| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
6
|
Posted - 2017.02.15 15:43:43 -
[1] - Quote
Perhaps a simpler implementation would be to have any LP earned for one faction give you an equal negative LP adjustment to the other faction.
So if you earn 10 million Amarr LP... you'd have a negative 10 million Minmatar LP balance that you'd have to grind up to zero before you could get any rewards from them from the LP store.
You'd still have some switching between Amarr/Caldari or Gallente/Minmatar in order to grind out LP... but at least they wouldn't be actively working AGAINST their old FW group. The thing creating loyalty would be that huge negative LP grind. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
6
|
Posted - 2017.02.15 17:55:14 -
[2] - Quote
Boozbaz wrote:That's a good idea, but what if you made multiple accounts? What if you had two different characters and you used the ISK you generated from LP on either side of the warzone to fund PvP with a third character?
I don't see the problem. If you had a personal loyalty system like originally proposed, I assume that would be toon based as well and the same thing could happen.
The only reason I was suggesting negative loyalty point is in my mind (as a software developer) that seems like a fairly small change.... just check all the interactions with LP to make sure they can handle a negative value without crashing or doing something goofy like treating it as a gigantic LP total... and then write the code to reduce the LP balance toward the opposing milita group when LP is earned for one.
This was more of an "easy implementation" suggestion for the original idea... perhaps one that got you 80% of the desired result for 5% of the dev time. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
10
|
Posted - 2017.02.16 14:26:13 -
[3] - Quote
Boozbaz wrote:
I think we're having a miscommunication here.
The problem is related to how the tier system works in Faction Warfare. Say for example, that your faction is at Tier 1 - you get little payouts for flipping plexes. This is supposed to incentivize taking over territory and pushing your faction up into higher tiers.
The problem is that when a faction is in Tier 1, a lot of players give up on trying to push it up into higher tiers. This makes it very hard for the few remaining loyal players who continue to fight to bring it back up. Those who continue grinding plexes in a T1 faction make less than 30 million isk per hour. I'd say they make maybe 10-15 million ISK per hour by flipping novice/small plexes, dealing with PVP situations, and losing ships. Personally, I don't think 10-15 million ISK per hour is enough to warrant flipping plexes - and I can understand why so many players leave when a faction is struggling in T1.
One might argue that plexing isn't meant to be a source of income, it's meant to be a place to fight. If that's the case, why not just take away all LP payout for flipping plexes, and let them sit there? Who is going to sit in a plex and wait inside of it for 10-39 minutes when there's only two reasons for being inside of it: A) Getting fights in ships that are of similar power level to your own. And B) Grinding your faction up into higher tiers of LP payouts for running FW missions? I'm just going to go on a limb here and say this: very few players. If you wanted to get fights, it would be much faster just to roam around asking people to duel you on a stargate.
What bothers me, is what happens when these loyal, diligent players grind the plexes in the faction warfare zone, and get their faction back up to Tier 2/3/4; because when a Faction hits higher tiers of rewards, all of a sudden other players join the party and start farming LP, reaping the rewards of the hard work of the players who were loyal and stuck around to get thier Faction out of a rut. And also making it that much harder for the opposite side to regain territory. So the pendulum swings back and forth. When should you join Minmatar Faction Warfare? Well when Minmatar is winning! When should you join Amarr Faction Warfare? Again, the answer is when Amarr is winning!
I hope what I'm saying make sense to you. I like the idea of individual players or corporations having their own tier of rewards, because then those few loyal players who grind away while a faction is losing a warzone still get rewarded well for doing so. And those who jump in when the going is good, have to actually work their way up the tiers to get good rewards.
Perhaps it could be a two tiered system. Your LP payout could be based on two factors: A) What tier your entire faction is currently at. And B) What tier you are personally at. Then if your faction is at T1, but you personally (or your corporation) is at T5, then you get medium level rewards (current T3 rewards). And if both your Faction and you personally are at T5, then you get what is currently T5 rewards.
Now you said that it could be easier to code a system where a player gains negative LP for the opposing faction when they gain LP for their current one. I agree that it could potentially be easier for CCP to program that into the game. What I don't understand is how that would help in the problem that I just elaborated upon above. If you can explain to me how it would help, I'm open to it.
The point of the negative number is to prevent a toon from jumping back and forth between factions based on who's at the higher tier. That seemed to be the point of having "personal tiers"... to have something incentivizing you from flipping to the higher tier side.
If that's the case... having a negative LP balance with the opposing side does the same thing. If you have been grinding Amarr plexes and all of a sudden the minnies flip the board... under the current setup the plex farmers will flip to the minnie side, right? But would they if they had ground 50 million amarr LP and thus had a -50 million LP balance with minmatar? That would mean they'd have to grind 50 million minnie LP just to get to 0... and to start being able to cash in LP for anything.
The huge negative LP balance from grinding amarr prevents an individual toon from switching and grinding Minmatar. Now... could they have another toon for the other side? Yeah... but they could also have another toon with high tiers for the other side in your personal tier system... and they'd still get higher rewards if the other side was winning.
If the flipping of sides isn't your main issue and the fact that those grinding on a lower tier get lower rewards is... the negative LP suggestion doesn't address that. It addresses only the flipping of sides. But preventing toons from flipping sides may have an impact on how many people are plexing for the losing side... it's hard to tell player reactions on a change like that ahead of time.
|

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
12
|
Posted - 2017.02.17 17:51:39 -
[4] - Quote
SHOULD a neutral pirate scaring a plexer away interupt or set back plexing?
They aren't actively trying to "win the system/complex" back for the other side... they're neutral. They just want to blow up ships... they don't care who holds the system. If you're trying to win the faction war, fights with pirates really are a side effect. Fights with the enemy is the actual point. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
12
|
Posted - 2017.02.17 18:27:33 -
[5] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Scialt wrote:SHOULD a neutral pirate scaring a plexer away interupt or set back plexing?
They aren't actively trying to "win the system/complex" back for the other side... they're neutral. They just want to blow up ships... they don't care who holds the system. If you're trying to win the faction war, fights with pirates really are a side effect. Fights with the enemy is the actual point. If you want people in plexes to be pvpers then the more disruption to rabbit plexing the better. The side that can pvp better will have the better chances of winning plexes and therefor the sov war. The pvp may be against pirates or it might be against the enemy it really doesn't matter to most pvpers. Keep in mind both sides will have to deal with pirates. So unless there is some sort of deal worked out with neutrals (and such diplomacy is something eve has always supported) then both sides are still on equal footing. Plexes will be harder to win. Its true. But perhaps they should award more victory points if that is the case. (I don't really care about loyalty points) Also I would point out that there are still some advantages to the fw player in the plex: 1) They are in the plex to begin with so can set up range (this is substantial) 2) FW players who just want to win the plex just need to fight off the person entering. So they can have very long range weapons and don't even really need to worry about fitting a point. For the nonfaction war player looking for a kill they would need to fit a point and just chasing someone doesn't really accomplish their purpose.
I guess it comes down to the question of what FW is about?
Is it just about PvP... as much as possible? Or is it about the "game" of plexing and capturing systems between the opposing factions?
If it's the former, then anything promoting any PvP would be good. I have my doubts that making the current plexing mechanic a lot harder would in fact increase pvp. Instead it might drive people away from FW and more toward other ways of making isk which might in fact lower the number of targets for people seeking PvP around plexes. I suppose it might make it easier for the hunter in that they're more likely to have a willing target at a plex once they find someone at a plex... but the number of people they find at plexes in total might be much lower.
If it's the latter, neutrals aren't really part of the game. I'm not sure their actions should have the same impact as an opposing faction member doing the same things. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
12
|
Posted - 2017.02.17 19:59:33 -
[6] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Scialt wrote:Cearain wrote:Scialt wrote:SHOULD a neutral pirate scaring a plexer away interupt or set back plexing?
They aren't actively trying to "win the system/complex" back for the other side... they're neutral. They just want to blow up ships... they don't care who holds the system. If you're trying to win the faction war, fights with pirates really are a side effect. Fights with the enemy is the actual point. If you want people in plexes to be pvpers then the more disruption to rabbit plexing the better. The side that can pvp better will have the better chances of winning plexes and therefor the sov war. The pvp may be against pirates or it might be against the enemy it really doesn't matter to most pvpers. Keep in mind both sides will have to deal with pirates. So unless there is some sort of deal worked out with neutrals (and such diplomacy is something eve has always supported) then both sides are still on equal footing. Plexes will be harder to win. Its true. But perhaps they should award more victory points if that is the case. (I don't really care about loyalty points) Also I would point out that there are still some advantages to the fw player in the plex: 1) They are in the plex to begin with so can set up range (this is substantial) 2) FW players who just want to win the plex just need to fight off the person entering. So they can have very long range weapons and don't even really need to worry about fitting a point. For the nonfaction war player looking for a kill they would need to fit a point and just chasing someone doesn't really accomplish their purpose. I guess it comes down to the question of what FW is about? Is it just about PvP... as much as possible? Or is it about the "game" of plexing and capturing systems between the opposing factions? If it's the former, then anything promoting any PvP would be good. I have my doubts that making the current plexing mechanic a lot harder would in fact increase pvp. Instead it might drive people away from FW and more toward other ways of making isk which might in fact lower the number of targets for people seeking PvP around plexes. I suppose it might make it easier for the hunter in that they're more likely to have a willing target at a plex once they find someone at a plex... but the number of people they find at plexes in total might be much lower. If it's the latter, neutrals aren't really part of the game. I'm not sure their actions should have the same impact as an opposing faction member doing the same things. I don't think it's a dichotomy like you suggest. It can be a pvp game about capturing plexes and systems. And yes IMO I think FW sov should be a pvp game. If you want to do the whole rabbit v. hunter thing you can do fw missions. Players also have many non fw options in eve to do hunter v rabbit games in null, wormholes and low sec. Missions, exploration, sleeper sites, ratting, special events etc etc. IMO Eve really doesn't need yet another rabbit v hunter mechanic. It needs more good quallity pvp war mechanics. And leaving fw sov as yet another hunter v rabbit game is not good for fw and is especially bad for eve as a whole. The sov game should simply be better than who can multibox the most alts in different plexes and warp off if trouble comes. As far as making isk, I don't care if ccp wants to increase the amount of lp per plex. Fewer plexes captured but the same amount of total lp given to plexers. Or they could lower the amount of lp fw missions offer. (which would make the lp in plexes comparatively more valuable.) But right now the lp is just getting devalued by people multiboxing alts and rabbit plexing. If you want that lp to be worth more isk you might want to end rabbit plexing as well. But the key is to make winning sov fun. If people are just grinding plexes so they can make isk for their null sec main then fw is not where it should be. EVE players need fulfilling game-play that they want to actually spend that isk on. IMO fighting for faction war sov could be a mechanic like that - if ccp makes the changes it promised the players. But as the years go by and the promises are forgotten more eve players leave fw and maybe even the game as a whole.
I wasn't really talking about the idea that rabbiting plexes should be able to be stopped by FW opponents... I question if neutrals should stop it. Neutrals (or pirates if you will) are there to get in fights. They aren't playing the FW game... or they'd join a FW corp.
If the goal of FW is JUST pvp... then having neutrals disrupt plexing might be reasonable. It would (in theory) encourage the plexer to stay and fight.
But if the goal of FW is the "game" (which includes PvP between militias)... it might not be reasonable. There's not a great reason as to why a neutral should be able to impact the "game" of FW as much as the participants.
As to what "fun" is... I've learned that my ideas of what is fun are not the same as others in my corp. Some people view isk acquisition as fun in itself... not as an avenue for their main somewhere else. Others love PvP. Some like running missions for its own sake. Some like working the manufacturing process.
It's difficult to use that as a metric when making decisions.
Also... as far as the "rabbit vs hunter" part... that feels like what PvP in eve is for the most part. Even if you lose all plex progress if you warp away from the grid of a site.... I'm going to run if a ship or group of ships that outclasses me comes in. That's not necessarily being a rabbit... that's simply choosing your fights. Part of PvP in the game is catching a kill or avoiding being caught by a superior force. Many times that's the battle. I don't think there's much you can do with the mechanics that will alleviate that.
|

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
26
|
Posted - 2017.02.23 14:43:24 -
[7] - Quote
How about every complex have a warp disruption bubble that covers the entire range where the timer moves plus 10-20km?
Would that be a simple method of reducing plex farming if that's the issue? Would seem to force more fights... you could still run but it would be harder. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 04:35:12 -
[8] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Darth Magic wrote:This has already been said, but I think the Tier system for rewards is bad. And I agree with the CSM wanting to get rid of it.
Make it all Even instead... Rewards should be higher for higher ranked members of the militia, encouraging loyalty and participation. The Tiers give both sides a reason to push for action in the warzone.
I'm not sure it does.
People looking for isk from plexes are often not looking for fights. Some might take them if they come... but they aren't LOOKING for them.
People looking for fights rarely care enough to wait for a plex to finish. They're hunting others who are plexing.
The desire for ships exploding is what drives combat in FW. Even for those wanting "action"... the tier stuff is what they do in order to FUND their action. It's not what drives it... because quite honestly it's probably more effective to run from combat if you want to raise your tier than to engage in it. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 15:03:09 -
[9] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Scialt wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Darth Magic wrote:This has already been said, but I think the Tier system for rewards is bad. And I agree with the CSM wanting to get rid of it.
Make it all Even instead... Rewards should be higher for higher ranked members of the militia, encouraging loyalty and participation. The Tiers give both sides a reason to push for action in the warzone. I'm not sure it does.People looking for isk from plexes are often not looking for fights. Some might take them if they come... but they aren't LOOKING for them. People looking for fights rarely care enough to wait for a plex to finish. They're hunting others who are plexing. The desire for ships exploding is what drives combat in FW. Even for those wanting "action"... the tier stuff is what they do in order to FUND their action. It's not what drives it... because quite honestly it's probably more effective to run from combat if you want to raise your tier than to engage in it. I know it does because I've been on both ends of the stick and have had these sorts of discussions with the main content creators in my militia for the past several years.
Care to explain it then?
It seems to me that those who care most about LP rewards are the rabbit plexers. Perhaps I'm coming from a different perspective as someone who's income isn't primarily from FW... I only really come to FW space for PvP opportunities. If I'm plexing... I'm doing so because I wan't to control the engagement range with whoever comes into the plex with me. The tier isn't much of a factor.
Those who've actually engaged in combat with me don't seem to be caring much about it either... which is why I'm confused in you saying the Tier gives a reason to push for action. It doesn't feel like it to me (though I'll admit my experience is limited).
|

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 17:09:10 -
[10] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:
Lots of reasons to try to manipulate the tier levels, and to do so you need to capture systems. Capturing systems leads to pvp, which is what we want too.
I guess this is the part I'm still not completely sold on.
Does capturing systems generally lead to PvP. I've taken part in 2 system captures... and in both cases the opposition barely showed up. A week of people yelling to plex a certain system... then go shoot at the hub for a bit. the only people who showed up were a couple of neutrals trying to snipe for a little while on the IHUB bash.
I don't seem to get a lot of PvP when I engage in plexing games... I get it when I search for it (jumping between plexes until I find someone in one who wants to fight). I get SOME... but it's much less frequent for me.
|

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
44
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 16:31:30 -
[11] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:Scialt wrote:X Gallentius wrote:
Lots of reasons to try to manipulate the tier levels, and to do so you need to capture systems. Capturing systems leads to pvp, which is what we want too.
I guess this is the part I'm still not completely sold on. Does capturing systems generally lead to PvP. I've taken part in 2 system captures... and in both cases the opposition barely showed up. A week of people yelling to plex a certain system... then go shoot at the hub for a bit. the only people who showed up were a couple of neutrals trying to snipe for a little while on the IHUB bash. I don't seem to get a lot of PvP when I engage in plexing games... I get it when I search for it (jumping between plexes until I find someone in one who wants to fight). I get SOME... but it's much less frequent for me. We might be able to give you some suggestions about how to find/get PVP if you post with your main. I assume this isn't it since it has never destroyed a ship and has only lost 1.
Well that and the word "alt" in the name are probably good clues.
I don't really have a problem finding PvP. I just don't find it while plexing... I find it by cruising around FW space and looking for it. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
46
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 16:37:14 -
[12] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Scialt wrote:X Gallentius wrote:
Lots of reasons to try to manipulate the tier levels, and to do so you need to capture systems. Capturing systems leads to pvp, which is what we want too.
I guess this is the part I'm still not completely sold on. Does capturing systems generally lead to PvP. I've taken part in 2 system captures... and in both cases the opposition barely showed up. A week of people yelling to plex a certain system... then go shoot at the hub for a bit. the only people who showed up were a couple of neutrals trying to snipe for a little while on the IHUB bash. I don't seem to get a lot of PvP when I engage in plexing games... I get it when I search for it (jumping between plexes until I find someone in one who wants to fight). I get SOME... but it's much less frequent for me. Capturing the right systems does. In general, the more the other side decides they care about a given system, and the more they are active in your TZ, the larger volume of fights. If the other side doesn't care, then there's nothing you can do about it and you're not going to get fights. But that dynamic applies to every other aspect of this game as well.
perhaps the main point of misunderstanding is I largely play FW in a solo capacity... not as part of organized corp fleets. I don't make choices about what systems to capture... someone just screams in militia chat about helping to take XXX system and I join in.
So all my responses should be qualified with "As a largely solo PvP and FW player". For me plexing generates way less pvp then hunting other war targets. And when I hunt targets it's not to interfere with their plexing or to plex the same site in return... I fight and leave (to repair and fight again).
It feels the same in the two militias I have alts in. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
46
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 18:24:40 -
[13] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Scialt wrote: I don't really have a problem finding PvP. I just don't find it while plexing... I find it by cruising around FW space and looking for it.
So you find it while other people are plexing. Working as intended.
Yes.
The point is that the LP/Plex/Tier system isn't the driver. It's having set locations where you know you have a good chance of finding fights at reasonable odds. I'd wager that the number of fights would in no way be impacted by any changes in how LP are awarded and Tier mechanics... simply because the people using FW for fights (as opposed to plexing and running when a fight comes) don't seem to care all that much about that stuff.
Heck, when I do run a plex in order to set engagement range on a fight, 95% of the fights seem to be neutrals anyway. It's clear they don't give a crap about LP... and as I warp away to fix my ship after the battle (or I'm dead)... I don't really care either.
My comments are based on the idea presented that fighting for higher tiers drives pvp in FW. It's not saying FW doesn't create PvP opportunities... it does. But it doesn't seem to me that those who are trying to win systems to increase the tier are driving PvP much. I don't think changes to LP awards will impact PvP in FW much at all. It will mainly impact those rabbit-plexing for LP. |

Scialt
Universal Sanitation Corporation
50
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 21:40:02 -
[14] - Quote
Hamish Nuwen wrote:Boozbaz wrote:One of the things that I want changed with FW is the way you deplex. Deplexing can be one of the most boring, uninteresting and disengaging things in EVE. You just sit there, for 10-39 minutes, babysitting an NPC... I can't agree more. My proposal doesn't have deplexing at all. The only way to prevent an offensive plexing attempt is to actively engage with the plexer/plexers. If nobody is attacking nobody has to defend it, so no more time wasted deplexing. This also means the end of AFK plexing, or plexing with alts with unfitted frigates or with stabs. It has no sense mechanically or economical gain. In offensive plexing the incentive preventing them to run freely is the money (or better: LPs) the ministrutures cost. You can't avoid for them to run, but you can punish them (at least a bit) for doing so, That prevent tactics like rabbit plexing (unless you want to risk to lose more money/LPs that you can earn).
Doesn't there have to be some kind of way to roll back the contention level of a system.
If the opposition offensive plexes a system my militia is defending by 10%... how do I get that back to where it was? Or can the defenders in a system only possibly hold the level where it is and never reverse it (until it flips)?
Seems like that wouldn't quite work. |
| |
|