A scram, multiple point, etc. Use them. -\_For the Proveldtariat_/-
Baron' Soontir Fel Justified Chaos 200	Posted - 2014.07.10 17:07:00 - [115] - Quote Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: Bring us the Gate restricted BC complex. NOW! We have larges. Why do you want to have a gate.
Rahelis Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 78	Posted - 2014.07.10 19:35:00 - [116] - Quote I want unrestricted AND bc plexes with a gate - so we can field bc fleets again without getting blobbed easily. Gals should know - we had all this nice bc fights in eha/ oicx and I was in cal mil.
Korhaka Mirunas Armed Warriors On Line 33	Posted - 2014.07.10 22:51:00 - [117] - Quote I dont think stabs should be disabled in FW complexes, it is a valid game mechanic to counter the warp scrambler while also reducing your combat capacity, the player that comes in without a WCS will have a huge combat advantage over the player using WCS and will be able to drive them out and take the plex for them selves. As for cruisers NPCs being too hard to kill in your farming frig, that's a good thing. Ship up or fleet up, faction warfare should be about PvP with LP just as a way to help replace your lost ships. We need T3 Shuttles!!-áhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiR5Q72kT1U
Ashlar Vellum 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 114	Posted - 2014.07.11 08:41:00 - [118] - Quote Anslo wrote: Why should it not be possible? CCP have you the tools to handle stabs. Use them. It all comes down to this - do you see rewarding semi-afk gameplay as a problem or not.
Sara Tosa School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 14	Posted - 2014.07.11 18:14:00 - [119] - Quote so, basically stabs are the FW version of afk cloak?
Cearain Goose Swarm Coalition 1317	Posted - 2014.07.11 18:36:00 - [120] - Quote Sara Tosa wrote: so, basically stabs are the FW version of afk cloak? No. Sort of the opposite really. Low sec players who don't want stabs want more risk not less. Null sec players who are against afk cloaks want less risk. You can afk cloak all you want in low sec and no one will care. 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 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.