| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
99
   |
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote:CCP would like to inject some of the drama that surrounds the CSM election system into FW, by having some
sort of in-game election of militia leaders/admirals
Fleetwarp sujarento for president |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
99
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
The entirety of plexing mechanics has promise for variety of ship types to be used instead of just battleships, logi, and caps as the order of the day. All we needed was a meaningful reason to fight over plexes. Lower skilled pilots could have an impact on the "war" by fighting in minor plexes forcing the enemy to ship down in order to capture the complex. You had all sorts of fights, frig/dessie brawls, cruiser skirmishes, and BC engagements in majors, and then the eventual cluster **** where everyone flies as big as they want for the bunker bust. CCP should understand that having all shiptypes meaningful is really important to the playstle most of us enjoy in faction war. Players have the option of hoping in a frig and brawling cheaply, or flying bigger ships too. I enjoy the variety. All ship sizes are relevent.
Didn't a few frigs/dessies just recently cap a minor plex making a system no longer vulnerable while a minmatar blob was busting a bunker, buying time for the amarr to rally a counter fleet? I think the current system has a LOT of potential for something dynamic. You could have fights in multiple sized plexes as well as the bunker simutaneously. This excites me. Having one big fleet shooting a structure is kind of boring. I hope they don't completely scrap what's in place. It just needs improving, not removing. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
100
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
I can see it now, as soon as "in game elections are held" everygoon puts an alt in each militia and votes for a mittens alt. This proposed tax Income is then syphoned off to somewhere not relevent to FW.  |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
104
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 21:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
If they do implement in game elections, giving all the militias tax resources to single leadership entity, its a r e t a r d e d idea considering that those not participating in faction war will find ways to harvest this resource remotely just like moons are. It seemed like CCP and the CSM wished for remotely controling resources to go away, according to the minutes.
If i were CCP I would give new meaning to the victory point system. As militia corps/militia alliances kill the enemy and capture/defend systems/plexes (earning VP) they then could use their earned victory points to "bid" for stations on a corp/alliance level (note that you have to be in militia to do this) to control whatever benefits/upgrades from having occupancy would be purchased. Of course there would be upkeep on having control, not just having isk to throw at maintaining a station, but also having to continue fighting for their faction and earning VP having to spend it to keep the factions favor in order to keep the station under their control. It'd be like fighting for your lord and them rewarding you with a little bit of real estate. Something like this would implement safegaurds that those participating in faction war reap the benefits, not some entitiy with enough numbers to make mass alts to vote in a mock leader to steal isk (or at least would force outside entities to really work at it). Also this would allow for corps/alliances that participate in FW to choose where they want to base, they could all base in one system like how heyd/enaluri used to be. But there would be incentives to spread out (especially if the warzone is expanded by making all of lowsec FW) to get their own slice of the pie by bidding for stations that are not in the "main systems".
Anyhow just some rough ideas from a crazy FW bittervet, I want to improve faction war just as much as the next guy thats in it. I think there some good ways to go about it, some better than whats was proposed during the CSM meeting. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
109
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 05:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote:It really shows how little CCP actually reads this forums, time and time again FW pilots state that they dont want some watered down Null Sov. That null and all it "leaders" playing Julius Caesar are not want we want, need or like. That endless bashing, and ship up = win is more likely to have us log off and not get stuck in.
FW pilots have been to null, have dealt with the Caesars and left. FW pilots like being able to undock in a thrasher and fight in minor plexes knowning four battlecruisers are not on the way. FW pilots like 2 on 4 fights, 5 on 5, 10 on 10. They like being able to play for a few hours or not.
Null is not our end game, Null is not appealing to us at all.
Do not ccp, turn our War into thier test bed. Our War is OURS, Your constant drive to move more and more people in to null is becoming annoying. We dont want to be their, stop pushing its game on us. We chose not to play it, respect that for once.
FIX FW, don't merge FW into Null Sec.
Its likely I've just wasted my time, cause no doubt no one from CCP reads this **** anyway. Who knows, maybe a Dev will reply but highly doubtful.
I'm....i'm upvoting an all italics post....this...this feels so wrong!
A well deserved +1 though.
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
110
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 06:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
I'm all for there being consequences for failing to defend a system and benefits for capturing one. I'm not for the complete removal of the plexing mechanics. Tweaking, sure. Refer to my first post in this thread regarding my take on the whole deal with making all ship sizes relevent.
These "elections" are going to be a load of garbage unless safegaurds are in place to, you know, make sure that those who are participants (note simply members of a militia, not mission farmers, not 3,000 goons who joined FW for a day to vote an alt to remotely siphon isk, but actual participants) in faction war. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
116
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 18:12:00 -
[7] - Quote
I'm not sure if CCP even enters the warfare and tactics forum unless a GM or Dev gets a petition about an offensive post or something. Anyhow, I cross linked this thread to eve general discussion.
Voice your opinions, protest, shoot a statue, keep posting on any FW thread. Maybe CCP will listen... |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
125
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 17:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
I agree with Karl
Cearain, please stop derailing the thread. You turn every FW thread into a plexing b*tchfest. Stay on topic.
Regarding "removing" faction war systems. If the population in faction war increases (such as FW getting some development time, thus more player interest, or alliances being able to join), having the same amount of systems as we do (on the caldari/gallente front) currently is a good thing. This isn't red versus blue where the fighting is concentrated in two systems. If you want small gang PvP to continue as a theme for faction war, removing the available area to fight over isn't going to help that. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
126
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 22:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
Pulgy wrote:Dirk Smacker wrote:In regards to the bit about pirates being adversely affected by FW changes, CCP should seriously look at shaving a constellation or two from each side of the Caldari-Gallente warzone and maybe one from the Minmatar side of their warzone. For Caldari, I would take away Ieyama and Urpiken (top corners: http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Caldari_VS_Gallente) And for Gallente, Serthoulde (Far left) and Beyt (hi/low sec connected to Serthoulde). The benefits of this would be to lessen the number of systems affected by the changes, allow a bit of a buffer from nul sec, and concentrate the militia PvP in a warzone that is probably far too big as it stands. omg this! just thinking about conquering and holding a system 10-15 jumps from the nearest staging area gives me a headache 
Gotta make sure every system is in jump range for a bridge from a single system I suppose. Infact, while we're at it why not condense all of eve into one system. It'd be much easier to control since everyone is too lazy to travel a few jumps.
Awful frog logic is awful
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
126
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 22:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:
Regarding any FW Nullsec mechanics, for me (and this is the problem with the meeting minutes, it lacks details) it comes down to the details of the mechanic, if a good small gang system occupancy mechanic with consequences for occupancy is developed then I think we would all welcome that, also if that system is then built on and scaled up for Nullsec then does that really matter?
I'm all for this. But some of the ideas in the minutes have been pretty over the top (regarding elections). CCP just needs to build upon what already makes faction war what it is. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
128
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 05:41:00 -
[11] - Quote
We could always spam the CSM's mailboxes.  I've already begun...
Oh and BM is dead on the money here. Rather than politics deciding things let distinguishment on the battlefield be the deciding factor. We're all sick of politics and we all want to blow **** up. Can I get a fckin oath? |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
132
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 08:09:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mfume Apocal wrote:yo, why do you keep laying this on nullsec reps' feet when it was (according to the credits section) hashed out with two step who is a WH dude?
from talking to my csm, he was like, "i didn't say **** about FW; **** em"
You do realize that those credits are referring to who wrote the draft on that particular subject for the summit report, not who was in attendance to each session, right? Otherwise you'd have like 1 CSM per meeting  |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
143
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 03:49:00 -
[13] - Quote
Why have I just stopped reading cearains posts all together? I just skip to the next post |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
146
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 02:03:00 -
[14] - Quote
Carebears will still avoid pvp is they are in FW just to make isk. If you removed missions, they would orbit plexes as proposed. Then, say they've been running a medium plex for ten minutes, you arrive and ofc they warp away. You now have to spend 30 minutes closing said plex while they open new medium one elsewhere and begin to run it, taking them 20 minutes. See the problem here? LP farmers will always avoid pvp to maximize efficiency. Now blackrise has resources beyond just FW missions, there's PI and moons, and DED plexes. DED plexes are so valuable in blackrise with the newly introduced deadspace invul fields that are selling for 1-2 bil each. These sites were profitable before crucible 1.1 and every time you see a russian in blackrise, they're likely scouring for one of these sites. If you are forced out of these sites, there isn't going to be an abundant source of them elsewhere (whereas FW missions and plexes are beyond number). You have to fight for these resources.
Now there's the whole meaningful occupancy thing. If there were rewards for holding/taking occupancy that are separate (ie better) than just grinding LP in missions, then its possible that the gallente will have something to blob. Under current system there is no reason to fight out numbered. There is no reason to think inovatively to punch above your weight class to hold systems. It is easier to just welp it and go home. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
146
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 02:06:00 -
[15] - Quote
Also, just to chime in to the above comment. FW missions have been devaluing and will continue to devalue. 200 million isk navy geddons? Caldari are lucky their navy scorpions haven't dropped that far yet. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
146
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 08:08:00 -
[16] - Quote
Lets remove all forms of isk making from lowsec so all militias can fight with noobships. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
146
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 10:40:00 -
[17] - Quote
Mutnin wrote:There is a simple reason why using plexing mechanics or the ability to fail another player will never work. Soon as that happened all the ISK bears would join what ever Militia was the strongest at that time and they would continue their ISK grinds with safety in numbers. This would cause the weaker side to never over come the stronger because they simply wouldn't get enough help because they won't be able to make as much ISK to make it worth while on the weaker side.
Once they get run out of the plexes over and over they will just swap side and farm away. The "only" way you could do something like that is to limit the LP reward by the number of active Militia pilots in what ever specific system. Even then it would be very easy for 1 side to bulk up and be able to run the weaker side off at will.
LP for plexing in place of missions simply would not work and would hurt FW even more than the ISK farmers do.
Confirming I would just make an alt to farm fed navy webs, navy comets, and hookers.
Biggest proponents of the whole remove faction war missions are the gallente who currently pretty much have had the one sided fight in their favor for so many months now. Now they want more ways so that they can "magically" get noobs en mass to give them free killmails or the proverbial "good fight". I don't know about you but I kill plenty of gallente stealth bombers in missions. It's not a garuenteed kill everytime, they often get away. I catch plenty of snowflakes in the missions though. Infact it is quite enjoyable to go farm "noob mails" in the back pockets, rather than bring a small gang of 5 guys out only to get bitched out in local by the other militia for not fighting a gang twice (sometimes four to five times) in number and twice in ship size. I don't know if my blocked list has anymore room.
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
146
|
Posted - 2012.01.28 00:10:00 -
[18] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:[quote=BolsterBomb]
I support this message, one thing we may want to fight off (depending on the community) is to prevent alliances (get rid of their patch for it) If we let 0.0 alliances in FW as we know it will go away.
/quote]
Well, "they're here" whether we like it or not, the patch is live, and as far as I know FW still exists. I haven't heard of an Alliance yet that has signed up, or an Alliance formed from within Faction Warfare corps.
Does anyone have any field reports as to any Alliances that have applied and enlisted yet?
why should they? There really isnt a lot of good reasons. that was my point. Any of the alliances that wanted to kill FW pilots have already come and done so, and anyone wanting mission access can just use an alt.
The "floodgates" have opened and not a drop has flowed forth |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Caldari State Capturing
151
|
Posted - 2012.02.18 08:34:00 -
[19] - Quote
Andiedeath wrote:Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:I really hope they don't jump the gun and run in more changes that are meant for larger groups, as the CSM note hint to. As our reaction has shown to be negative towards them.
I would rather see smaller changes for a smaller scale part of the game, Hell most of the time FW pilots use the word "blob" to describe a fleet over 15 pilots!
Some small fixes to plexing, missioning, and territory control would go a long way.
P.S. also FW lower tier faction frigate, a demi-god can dream..... Personally I think there are a few things I would like to see... 1. Rewards other than VP for Plexing. Maybe the value of the equivalent FW mission level in LP spread across those in the plex when it Flips. I.E. a major plex is worth 25-30k in and that spread across the group active in the plex at the same time. Defenders and offenders would earn LP. Advantages - The biggest complaint currently I see for new people joining FW is that hey don't have income to support the replacement of ships. Rewards for plexes would help with this. I'm sure there are disadvantages although happy to discuss here. 2. Making FW missions contribute to the capture of the system. In the scheme of things I would think killing a field commander should weaken a system. I also then think missions should be specific for whether the system is being defended or attacked and will be determined by the current occupier. So yes that means in theory missions for Minmatar could spawn in Minmatar territory that is currently contested.
Regarding #1: It is possible for new players to support their pew pew habits already. You can train for a basic AML caracal to begin running the level 3's (at least for caldari). It's what I did when I joined the militia years ago. Most of these players don't realize they can dispatch a single BC rat with the tank equivilance of a rat they find on a gate or in a belt to get easy income. It's not as profitable as the level 4's, but when all you fly is t1 cruisers and dessies, you can easily support a weeks worth of ship losses with a couple hours of missioning with level 3's. Now that's not to say there shouldn't be rewards for plexing, there should be some sort of incentive for occupancy. I think the rewards should lie in holding occupancy, not giving a bit of monetary income for farming a single plex. It should be "big picture" types of rewards.
|
| |
|