| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
243
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:09:00 -
[361] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: ...I think to continually say GÇ£everything is fine in FWGÇ¥ is to be out of touch with the community, and thatGÇÖs why IGÇÖve reacted to your comments. ...
Hans I think you are doing a great job herding cats.
However, Bad messenger is not alone in basically saying everything is fine. If you read XGallentius's comments on plexing he is basically saying it's fine too. I think plexing and fw in general is "basically fine." (Yeah but to really get it where I think its worth doing I think they need to iterate.)
I'm not saying this is good or bad, but it just seems to be a fact. The cry to "fix fw" seems to be a bit quieter than it was. I would say the cry to "fix faction war" has been downgraded to a cry to "iterate on fw." There are at least 2 good reasons for this: 1) CCP has made good changes to fw. 2) Players read some of what ccp had planned to "fix fw" and gained some perspective on how bad it could be.
You are better than I am at putting a finger on the pulse of what current players want so I will let you judge for yourself whether what I say is true or not.
As for me I am not even claiming to express the views of current fw participants. I am posting views of what would make fw worth doing, *for me.* I think that is fine, and likely what ccp wants to hear.
I also think I am echoing the views of people who may not even participate in fw any longer because of the way it has existed for so long...but whatever I suppose anyone could claim that.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
99
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:13:00 -
[362] - Quote
In a broader sense. So what we want is a system? That combines some or all of what ? PvP Missions Plexing
We want a way to control/change/interact with it?
May be a triangle that hes a level of influence with each other? Or should some other format based sovereignty control influence some or all? PvP |......\ |........\ |..........\ |............\ |..............\ |................\ |..................\ |....................\ Plexing--------Missions
Or we want parts fixed or Iterated or ignored? plexing PvP rewards GGC interactions with certain acts Missions NPC interaction in .5-1.0 systems Sovereignty
Are any parts too mutually exclusive? Should any be? I am in Factional Warfare. Have been from day one.-á-áI will never work for a mega corp in null-sec. Do not make FW like null-sec.-áMake FW worth our time. Reword us for what we already do.Give us some more activities to do. |

Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
41
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:15:00 -
[363] - Quote
BolsterBomb wrote: Just to let you know, being a single voice for the community does not mean putting your opinion ahead of the community. Your ideas about changing FW missions (to prevent a bomber from doing a mission) is completely inaccurate with what the community has been saying.
As I said before
Be a voice for the community and talk about COMMON AGREEANCES. Plexing mechanics, sovereignty, etc.
When you advocate changes you advocate for changes that will move FW in the right direction not cause a split (which is what you are doing)
The community agrees 100% on two things
1) Plexes 2) Sovereignty control
Focus on those two, how about that. Leave missions alone for later.
I don't think you can address Plexes and Sov. without also taking the missions into consideration since missions are currently the primary source of reward in FW, and also are a key means of sustaining FW combat for many players. Ideally the goals of plexes, sov, and missions should be intertwined into a common theme for FW, with an underlying belief that rewards are tied to a pilots contribution to the war effort (ie. shooting eachother in the face). ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon |

BolsterBomb
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Flatline.
10
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:19:00 -
[364] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:BolsterBomb wrote:The problem with tying FW missions to VP or pvp is what if you suck at pvp or are not actually gaining VP but you are participating in FW. You then get penalized. If one sucks at PvP then perhaps signing on with a paramilitary force to wage a war was the wrong decision .. imagine how something like the US revolution would have panned out if 80%+ of the various state militias had said "I suck at the shooting bit, can't I have some corn to sow or some pigs to tend?" BolsterBomb wrote:Ex: For about a month I was flying different ships of all types and fighting whatever the heck came my way. I lost A LOT of ships and appeared on a lot of kill mails. Did I gain any VP? Some? Did I gain more loss points then Kills, probably. I spent the first 2-3 months bleeding ships, 40-50 total I reckon. Before I signed on all I had to my name was blob kills from my life in null and zero PvP experience, I have since (last 2.5yrs) gotten 3k kills or so with about 10% of that in losses .. If you deliberately suicide your ships ("fighting whatever the heck came my way") and don't practise with some focus ("flying different ships of all types") then it is no wonder that you don't feel like you got anywhere learning wise BolsterBomb wrote:Point is it will effect innocent pilots It is a war of attrition between competing ideologies .. there is no innocence. As for the 'community' not agreeing on missions being a bit a bit naff and the constant droning of cloaked bombers being annoying .. what game were you playing again? There are of course nay-sayers, but on the whole they are few and far between since the farming alts don't post in the relevant threads (thank Goddess!).
Are you kidding me??? Really because someone sucks at PVP means they shouldn't PVP??? Can you say elitist for me. I'll through this in the "I dont have a rational argument so I will just talk jibberish bucket"
Where did my post saying that I spent a month losing ships have anything to do with your response? I was pointing out an example that refutes the idea that FW missions should be based on VP or PVP.......not a rationale about how many kills you have....again Elitist maybe?
Once again...what is wrong with farming. You can farm asteroids, you can farm belts, you can farm ANY TYPE OF LVL 4.
This whole vendetta over missions clearly is coming down to "people are sinking my lp to isk ratio". The argument for FW missions has been completely torn apart and your argument (and others about fw missions needing a nerf bat of some type) are completely ridiculous. They are not logical nor address any of the results/changes that I have mentioned would happen.
The common tone is "I dont care people shouldnt be able to use lowsec for isk) that is the problem and the words you are screaming however you sugar code it.
Get over it.
|

BolsterBomb
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Flatline.
10
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:20:00 -
[365] - Quote
Fidelium Mortis wrote:BolsterBomb wrote: Just to let you know, being a single voice for the community does not mean putting your opinion ahead of the community. Your ideas about changing FW missions (to prevent a bomber from doing a mission) is completely inaccurate with what the community has been saying.
As I said before
Be a voice for the community and talk about COMMON AGREEANCES. Plexing mechanics, sovereignty, etc.
When you advocate changes you advocate for changes that will move FW in the right direction not cause a split (which is what you are doing)
The community agrees 100% on two things
1) Plexes 2) Sovereignty control
Focus on those two, how about that. Leave missions alone for later.
I don't think you can address Plexes and Sov. without also taking the missions into consideration since missions are currently the primary source of reward in FW, and also are a key means of sustaining FW combat for many players. Ideally the goals of plexes, sov, and missions should be intertwined into a common theme for FW, with an underlying belief that rewards are tied to a pilots contribution to the war effort (ie. shooting eachother in the face).
so does this mean we change the pirate missions in 0.0 since they are a main source of isk for most npc 00 players??
|

Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
243
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:21:00 -
[366] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Those that have been following this debate longest know that even on my main thread, the posts started out tinged more with my personal take on the FW system (being a minmatar pilot) and as I heard more and more feedback from a wider variety of sources, I have been more than willing to update the trend list reflect this.
I should have clarified in this case and said the only thing I care about in the missions is the bomber aspect. I donGÇÖt see this as being the main factor that cripples Faction Warfare, and I absolutely agree that the plexing system and sovereignty consequences have always been the top community issues. I never really saw the bomber thing as being a personal crusade, because I know IGÇÖm not the only one whoGÇÖs brought the issue up. If otherGÇÖs agree this is no longer an issue, IGÇÖm happy to drop it. I was more pointing out to Bad that my issue with missions isnGÇÖt about the isk income in the end (though alt farmers and the market effect annoys a lot of FW pilots) because I care more about the quality of PvP they encourage.
Don't apologize. FW missions are still easy mode for 1/2way skilled toons to make isk in low sec with no danger. Low sec DED missions have more risk than FW missions. Even if someone sees the FW mission up in a system, the mission runner still can A) get out before the pirate/opposing FW guy gets there and kill him or B) move on to another mission when the pirate/opposing FW guy camps the warp in. No risk low sec PVE is not how it's supposed to be. It goes agains what Low Sec is about!!! Risk/reward man!!!
You can also blob up a system and run level 5s risk free in low sec. And anyway comparing FW missions to other low sec missions that notoroiously have horrible participation is not really a good measure is it?
How is the risk reward of fw missions compared to high sec level 4s? I think its pretty balanced. High sec incursions? Its stupid to run FW missions.
How is the risk reward of fw missions compared to carebearing in sov null sec? I don't have any first hand knowledge but I think it's in line. There is much more risk doing fw missions because the systems are much more crowded. When I hear null sec bears complaining about afk cloakers I don't even know what to think. If I tried to only do FW misssions in completely empty systems I would likely only make about 10 million isk per hour. Not only do we have to do missions in busy systems we send up a beacon as to where we are. "dinners ready!!!"
From what I hear npc null sec missions are also in line.
Wormhole pve? I think they are making much more than fw missions for very little in the way of risk. If the risk was high they wouldn't be flying billion isk ships. That is the true test. One nice thing about bombers is they are cheap as is a speed tanking frigate. Why do we care about them being cheap? Risk.
You can catch bombers if that is what you are after. Its boring work yes. But if you are going to try to be a pirate and actually catch defenseless pve ships than you should have a bit more time on your hands - working as intended. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

Garr Earthbender
Quantum Cats Syndicate
33
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:22:00 -
[367] - Quote
lvl4 FW missions are as safe hi sec lvl 4 missions, pay better, and are done much quicker.
In low sec space.
THAT'S the problem I have. No increased risk for much more reward.
*edit* I guess this is where we will disagree. I won't change your mind, you won't change mine. Time to move on..... |

BolsterBomb
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Flatline.
10
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:26:00 -
[368] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote:lvl4 FW missions are as safe hi sec lvl 4 missions, pay better, and are done much quicker.
In low sec space.
THAT'S the problem I have. No increased risk for much more reward.
*edit* I guess this is where we will disagree. I won't change your mind, you won't change mine. Time to move on.....
That is where you are wrong they are safe because YOU AS A PLAYER are not doing anything about. CCP gave you a loaded gun and said hunt them down. You say.....meh its a bomber so whatever.
Your problem not mine. It has been said before "You are lazy" the ability to stop fw missioning is there.
You as a pilot are allowing the missioner safe haven.
edit: Thats fine to disagree but stop going out and trying to change something that is working as intended. |

Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
243
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:33:00 -
[369] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote:lvl4 FW missions are as safe hi sec lvl 4 missions, pay better, and are done much quicker.
In low sec space.
THAT'S the problem I have. No increased risk for much more reward.
*edit* I guess this is where we will disagree. I won't change your mind, you won't change mine. Time to move on.....
Ok we disagree about whether fw missions are as safe as high sec level 4s.
As to whether they are done quicker that varies so much its hard to even calculate. I have had pirates sitting in my fw missions for over an hour. Usually I figure i will not even be able to do 1/3 of the missions due to pirates and wts. So the time getting those missions and traveling is just wasted. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
113
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:46:00 -
[370] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote:lvl4 FW missions are as safe hi sec lvl 4 missions, pay better, and are done much quicker.
In low sec space.
THAT'S the problem I have. No increased risk for much more reward.
*edit* I guess this is where we will disagree. I won't change your mind, you won't change mine. Time to move on.....
Here's the standard argument: If FW missions are so easy, why don't all the carebear L4 mission runners run them? FW missions are self correcting. They are easy, so people put their alts into them and module prices go down. As they go down people will decide to do other things to make their isk.
Give me the ability to fail FW missions and I will personally remove all these damn carebear alts from the Caldari militia! Do it!  |

Bad Messenger
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
107
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:47:00 -
[371] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Bad Messenger wrote: It seems that Hans keeps himself as some FW God who knows everything about it and how he is doing everything right.
I doubt he even know who i am and what i have done in past in FW when he throws **** like that.
Can you Hans link me one post where CCP say why they made FW for? Missions were there from the beginning so how those are not part of FW CCP designed?
Conclusion is that you Hans Jagerblitzen want that CCP boost FW income just for Hans, also CCP should make pvp so easy that Hans can kill everything you see without effort.
At least i understand it so. Hans brings me one word to my mind 'Ankhesentapemkah'. YouGÇÖre absolutely right Bad Messenger. IGÇÖve let this get personal. My frustration is that IGÇÖve spent months now trying to coordinate the FW community into a single voice GÇô to avoid the amarr vs. minmatar, gallente vs. caldari grudges and trash talk (leave it on the server) so we can all work together to help CCP understand what the community wants fixed about the feature, so it becomes an active warzone again.
I am still part of that FW community with several 50m+ sp toons and with lot of low sp toons.
You are not representing me or my opinions, you are just like Ankhesentapemkah. I've seen people like you before. you are not good for community and you are not representing majority of FW people.
I have as much right to say my opinions as anyone else, i have also right to comment what others post, that is called discussion. There is no absolute truth, ever. |

Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
854
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:54:00 -
[372] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote: Don't apologize. FW missions are still easy mode for 1/2way skilled toons to make isk in low sec with no danger. Low sec DED missions have more risk than FW missions. Even if someone sees the FW mission up in a system, the mission runner still can A) get out before the pirate/opposing FW guy gets there and kill him or B) move on to another mission when the pirate/opposing FW guy camps the warp in.
No risk low sec PVE is not how it's supposed to be. It goes agains what Low Sec is about!!! Risk/reward man!!!
I'm not apologizing for bringing up bombers. I wouldnt keep saying that if there werent a 48 page threadnought that is chock full of complaints about how easy FW missions are. This thread is simply one of the dozen offshoots that have splintered off regarding FW over the years.
I was merely apologizing because for whatever reason, in this thread I've come off sounding like a know-it-all or someone who cares about myself above the group, and that I should take responsibility for.
The bottom line is - I DONT think we can agree on everything as a community, even plexing itself is still controversial as there are those that think its 98% fixed and those that still think it needs to be overhauled.
When I say we as a community need to approach CCP with one voice, I don't mean we approach CCP with one set of proposed fixes. That will never happen, not through my efforts, or anyone elses. Every faction has its own activities in their own sector, own issues, and own ideas for what needs to be fixed first.
I don't think a proper community representative needs to have unity on how to fix Faction Warfare to be effective. The bottom line is that we all share some very strong cultural values, the most important being that we are here in FW because we enjoy the small-scale PvP that it fosters, and that we don't have the patience for complicated 0.0 style politics or the emptiness of 0.0 space. These are core values that have been completely missed at the uppermost level of CCP and the CSM - and while we've succeeded in convincing them to begin working on FW again, we have not been able to get across why the plan proposed in the minutes will destroy the feature as we know it.
No one in this thread nor in the main threadnought is seriously arguing that CCP "gets it" with regards to Faction Warfare. So we have a choice. We can bicker about the details all day long - missions, plexes, rewards, you name it - and still fail to achieve a single unified solution. If that becomes the requirement needed to say "the FW has a voice, listen to it" and push this at the CSM level - we can just stop wasting our time now and admit defeat, and allow another nullsec-dominated council to elect itself this spring and decide what happens to us this summer.
I can't live with that, and I dont think you guys can either. My efforts instead have been to keep the conversation going - whether we agree or not. The longer we discuss - unity or otherwise, the more effective ideas float to the surface. That's how brainstorming works. We only fail when we stop talking and walk away.
So yes, missions are totally on the table for discussion, Bomber. So are plexes. So are Sov consequences. All of them matter, and all of them are worthy of debate.
The most important thing to me at this point isn't in getting my ideas implemented, or getting us all to agree (both objectives would fail), its getting us all to work together to send the message to CCP that this is our feature, not nullsec's.
That objective is certainly within our grasp, but ONLY if we leave the animosity towards one another on the server and respect each other for taking the time to share feedback and ideas for the sake of the feature we all love. I have not always lived up to that standard, admittedly, and I appreciate everyone here that has spoken up to keep me in check. |

Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
243
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 17:59:00 -
[373] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:There is no absolute truth, ever.
That's absolutely true.
And we should all remember that. 
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
855
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 18:32:00 -
[374] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote: You are not representing me or my opinions, you are just like Ankhesentapemkah. I've seen people like you before. you are not good for community and you are not representing majority of FW people.
I have as much right to say my opinions as anyone else, i have also right to comment what others post, that is called discussion. There is no absolute truth, ever.
Fair enough. I know full well not everyone will approve of my work. I just have to let the community majority decide that for themselves. I have only kept at this for so long because plenty of others have told me how much they appreciate what I am trying to do.
You are absolutely entitled to your opinions, I'm done arguing with you on them. There are plenty of others here that can respond to your comments, I don't have to do that myself, and I shouldn't if I can't stay respectful in the process. By all means, keep posting, you won't have another rebuttal from me, because this is the second time now you and I have butted heads and its not worth it to me to continue.
As for Ankhmorporkwhateverhernameis, I am unfamiliar with that individual. I wasn't always paying close attention to EvE politics, certainly not during my early days playing the game. There's no need to talk about them in this thread, which is about Warfare mechanics, but If anyone wants to send me a link to some information, I'm sure there's an entertaining story there.
|

Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
58
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 19:22:00 -
[375] - Quote
The issue with missions is not necessarily that they are low to no risk in a low sec environment, or even necessarily that they're being farmed. The issue is that they can be, and are farmed by people who contribute nothing to FW as a whole. They don't contribute to flipping systems, and they only contribute to pvp if some poor ******* is willing to fly around chasing stealth bombers for hours on end, hoping that the SB makes a mistake. The missioner has 12 hours to do his missions, he has time on his side to just bore the hell out of anyone who wants to try and fight him. Forget any arguments about people just wanting easy ganks or being too lazy to pvp, that's just bad game design. Players should not be able to hide behind impossibly boring mechanics that just discourage pvp. The whole point of FW is to encourage pvp, and yet here is this mechanic that makes the whole business extremely unpalatable.
Hell, there were (and I think these guys still actually do this) pirates in the FW area that actively ran Gallente FW missions to fund their mains, who would shoot at us on a regular basis. So we not only had people who didn't contribute to the faction running missions, we had people who actively worked towards its detriment running missions. And we had no way of dealing with them. If we shoot them too much, we get kicked out of FW due to standings. If we wardec them, they just continually hop corps or go to the NPC corp where we can't touch them.
Pause and think how objectively ridiculous that is.
The underlying point to the whole "missions are bad" argument is that FW is supposed to encourage pvp. Missions do not encourage pvp, and they help people who do not have any desire to create more pvp in the area. That needs to change, and there are several ideas about how to do it, but almost anything is better than the system we have now. |

Uppsy Daisy
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 20:08:00 -
[376] - Quote
Quote: The issue is that they can be, and are farmed by people who contribute nothing to FW as a whole.
This.
So, how do you make something rewarding that is tied to PVP, not PVE? Because if it is PVE it will be farmed by those who do not contribute to FW as a whole. And it needs a reward to encourage people to do it, and to finance the losses.
If the rewards at tied to pure PVP - just shooting people - it is easy to exploit. You just create an account in the opposing militia and shoot them over and over. So the reward cannot be linked to that.
So the question is, how do you create a system that is not easy to exploit, has ISK rewards, and contributes to FW?
|

BolsterBomb
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Flatline.
10
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 20:23:00 -
[377] - Quote
Uppsy Daisy wrote:Quote: The issue is that they can be, and are farmed by people who contribute nothing to FW as a whole. This. So, how do you make something rewarding that is tied to PVP, not PVE? Because if it is PVE it will be farmed by those who do not contribute to FW as a whole. And it needs a reward to encourage people to do it, and to finance the losses. If the rewards at tied to pure PVP - just shooting people - it is easy to exploit. You just create an account in the opposing militia and shoot them over and over. So the reward cannot be linked to that. So the question is, how do you create a system that is not easy to exploit, has ISK rewards, and contributes to FW?
Its very simple. The real problem you dont like is alts farming missions. (this will always be a problem, however to limit it you tie FW missions as an EFFECT OF PVP activity)
Ex: Say sov mechanics work as such when you conquer X system Agents P,QZ are locked out from being accessed until sov is flipped. You have now stopped alts from being able to farm and in order to access the FW mission you must pvp to reopen it.
This is NOT my example of the way to fix the problem it is merly an example to show you how you can alter other FW mechanics to influence when/how FW missions can be run.
By doing it in this order you did not stop the current method of FW missions just knocked out leeching alts. |

Dirk Smacker
Black Talon Aerospace Black Watch.
16
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 20:33:00 -
[378] - Quote
This may have gotten lost with people spraying their superior factional pee pee on each other, but if they gave out LP for plexing, they could limit non-combatant farming by making them mission-based and placing restrictions on their frequency.
They could also "stamp" a system to a mission when you warp into a plex to prevent running away and opening a plex in another system for financial gain.
People would still do missions to make isk, but at least there would be an opportunity for positive peer pressure to do the plexes first to help out the war effort. I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one. |

Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 20:48:00 -
[379] - Quote
For me it is not the farming of missions that matter, people farm all content. It is not about LP store item prices or the fact that some individuals only do the missions.
It is about my own Gameplay.
I do feel that the faction warfare missions are entirely separate content; they are not well connected into FW other than a source of ISK.
My play time is limited; I joined FW to enable me to PVP (or try to) when my personal commitments allow. I have run FW missions but for me it is not rewarding enough for the time commitment, by this I mean that I can run a High Sec Mission (shock horror, and yes I keep an eye on local still) I can dock up at any time and not feel I am losing out but still get some game time, when I choose to go to losec it is only during times that I can guarantee not being interrupted, I would prefer to use that time to get proper fights and feel as though I am making progress within game (not just accruing ISK or Skillpoints). I run a few plexes and skirmish a little but it can be very quiet, at least I feel I am contributing a little.
I would like to include missions into this gameplay, if they contributed towards occupancy, if they allowed me to use a more PVP style fits so that I can undertake both PVE and PVP activities, I need to cram stuff into the time I have available and Faction Warfare I believe should be able to accomplish this in all aspects of its gameplay.
|

Vordak Kallager
Autocannons Anonymous
39
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 20:55:00 -
[380] - Quote
Cearain wrote: I'm not saying this is good or bad, but it just seems to be a fact. The cry to "fix fw" seems to be a bit quieter than it was. I would say the cry to "fix faction war" has been downgraded to a cry to "iterate on fw." There are at least 2 good reasons for this: 1) CCP has made good changes to fw. 2) Players read some of what ccp had planned to "fix fw" and gained some perspective on how bad it could be.
I think the reason there is less "FIX FW OMG" at the moment is because:
1) The two latest updates. They have brought a lot of people back online to check them out, temporarily bolstering activity across all of EVE, FW included. 2) A lot of the people in FW have moved on to other areas of EVE. I look in Minmatar Militia and while there are still a lot of old hats, there are a lot of faces missing in the crowd.
---
Hans, I'm clearly biased having known you for a long time, but you are doing a phenomenal job in my opinion of attempting to take the viewpoints of four separate blocs of the FW community (which are divided even further in whatever cliques reside in the militias) and amalgamate a single unified opinion on current issues in Faction Warfare. There will always be those who disagree or those who are jealous of your positive progress for the state of FW.
---
We can all agree that Plexes need to be reiterated. We can all agree that System Occupancy should mean something. We all agree that Faction Warfare isn't about the PvE, it's about the PvP the system engenders.
What we don't all agree on is how to go about improving Plexes, implementing meaningful System Occupancy and the type/regularity/scale of the PvP FW should be about.
However, the one sickness that ails FW is activity. I don't believe we would be complaining about FW if activity was high and PVP was around-the-clock. Change creates Publicity creates Interest creates Activity. At this point, I think any change that there is at least somewhat of a consensus on will be beneficial in attracting new interest and players to participate in Faction Warfare, something that needs to happen. |

Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
58
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 21:22:00 -
[381] - Quote
Uppsy Daisy wrote:Quote: The issue is that they can be, and are farmed by people who contribute nothing to FW as a whole. This. So, how do you make something rewarding that is tied to PVP, not PVE? Because if it is PVE it will be farmed by those who do not contribute to FW as a whole. And it needs a reward to encourage people to do it, and to finance the losses. If the rewards at tied to pure PVP - just shooting people - it is easy to exploit. You just create an account in the opposing militia and shoot them over and over. So the reward cannot be linked to that. So the question is, how do you create a system that is not easy to exploit, has ISK rewards, and contributes to FW?
I've never understood this argument. There has to be a happy medium between making it akin to the insurance scams of old, and where it is now, which is basically worthless LP payouts for killing WTs. Surely we can find a payout that is good enough for people who kill ships, but doesn't make getting an alt in a ship blown up over and over again to magically generate isk. We could eschew LP altogether and make it a straight up isk bounty, like capturing ships in the 18th Century. Lets say you get half the hull value of the ship you kill in isk, everytime you kill one. Maybe split that between all involved parties, or not. There's lots of ways to combat alt scamming. |

Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
243
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 21:36:00 -
[382] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Uppsy Daisy wrote:Quote: The issue is that they can be, and are farmed by people who contribute nothing to FW as a whole. This. So, how do you make something rewarding that is tied to PVP, not PVE? Because if it is PVE it will be farmed by those who do not contribute to FW as a whole. And it needs a reward to encourage people to do it, and to finance the losses. If the rewards at tied to pure PVP - just shooting people - it is easy to exploit. You just create an account in the opposing militia and shoot them over and over. So the reward cannot be linked to that. So the question is, how do you create a system that is not easy to exploit, has ISK rewards, and contributes to FW? I've never understood this argument. There has to be a happy medium between making it akin to the insurance scams of old, and where it is now, which is basically worthless LP payouts for killing WTs. Surely we can find a payout that is good enough for people who kill ships, but doesn't make getting an alt in a ship blown up over and over again to magically generate isk. We could eschew LP altogether and make it a straight up isk bounty, like capturing ships in the 18th Century. Lets say you get half the hull value of the ship you kill in isk, everytime you kill one. Maybe split that between all involved parties, or not. There's lots of ways to combat alt scamming.
I think overall your right they can do a bit more. But the margins are still pretty tight with t1 fully insured hulls.
As to the value of the other non vanilla t1 ships - that can get a bit tricky to calculate what half "the value" is.
Often the vaue of the hull is very little of the overall loss. As for valuing the mods I think that would be a larger undertaking. Although it would help with the whole bounty system too. But anyway when you scoop the loot you get half the value already. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|

Uppsy Daisy
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 23:47:00 -
[383] - Quote
@Julius
Because it needs to be a lot more than half the value of the hulls!
I am a fairly active FWer. I could easily make 1 billion a month running missions.
Half the value of the hulls I kill in a month, (shared amongst everyone on the killmails?!) would be nothing compared. |

Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
58
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 00:18:00 -
[384] - Quote
We can change the payouts for plexes and system capture (or create them in this case), you don't have to get all your income from shooting other militiamen. The whole point is that you get more than the piddly ass amount you do now. Half the hull value of an abbadon or a t3 is nothing to scoff at. It doesn't have to be enough by itself, it just has to supplement the main income, which should come from participating in occupancy battles. |

Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
857
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 00:21:00 -
[385] - Quote
Cearain wrote: As for me I am not even claiming to express the views of current fw participants. I am posting views of what would make fw worth doing, *for me.* I think that is fine, and likely what ccp wants to hear.
And that's precisely what needs to happen. I think one of the biggest barriers to cooperation has simply been the way we interpret each other's language.
Many of us say "The real issue here is...." instead of "One of the main issues here is...."
The result is threads like this where we have have some heated debates that can get confrontational, even though each person is suggesting an idea with substantial merit.
We all just need to give each other the benefit of the doubt and realize that most of these ideas are excellent things for CCP to investigate - whether they are plexes, missions, occupancy rewards, NPC AI, LP reward placement, etc.
This has been why my strategy has been to maintain the list the top issues so that CCP understands that there is a multitude of valid ways they could enhance the FW system. That way, everyone in here that feels strongly one way or another whether its about missions, plexes, consequences, or rewards - ends up contributing to the overall message.
While we bicker away in the forums the CSM and CCP continue to discuss a radically different purpose for Faction Warfare. If we can hold off the animosity for long enough to deliver the unified message that we are NOT in Faction Warfare to be farmed up to 0.0 and that we are here for small-scale, frequent PvP - than we have achieved a real victory worth celebrating.
I don't think the developers are incompetent and need us to spoon-feed them perfect fixes. (I'm sure I'll be flamed for that but whatever.) I think they are being misdirected by the council, which has far greater sway in the wake of Crucible than ever before. The difference is critical.
If we want to be effective in changing their minds, we have stop worrying about being right when we argue amongst ourselves. We should by all means continue the discussion, I just cant stress the urgency of tolerance and respect above all.
I will certainly try my best to be a better example in this regard. |

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 01:10:00 -
[386] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:[quote=Cearain] If we can hold off the animosity for long enough to deliver the unified message that we are NOT in Faction Warfare to be farmed up to 0.0 and that we are here for small-scale, frequent PvP - than we have achieved a real victory worth celebrating.
How do you propose we deliver said message?
(By the way, there's a handful of (ex)fw people here who will continue animosity no matter what, learn who they are and ignore them and these threads will go a lot smoother). |

Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
859
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 04:19:00 -
[387] - Quote
chatgris wrote: How do you propose we deliver said message?
Working on that. More to come... 
Quote:(By the way, there's a handful of (ex)fw people here who will continue animosity no matter what, learn who they are and ignore them and these threads will go a lot smoother).
Yes I know, lesson learned.
|

Damar Rocarion
Nasranite Watch
132
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 05:05:00 -
[388] - Quote
chatgris wrote:(By the way, there's a handful of (ex)fw people here who will continue animosity no matter what, learn who they are and ignore them and these threads will go a lot smoother).
And a r..ard whose corp members (with his own approval) are part of evemail spamming, convoing hostile FC's durng fights and other welll documented shenigans once again attempts to play "All Gallente players are totally cool and mature" card...
|

Hrett
Quantum Cats Syndicate
38
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 06:57:00 -
[389] - Quote
Damar Rocarion wrote:chatgris wrote:(By the way, there's a handful of (ex)fw people here who will continue animosity no matter what, learn who they are and ignore them and these threads will go a lot smoother). And a r..ard whose corp members (with his own approval) are part of evemail spamming, convoing hostile FC's durng fights and other welll documented shenigans once again attempts to play "All Gallente players are totally cool and mature" card...
Wait. We have been approved for shenanigans? When was there approval for shenanigans?
HOW DID I MISS APPROVAL FOR SHENANIGANS?!?!
I knew there was something wrong with this lousy excuse for a corp. |

Bad Messenger
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
107
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 08:17:00 -
[390] - Quote
Hrett wrote:Damar Rocarion wrote:chatgris wrote:(By the way, there's a handful of (ex)fw people here who will continue animosity no matter what, learn who they are and ignore them and these threads will go a lot smoother). And a r..ard whose corp members (with his own approval) are part of evemail spamming, convoing hostile FC's durng fights and other welll documented shenigans once again attempts to play "All Gallente players are totally cool and mature" card... Wait. We have been approved for shenanigans? When was there approval for shenanigans? HOW DID I MISS APPROVAL FOR SHENANIGANS?!?! I knew there was something wrong with this lousy excuse for a corp.
Gallente players are well known clowns, they have circus out there. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |