Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
100
|
Posted - 2016.03.29 02:52:30 -
[31] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Corvald Tyrska wrote:Thanatos Marathon wrote:Fixed that for you. They changed FW missions to make it much harder to run them in a stealth bomber, and it was never super easy to run gal mil missions in one to begin with. Corvald Tyrska wrote:not aware of changes in the game but feel like making random suggestions anyways. Well I just gave one a shot to see how different they are and promptly lost a Purifier . Seriously though, they are definitely still doable. I can see exactly where I messed up and how to avoid it. It would require a little more cherry picking and some slightly different tactics but the Minmatar ones are definitely still doable in stealth bombers, especially if you have two characters running them together, which is easy enough on a dual monitor PC. The real way to fix it is to ensure the mission objectives aren't so vulnerable to torpedoes which is why I suggested Burner style missions. The current targets tend to be battleships, transports or structures which can all be hammered from 70-80 km away whilst outrunning the pursuing ships with a MWD. burner style? so a minmatar maelstrom that has nyx tank moros dps and windicator webs. seems legit. need 20 people to run fw missions yay.
Most burner missions are run in Assault Frigates and Pirate Frigates but I was suggesting the style not a wholesale clone. The point of burner missions is that instead of stock standard, mass NPC slaughterfests the mission points out a target with a profile of damage, tank and other info so that you fit a ship to counter it. The idea behind burner missions was PVE that was more like fitting a ship for PVP and if used for FW, ideally, would encourage people to be flying around in FW zones in a ship that was more PVP focused than PVE. FW is supposed to be more PVP focused than PVE but the missions are very similar to running normal missions in LowSec.
Really the missions do pay out way too many LP but although it encourages a lot of people to switch factions to farm, a lot of them probably wouldn't be contributing much to the defence of their original faction anyway if all they want to do is farm LP. Changing the missions probably wouldn't help much with the state of FW when one side is dominating.
Reversing the scaling for defensive plexing would have a much bigger impact on FW as it actually rewards players for defending systems when they are losing badly and funnels more players into those systems the attackers are trying to take, hence leads to more conflict (kinda the whole point of FW). |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2932
|
Posted - 2016.03.29 15:04:10 -
[32] - Quote
You've pretty much described FW missions. Every mission has a target and if you have any brains you'll leave the rats alone - unless you want some sweet tags to buy lots of proper faction gear from the LP store. The difference is that you (if you are Gallente) need something bigger than an assault frig for L4 missions to be efficient at it.
The other missions (L1 through 3) can be done in frigates, faction frigates, and assault frigates, respectively.
And please just stop with the suggestions. Reversing the scale of the LP payouts for defensive plexes is pretty dumb.
JUSTK is recruiting.
|
Oreb Wing
Arm of Coryphaeus
162
|
Posted - 2016.03.29 21:06:56 -
[33] - Quote
The only advantage for cornered defenders I'd like to see is tier point bonus granted by daily averages of kills and warpoints, and not just territory control. I want both, but if I could have my pie and eat it too, I would remove donations level as a point value and shift that over to stacks of 25 points for best-in category daily values and weekly values towards that faction.
Kills, daily(25) and weekly (25) WZ war points daily (25) weekly(25) Isk efficiency KDR daily(25) weekly (25)
Then no one will complain or moan like babies when they are low tier. When they do, I shall shake my spear and laugh.
Edit: Probably change values to 50? |
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
100
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 01:56:32 -
[34] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:And please just stop with the suggestions. Reversing the scale of the LP payouts for defensive plexes is pretty dumb.
Serious question, why? What problems/exploits do you see with it? I am happy to acknowledge that there may be issues that I haven't thought of but what are they?
|
Oreb Wing
Arm of Coryphaeus
162
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 02:19:30 -
[35] - Quote
Corvald Tyrska wrote: Serious question, why? What problems/exploits do you see with it? I am happy to acknowledge that there may be issues that I haven't thought of but what are they?
There's no incentive to be 'winning'. Just as when we didn't get an award or trophy for total warzone control the 2nd time, it was so disheartening and lame. People put in a lot of hours, but we were refused a medal due to the horde of farmers that were riding bloody coat tails. Rewarding higher tier to the losers is so anti-climactic that it borders on being ridiculous. I understand what t1 feels like, but flipping rewards around like this is not the solution. |
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
100
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 02:57:08 -
[36] - Quote
Oreb Wing wrote:Corvald Tyrska wrote: Serious question, why? What problems/exploits do you see with it? I am happy to acknowledge that there may be issues that I haven't thought of but what are they?
There's no incentive to be 'winning'. Just as when we didn't get an award or trophy for total warzone control the 2nd time, it was so disheartening and lame. People put in a lot of hours, but we were refused a medal due to the horde of farmers that were riding bloody coat tails. Rewarding higher tier to the losers is so anti-climactic that it borders on being ridiculous. I understand what t1 feels like, but flipping rewards around like this is not the solution.
That is a fair point. What I was trying to address is the fact that when warzone control is mostly lost there is really no incentive to continue defending. Aside from the few groups that care about the pride factor, most FW players will either leave the losing side or stop participating and do something else once tier drops to T1. There needs to be rewards for winning control and the massive increase in LP payout for offensive plexing and mission running does give that to a degree. How can we encourage defenders to actually defend or even attack other systems when their side is losing? I've been on the other side at times and it can get pretty dead at high tiers with there being few people around to fight. |
Oreb Wing
Arm of Coryphaeus
162
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 03:56:33 -
[37] - Quote
Corvald Tyrska wrote: That is a fair point. What I was trying to address is the fact that when warzone control is mostly lost there is really no incentive to continue defending. Aside from the few groups that care about the pride factor, most FW players will either leave the losing side or stop participating and do something else once tier drops to T1. There needs to be rewards for winning control and the massive increase in LP payout for offensive plexing and mission running does give that to a degree. How can we encourage defenders to actually defend or even attack other systems when their side is losing? I've been on the other side at times and it can get pretty dead at high tiers with there being few people around to fight.
Ye. Like I said above, if the system tier were decided on a categorical level we would be much better rounded. Take us for instance. If you look at our Statistics window in the FW GUI all this information is already here. Kills Yesterday, Kills In the Last Week. The same for Victory points.
If a batch point system were thrown in based on the Statistics in the Militia space in Gal v Cal wz it would look like this:
Kills in the Last Week: C.1505 /G.2064 (50 galmil) Kills Yesterday: C.214 / G.289 (50 galmil) Systems Controlled: C.32 / G.69 (50 galmil) double values VP Last Week: C. .16m / G. .13m (50 Calmil) VP Yesterday: C. 22.12k / G. 19.22k (50 Calmil) Total Possible: 101 (systems) + 250 (points) = 351 Warzone Control levels: Gallente: (150+69) 219= T4 @62% Caldari: (100+32) 132= T2 @37% (nearly t3)
No more donations.
|
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
100
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 07:31:21 -
[38] - Quote
Intriguing idea. I like how dynamic it is. I can see what you mean about the rewards being high. If tier was determined by activity it would certainly encourage better participation. |
aldhura
Bartledannians Nite Owls
36
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 22:39:07 -
[39] - Quote
Where is your loyalty ?? FW is about honor and PVP, rewards should be considered a nice to have.
Bartledannians Corporation is recruiting
Nite Owls Alliance is recruiting
|
Oreb Wing
Arm of Coryphaeus
164
|
Posted - 2016.03.31 04:58:27 -
[40] - Quote
aldhura wrote:Where is your loyalty ?? FW is about honor and PVP, rewards should be considered a nice to have.
Loyalty doesn't put plasma in my cannons, but I shall name my next set of honorable turrets after thee. |
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
569
|
Posted - 2016.04.01 20:14:38 -
[41] - Quote
amazing how all these ideas about how to fix fw pop up when minmatar arnt at t4. enjoying the free lp train.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Silverbackyererse
The Church of Awesome
207
|
Posted - 2016.04.02 00:21:59 -
[42] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:amazing how all these ideas about how to fix fw pop up when minmatar arnt at t4. enjoying the free lp train.
They crop up all the time m8 - please get back to pushing those Aug and Omen Navy issue prices down further!!! |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |