| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
|
CCP Wrangler
   |
Posted - 2007.09.14 15:29:00 -
[1]
You've waited for a long time, and while the waiting is not yet over we are moving closer to Factional Warfare in EVE! Make sure you don't miss War is Divine, a new Dev Blog by Ginger.
Wrangler
Community Manager
EVE Online
Contact Support - Contact Moderators - Report Bug - Submit News Leads - Knowledge Base
Player Guide - Policies - Join ISD - Fan Submissions - DevFinder LiteÖ |
|
Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 15:36:00 -
[2]
"A little while later, the Content department was sitting around, while Fendhal rolled some dice to figure out what to nerf next"
YMMD :D
|
Syrin
Wildfire Laboratrories
The Crimson Federation
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 15:44:00 -
[3]
Interesting
Any idea on what sorta rewards might be punted out for services rendered ? Really want that Fed Issue Eos (A man can dream )
|
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 15:47:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Erotic Irony on 14/09/2007 15:50:19
questions:
 Quote:
You will not need to leave your corporation to join factional warfare. Individuals as well as corporations can join the cause.
Has the standings threshold been set yet?
Quote:
Fighting for an alliance will have negative consequences on the enemy faction.
Not sure I follow, you can commit as a player alliance to the factional warfare game? Pirate factions are eligible for Factional warfare too?
Quote:
...
Rewards man, what kind of rewards are we talking about? Medals and things yet to be added, faction gear? I didn't notice the emphasis on annexing constellations and systems any more...that's been purged?
___
Support Killmail Overhaul
|
Veng3ance
New Dawn Rising
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 15:50:00 -
[5]
"Opposing Faction navies will take a sudden dislike to you fighting for their enemies."
Will this be standings based? Such as after I attack Amarr a certain number of times, I can no longer enter Amarr space because of bad standings. Or is it a temporary agression based on attacking an opposing faction? (Such as a timer)
|
|
CCP Ginger
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 15:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Erotic Irony
Has the standings threshold been set yet?
Were still thinking about this, we have a number in mind and it wont require you grinding missions for a year.
Quote:
Fighting for an alliance will have negative consequences on the enemy faction.
Originally by: Erotic Irony
Not sure I follow, you can commit as a player alliance to the factional warfare game?
Yeah, sorry about that, we meant fighting for a faction will have negative consquences to the enemy faction, ill go fix that now.
Originally by: Erotic Irony
Rewards man, what kind of rewards are we talking about? Medals and things yet to be added, faction gear? I didn't notice the emphasis on annexing constellations and systems any more...that's been purged?
There will be territory control, there will be rewards and funk. Funktastic stuff, but nothing has been finalized in this department
|
|
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 16:02:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Veng3ance
"Opposing Faction navies will take a sudden dislike to you fighting for their enemies."
Will this be standings based? Such as after I attack Amarr a certain number of times, I can no longer enter Amarr space because of bad standings. Or is it a temporary agression based on attacking an opposing faction? (Such as a timer)
There's already a standings-based system for this ingame - if your standing to a faction drops below a certain level, their faction navy will mercilessly hunt you down and throw peanuts at you while you're in their hisec space. We're looking at ways to use this mechanic without causing too many unwanted knock-on effects. We're also looking at giving them significantly bigger peanuts 
|
|
torswin
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 16:11:00 -
[8]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
There's already a standings-based system for this ingame - if your standing to a faction drops below a certain level, their faction navy will mercilessly hunt you down and throw peanuts at you while you're in their hisec space. We're looking at ways to use this mechanic without causing too many unwanted knock-on effects. We're also looking at giving them significantly bigger peanuts
Nooo, I'm allergic to peanuts 
looks like i have to get some caldari and amarr faction now
---
Signature radius: 150 mm
Unless explicitly stated, this post does not represent my alliance, corporation, my own, or any other living organism's view. |
Brutal Psycho
Amarr
Forged INC.
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 16:15:00 -
[9]
As a sort of EvE loner these days I find this idea of gameplay intriguing. I'm hoping there will be something that can allow me to start PvPing again without having to enter the whole alliance/corp political stew again. Being able to log-in and do some PvP without having to sit and do long alliance ops and tours of 0.0 will be a welcome change.
I just request that you dont keep it all to low sec.
2007 The Year of Rabble Rabble |
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 16:18:00 -
[10]
Thanks for the responses Ginger.
I just noticed this, may have been a stealth edit/followup to my question:
Quote:
The first release will only involve the four Empires, but we have every intention of expanding this in the future so you can attack the pirate organizations or even declare war on the Empire factions.
___
Support Killmail Overhaul
|
Helison
Gallente
Times of Ancar
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 16:53:00 -
[11]
You write that you already have a "solid design" for it. On the other side you want more input from us, but you are only giving us a few bits of your "vision". It would be great if you could give us more info about what you have already decided.
Very interesting would be if you have already decided on which way you will "control" the flow of factional warfare. Will it be massivly "agent-controlled" and you (CCP) can only give new goals by designing new "missions" (targets). Might CCP-controlled characters (reformed Aurora?) play any part within faction warfare?
|
|
CCP Ginger
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 16:59:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Helison
You write that you already have a "solid design" for it. On the other side you want more input from us, but you are only giving us a few bits of your "vision". It would be great if you could give us more info about what you have already decided.
Very interesting would be if you have already decided on which way you will "control" the flow of factional warfare. Will it be massivly "agent-controlled" and you (CCP) can only give new goals by designing new "missions" (targets). Might CCP-controlled characters (reformed Aurora?) play any part within faction warfare?
Well the foundations of it all is part of the solid design, but as we have more time to design we can review aspects of it so nothing is set in stone if we find a better way or alternative way of doing things. Dont want to limit ideas!
As for the system, the players will have overal control of the flow of factional warfare, we will be able to add more content, or sand if you will, to allow players more varied options etc. But it will be your sandpit.
And we are looking at ways to incorporate characters into it, yes, we think this would be cool.
|
|
BillyBong2
Amarr
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 17:02:00 -
[13]
Will factional warfare assist smaller entities with controlling territory, much like this thread?
|
Andre Ricard
Gallente
Templars of Space
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 17:05:00 -
[14]
Are there any plans for fixing HUBs? (like having items delivered to the station you are in, instead of the station you buy it from?)
Because if not, I fear the vast majority of players will fight for the Caldari side because they will simply be too afraid of losing access to Jita and surrounding agents.
1010011010 |
Hamfast
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 17:39:00 -
[15]
First off, I am interested in "Factional Warfare" in that I hope it's a good way to raise faction standing faster... and I hope there is a non-pvp way to do this...
Yes, I know, I am a carebear, I am not into the PvP combat... but factions are NPC entities, so as a PvE player I see no reason why I should not have a hand in this war...
If in helping in the Factional War, I can raise my Faction Standing to a point that the player Corp I am a member of can set up a pos inside High Sec empire space, then sign me up and tell me how I can help.
If Factional Warfare has no place in it for those of us that do not enjoy the PvP Combat part of this great game, I would hope that some further steps could be taken to allow for it.
--------*****--------
It takes 43 muscles to frown and 17 to smile, but it doesn't take any to just sit there with a dumb look on your face.
|
Altaree
Red Frog Investments
Blue Sky Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 17:44:00 -
[16]
will faction standings still be a negative sum game? I.e. right now, if you shoot a faction ship you lose more standing than you can hope to gain. And to make matters worse, there is a point of no return where you can never fix this. Will you be adding a way for people to fix their faction standings as easy as it is to fix security standings?
|
Gennaro
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 17:54:00 -
[17]
In short words when it'll be done?
|
Frater Perdurabo
Amarr
The Ancient Illuminated Seers of Bavaria
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 18:33:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Andre Ricard
Edited by: Andre Ricard on 14/09/2007 17:06:56
Are there any plans for fixing Hubs? (like having items delivered to the station you are in, instead of the station you buy it from?)
Because if not, I fear the vast majority of players will fight for the Caldari side because they will simply be too afraid of losing access to Jita and surrounding agents.
I am also worried about this aspect of the game. Ultimatly, jita is THE trade hub... ergo many people will not participate in factional warfare for the gallente (and possibly minmatar) based on not wanting to lose access to jita.
Sig->
Good isnt it.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 18:52:00 -
[19]
Originally by: CCP Ginger
We are simply aiming for a design which encourages, rewards and makes it more viable to achieve objectives with a small gang as opposed to a large fleet. Of course there won't be anything stopping people from bringing large fleets if they so wish.
The problem here is that if people can bring a blob they *will* bring a blob.
Even if you make the mission "objectives" only completeable by 5 people similar to the gang mission feature people will simply get a 20 man blob to finish 4 different engagements fast and without major losses by steamrolling their opponents with everyone in the group being able to claim the reward from one engagement.
|
Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari
Omerta Syndicate
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 19:57:00 -
[20]
I'm always pleased to see a new blog on Faction Warfare. Please see the Features/Ideas thread for my only request.
|
Lod Losh
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 20:33:00 -
[21]
yo
|
Eslea Karaith
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 20:33:00 -
[22]
yo
|
Khavi Vetali
Tabula Rasa Systems
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 20:51:00 -
[23]
In order to take part in factional warfare, will you be required to declare for a specific faction, or can you fight all of them?
__________________________
|
Chainsaw Plankton
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 21:26:00 -
[24]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Veng3ance
"Opposing Faction navies will take a sudden dislike to you fighting for their enemies."
Will this be standings based? Such as after I attack Amarr a certain number of times, I can no longer enter Amarr space because of bad standings. Or is it a temporary agression based on attacking an opposing faction? (Such as a timer)
There's already a standings-based system for this ingame - if your standing to a faction drops below a certain level, their faction navy will mercilessly hunt you down and throw peanuts at you while you're in their hisec space. We're looking at ways to use this mechanic without causing too many unwanted knock-on effects. We're also looking at giving them significantly bigger peanuts
let them throw rocks rather then peanuts, but remove their perfect ewar. (okay so my only faction police experience was from shooting a caldari customs official at a gate on the test server)
|
Sakura Nihil
Tabula Rasa Systems
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 21:28:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Khavi Vetali
In order to take part in factional warfare, will you be required to declare for a specific faction, or can you fight all of them?
My concern right here, for the Fraction. I personally wouldn't mind being locked out of highsec in order to be able to fight all four empires, it'd be a sacrifice I'd be happy to make.
Also, will we be potentially seeing NPC battlegrounds attacking each other in major battles and potentially taking enemy systems? What kind of war will it be without territory changing hands?
Eve Golden Rules |
Daedalus DuGalle
Gallente
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 00:50:00 -
[26]
Caldari Border Zone here I come...
Originally by: Janu Hull
Nothing says gritty cynicism like a 1 ISK note wedged between a pair of silicone enhanced knockers.
|
Mashie Saldana
Hooligans Of War
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 01:20:00 -
[27]
I hope factional warfare will bring back the privateer style PvP in Empire (highsec):
Anyone working for a faction should show up / behave like a wartarget for the people in opposing factions. Ofcourse the local faction navy should assist their own side, similar to sentry guns in lowsec (tankable but still annoying).
The main part is that you will be able to find a lot of targets willing to PvP and not have to worry about capital blobs getting dropped on your head.
Light Assault Launchers & Defender FoF ideas |
Kylegar
Caldari
Shadow Of The Light
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 04:12:00 -
[28]
So...Do we get to travel around lowsec and see like a Caldari camp in a Gallente Lowsec system? or howabout roving NPC gangs that OMGWTFPWN anyone that shows up?
--
Originally by: CCP Ginger
No sex changes.
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 05:30:00 -
[29]
Originally by: "the blog"
Here is our vision, we want to promote small gang warfare, we want to create more accessible PvP and we want to create the feeling of the factions finally going to war. However, the system is not going to force or restrict people to fight this way. We are simply aiming for a design which encourages, rewards and makes it more viable to achieve objectives with a small gang as opposed to a large fleet. Of course there won't be anything stopping people from bringing large fleets if they so wish.
"Objectives" are bad. Make objectives enemy ships. This means rats and other players.
This is a perfect time to test fluid soverignty mechanics based on produced statistics
Run no "events" place no objects that need to be destroyed, nothing static.
E.G. if Amarr and Gallente are at war and I am flying for Amarr, i ought to be able to bust into a Gallente system and kill the Gallente Navy there and gain rewards from Amarr for doing so and provide strength for Amarrs claim on the system. A Gallente alligned player ought to be able to attack me to provide strength for Gallentes claim on the system.
Maybe then Amarr and Caldari rats will start to show up in belts. Killing them will help provide strength for Gallentes claim on the system. So as an Amarr alligned player, i can also go in and kill the people trying to kill them.
Assign an LP value to one average player in system. Add up all the total LPs gained [See, ideas thread], and then whomever has the most LPs over the last x days gets the system.
|
Ambo
2nd Outcasters
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 06:16:00 -
[30]
I've very glad that you guys are delaying this until it's right rather than releasing it in a half-finished, bug-ridden state.
Yes, it's a massive feature that many are looking forward to but Rev 3 still contains a huge amount of stuff. Trinity 2 alone would be enough for many games companies to release as a patch.
It sounds interesting though and I look forward to what effect it will have on the Eve universe (though I'm assuming 'core' empire will remain largely unchanged?)
Feature rich and working correctly is always far preferable to half baked and shaky, even if it does take longer for the features to reach us.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |