| 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.
|
Gerome Doutrande
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 06:42:00 -
[31]
Good candidate for the "least information in a dev blog" award for this year. Why are you saying you have a solid design ready and then go on to say that you can't tell us anything because you are still "in the design process"?
|
KarateKid
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 07:22:00 -
[32]
because they want to hear our ideas. And if they tell us too much they limit those ideas.
Its simple really...
________________________________________________________
|
KarateKid
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 07:22:00 -
[33]
Edited by: KarateKid on 15/09/2007 07:22:45
double post ftl!
________________________________________________________
|
Gerome Doutrande
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 07:26:00 -
[34]
They should've done that when they announced that they want to do it. At this stage it sounds much like a vaporware excuse.
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 10:38:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Ginger
Opposing Faction navies will take a sudden dislike to you fighting for their enemies. The pansies who currently take you on will most likely get fired and replaced with people who know how to shoot.
--
(Battle hardened industrialist)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
Mr ZER0
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 14:08:00 -
[36]
The question on a lot of peoples lips for this patch, what about Factional Warfare? NO SIR...the question on everyones lips is 'why the hell cant they get the servers up and running as they are now and why are they worring about expansions when the current build sucks ???? answer that one
|
Mr ZER0
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 14:13:00 -
[37]
"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".... how about promoting a server that will run that we can log into? or how about promoting pvp with little lagg not the cluster f**k it turns into now when more then 50 ships are on a grid
|
torswin
|
Posted - 2007.09.15 22:33:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Mr ZER0
"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".... how about promoting a server that will run that we can log into? or how about promoting pvp with little lagg not the cluster f**k it turns into now when more then 50 ships are on a grid
Calm down. I've been in 200-man fleet battle without too much lag. Of course, I didn't have 200+ fps, but 20+ which is more than playable.
And the recent server crashing is supposed to be fixed. Haven't had much server lag either 
---
Signature radius: 150 mm
Unless explicitly stated, this post does not represent my alliance, corporation, my own, or any other living organism's view. |
Ebodhisatva
Gallente
hunter killers
|
Posted - 2007.09.16 16:00:00 -
[39]
I don't get the statement "Focussed in low-sec space" fully here.
We have 4 factions that will go at war at a certain time, this means to me that empire, and that includes 0.5 to 1.0 sec space also right?
Maybe someone can update me with some intel on this matter?
Originally by: CCP Prism X
You wont have any LPs. You need LPs with said Corp and like I said I just nuked your LPs.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2007.09.16 16:47:00 -
[40]
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.
This is something we're thinking about - even without the issue of hubs, the possibility of one side gaining a decisive long-term advantage could cause problems. To a certain degree this will likely be self-balancing - if there are many more Caldari pilots than Gallente, the Caldari will soon find themselves starved of targets. We're also looking at ways of scaling difficulty as one side or the other begins to dominate, so that the system has some built-in balancing features as well.
Originally by: Aramendel
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.
There's been a lot of discussion on this, and the exact point you bring up has been repeated multiple times  The basic problem of blobbing is a difficult one to approach - but we're looking at ways of countering it by setting the system up so that, past a certain point, "more firepower =/= completing the objective faster". If your 20-man blob takes as long to do something as a five-man raiding gang, blobbing stops being quite so profitable - you'd work faster splitting up, and if you insist on blobbing, your enemy can complete objectives three times faster than you using the same resources.
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?
We're not looking to exclude anyone from the majority of the in-space content - given that we're trying to further enable PvP, it doesn't make much sense to spend a lot of time trying to exclude non-affiliated pilots who just want pew-pew 
|
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.16 23:06:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Goumindong on 16/09/2007 23:07:24
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
There's been a lot of discussion on this, and the exact point you bring up has been repeated multiple times Smile The basic problem of blobbing is a difficult one to approach - but we're looking at ways of countering it by setting the system up so that, past a certain point, "more firepower =/= completing the objective faster". If your 20-man blob takes as long to do something as a five-man raiding gang, blobbing stops being quite so profitable - you'd work faster splitting up, and if you insist on blobbing, your enemy can complete objectives three times faster than you using the same resources.
Stop thinking about objectives. Do not add anything to the game. Just integrate the thigns that are already in the game into factional warfare.
If i was a mission runner, i would want mission running to tie into factional warfare. If i was a miner, i would want mining to tie into factional warfare. If i was a ratter, i would want ratting to tie into factional warfare. If i was a pirate, i would want pirating to tie into factional warfare.
Simply give out LP rewards for these actions in each system. Sum the LP generated in each system and then give the system to the power with the total LP generated in that area over an arbitrary period of time. Add in some non-cosmetic changes to the system, like the type of rats that spawn in different areas[and make low-sec rats bigger in general], turn off opposing-factions mission agents, turn off opposing factions NPC buy or sell orders etc.
So, lets run this out pretty simply without going into specifics.
1. Ratting opposing NPCS gives LP
2. Running friendly missions gives LP.
3. Running friendly missions in enemy space gives more LP[I.E. mission accepted on a border region, moving into hostile space for the mission objective]
4. Put open contracts based on faction affiliation for ores, ships, etc. Make the completion of these give loyalty points. Put a cap on purchases each day
5. Put up open contracts based on faction affiliation to give out ores, ships, etc. Make the completion of these cost loyalty points. Put a cap on sales each day
6. Reduce loyalty points on any hostile action taken against a friendly faction
Now mining has an effect. It can be sold to the faction and increases their hold on an area.
Mission running has the same effect.
Now pirates have reason to go after miners and mission runners over what they normally do. It generates LP for them and stops LP from the other side.
Now anti-pirates have a reason to defend miners and mission runners.
Traders can move items to the front for LP.
Producers can produce items for the war for LP.
Fighters can buy faction ships, ammo, and equipment for LP[P.S. moar faction ships are always apreciated]
It doesnt change the basic dynamics of the game it just integrates it into factional wafare, gives them additional incentives to take the actions in low-sec.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 10:57:00 -
[42]
Why?
|
|
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 13:28:00 -
[43]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Edited by: CCP Greyscale on 17/09/2007 11:41:19
Why?
You've laid out an interesting idea, but provided no justification for any of it, which makes it very hard to evaluate it. Why should we do that? Why are the end results desirable? Why is it better than the alternatives?
Readme
___
Eve Players are not very smart.
Support Killmail Overhaul
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 14:01:00 -
[44]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Edited by: CCP Greyscale on 17/09/2007 11:41:19
Why?
You've laid out an interesting idea, but provided no justification for any of it, which makes it very hard to evaluate it. Why should we do that? Why are the end results desirable? Why is it better than the alternatives?
Conversly, it is hard to lay out an interesting idea without a clear framework of either what is planned or what factional warfare means to the design team ;) All we have a a couple design points and the claim that "it will be a complete system"
Anyway,
When i think of factional warfare in terms of design goals, i think "a system to integrate both the game world fiction and player versus player activities seamlessly into current activies for the purpose of providing both meaninful pvp and world changing effects without the need of aurora/isd"
If you start adding new mechanics as "factional warfare" goals, then you end up with no seamless enviornment. Instead of players playing the game and taking actions they will play the game and then "go factional warfare" in the same way that they "go mission running" or "go ratting" or "go gatecamp lowsec systems".
The system should be seamless because factional warfare should not be thought of as a seperate activity.
The system should be automated so that players know that their actions have effects, and can see those effects over time.
The system should offer personal incentive so that the players can clearly see the effect they have and want to participate.
We have great existing systems with the LP store as ways to represent and calculate favor. Such, we can simply assign values[to be determined of course] to actions that you want taken [such as running missions in/near hostile space, killing opposing NPCs, filling orders in the area, killing opposing players] and let nature take its course.
|
Night Tripper
Es and Whizz
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 14:26:00 -
[45]
come on, give some of the other factions some love to, we are always getting the sloppy seconds 
it might go someway to helping spread people out through eve more if the main four factions, weren't the factions to always get the first content, level 5 agents, better loyalty point stores, more research, more faction ships.
|
Crausaum
Ixion Defence Systems
The Cyrene Initiative
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 06:37:00 -
[46]
Well it's nice to see some published details on Faction Warfare and it's nice to see that it's not becoming vaporware (just yet at least  ).
I'm left a little concerned about access to my Gallente R&D agents out in the Caldari and Amarr territories but I'm sure that can be easily resolved.
Now I just hope that I don't have to wait another year to see this all ingame.
---------------------------
absit iniuria verbis |
Jenni Concarnadine
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 07:27:00 -
[47]
What worries me, as a n00b, is that this will just become a rationale for open warfare in hi-sec.
Please allow those of us who still have training wheels on our Rifters some degree of space in which we can learn how to go about things, without having to worry that, at a moment's notice, someone will announce they're gone hostile on us for no other reason than n00b-slaughtering.
* * * * *
Hamsters don't overload very well |
Callthetruth
Caldari
Drunken Ratbags Inc
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 08:04:00 -
[48]
wanna discourage the blob spread the objectives out
|
Fatsam
Madhatters Inc.
M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 12:21:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Fatsam on 18/09/2007 12:22:29
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
The basic problem of blobbing is a difficult one to approach - but we're looking at ways of countering it by setting the system up so that, past a certain point, "more firepower =/= completing the objective faster". If your 20-man blob takes as long to do something as a five-man raiding gang, blobbing stops being quite so profitable - you'd work faster splitting up, and if you insist on blobbing, your enemy can complete objectives three times faster than you using the same resources.
I am very interested in how this is to be accomplished. Any playable system that is developed from this that can somehow be adapted to 0.0 warfare to reduce the blob there is an exciting prospect.
To use the above example, CCP are saying they want 4x5man teams to complete 4 times the number of objectives of what one 20man team could. Fine, like the idea. But as it is PvP focused I would suggest the 20man gang would find each of the 5man teams and utterly destroy them 1 by 1 so they canÆt complete any objectives, then split up and complete their own objectives with impunity for the rest of the eveningÆs play.
Realising this, the 4x5man teams re-equip their ships and learn from their mistakes. Not wanting to get utterly destroyed by the larger gang the next night they stick together running each objective consecutively. To make sure they are not out blobbed again they bring another 20man gang that had the same happened to them so they can complete their objective with 100% success.
You can see where IÆm going with this.
The original blob gang then get another 20 people, and so on and so on until everyone involved with factional warfare is concentrated in 1 system (600 in local) trying to complete or prevent the completion of this one objective. Massive lag, no fun, etc.
The game mechanisms as they exist today donÆt give any strategic or tactical reasons why this wonÆt happen.
I am hopeful this warfare will bring some mechanism that will force the player base to stop the inevitable node crashing lag fests that are ruining fleet warfare. I think the prospect of multiple battles across an entire region happening simultaneously would be a superb improvement over 300vs300 lag/dysnch fests.
Not an easy task. I could make some suggestions how to solve it but they have probably been thought of before or are stupid, or both (and this post is too long already).
|
Delichon
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 14:44:00 -
[50]
It is wonderful that "blobs-slove-probs" is adressed heavily among the designers while thinking about FW.
My opinion would be that for FW to be something different from just another way to make ISK/grind status, there should be visions (like corporate visions) and limitations for all the involved factions.
These visions would then be broken down to objectives and priorities, these objectives and priorities would be broken down to goals and missions(I just use the term, no relation to ingame missions here, although that is one way to realise this) Ability or inability to achieve these missions and goals would result in a shift of objectives and priorities, which in turn would result in the destiny of a faction changing.
Say Guristas get to much attention from the Caldari(because caldari players succeed in every objective and contr-caldari faction players fail at theirs) and suffer some very nasty blows, effectively being elliminated - which would result with them disappearing from the game. Or quite the opposite - Caldari have to divert attention from Guristas ( because caldari players get eliminated time and again) which results in Guristas forming a pirate state of a dozen systems, with a government of sorts and an active milita. Which results in a fifth faction being born.
What am I getting at - let us carve the destiny of non-0.0 Eve. 0.0 alliance have their own toys and wars, they are pretty much occupied as it is. They have a purpose for playing.
But anything aside 0.0 is isk-grind. You can do explorations, but in the end it boils down to isk. You can grind missions - but it boils down to isk. You can mine or produce - but it boils down to isk none the less.
Factional warfare may give a purpose for non-0.0 players. Something to be looking forward to, like a fiction book from your favorite author. With a major exception - you can add your own paragraph to that book. This would be a pure delight for those non-0.0 players.
I am not saying "carebears" - because the risk (ISK-wise) may be well over the reward(ISK-wise) in FW. As long as players will see, that what they do matters ingame - Role Playing oriented players will participate gladly.
I am not saying solo-players - as the FW itself will act as banding instrument, promoting players to gather up in groups.
- Gallente in Rancer, NPCs are attacking the station! All available pilots, please respond!
- Jumping to my Caldari alt, hold on guys!
- 7 man-strong gang in Crielle, requesting gate status.
- Gate is green, convo me for warp-in point. Hurry up guys! We are low on tacklers, we need need tacklers...
You can see something similar in Warhammer 40 000 tabletop game. They have a world-wide campaigns, where hundreds of players participate in duels, develop a strategy and talk on ingame terms. The reward is simple - some new fiction, that represents results of campaign(that is based on the results of a few hundred/thousand duels).
I have seen and participated in quate a few MMOs, and live RPGs - people DO really value the ability to participate in the destiny of the world they are living in.
So to conclude my long post - please, oh please don't make FW another isk/rating grind. Make it something that will provide another purpose for being in empire space. That purpose being - to change Eve as it is now.
|
Yakov Draken
Minmatar
Tides Of War
|
Posted - 2007.09.19 08:43:00 -
[51]
My thoughts:
Concord Sanctions Wars
- "Moldenheath is now a war zone with Matar and Amarr navy and pod pilots engaging across the region. Concord will not be interfering."
War would be primarily low sec and developments in politics will open new fronts.
Faction Warfare Missions
Teams assemble ships using a points formula such as in the alliance tourny and enter the mission waiting zone when they are ready. When an opposing team is found both are warped to the combat area. A lesser reward version for character 6 months an under would help give the nubs a leg up.
Mission could be anything from raiding a convoy to supporting a fleet attack and could have large numbers of npc ships involved or none.
Losses would be partially covered by who you are fighting for.
Cheers
|
Callthetruth
Caldari
Drunken Ratbags Inc
|
Posted - 2007.09.20 02:33:00 -
[52]
well the anti blob idea id be intersted to see what CCP puts out first before commenting
|
Helevorn Feanaro
|
Posted - 2007.09.20 13:14:00 -
[53]
My 0.02 ISK: I think it might be implemented as new 'contested regions' that open up in the new expansion. Various neigbouring factions then strive for dominance of the newly opened space. (Sovereignty?)
This space would have strong faction navy presence, but no CONCORD. Once inside a contested region, opposing factions become automatic wartargets to each other.
Players should be able access these regions from known jump gates that will be heavily camped by the owning faction navy. There should be multiple gates, in both lo-sec and hi-sec.
They might also access the regions via 'hidden' gates, cyno's (provided in missions?), and black ops BS.
This approach will allow current hi-sec to be largely unaffected, while providing consensual PvP options in neighbouring space.
Whatever the final design, I look forward to it.
|
Hamfast
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.09.20 15:34:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Helevorn Feanaro
My 0.02 ISK: I think it might be implemented as new 'contested regions' that open up in the new expansion. Various neigbouring factions then strive for dominance of the newly opened space. (Sovereignty?)
This space would have strong faction navy presence, but no CONCORD. Once inside a contested region, opposing factions become automatic wartargets to each other.
Players should be able access these regions from known jump gates that will be heavily camped by the owning faction navy. There should be multiple gates, in both lo-sec and hi-sec.
They might also access the regions via 'hidden' gates, cyno's (provided in missions?), and black ops BS.
This approach will allow current hi-sec to be largely unaffected, while providing consensual PvP options in neigbouring space.
Whatever the final design, I look forward to it.
Good ideas, but pure PvP, this leaves those of us that prefer the non-pew pew parts of the game out... unless we can in fact affect the outcome, we are not going to play (this is not play the game, we will just not be playing in the factional warfare)
Building on your "Contested Regions" idea, a way, through missions, building, markets and ratting to throw a system into turmoil (Raise the "Turmoil Level), thus making it "Contested"...
Contested regions have 2 or more Faction Navy forces and may have Concord, limit the security of the system to .6 or less, .5 and .6 have Concord, .4 or lower has not (just like now). The Faction Navies are there to "Contest" the region, but we pod pilots, via fighting the faction navies, faction based missions, supplies and such, again, playing to the varied strengths of the game that already exist.
Goals for a contested area such as losses for the faction navies, bases destroyed and built/supplied, remove them from that "Contested" category until such time that an opposing force is able to again throw a wrench into the works...raising the systems "Turmoil Level", and making it contested again.
Contested Systems would have 3 types of bases (depending on the level of turmoil) Strong Faction, Weak Faction and Neutral... as the Turmoil level rises, bases are "Required" to choose a side ("If you are not with us, you are against us") by the factions...
Turmoil Levels would be set for all systems, different actions would have different affects on that level... For systems that are Security Level .7 or higher, the turmoil level is set to 0.0, 1 faction navy has forces in that system, and they react like concord-lite to forces of the opposing factions, actions can be taken to raise the turmoil level, but the amount needed to move it even a little would be huge...
The Turmoil Level is set by the Security level of the system as follows:
Sec = Turmoil level
0.6 = 0.1
0.5 = 0.2
0.4 = 0.3
0.3 = 0.4
0.2 = 0.5
0.1 = 0.6
A Turmoil level of .7 means the System is contested (All 0.0 space is always contested, but no faction forces beyond the current rat system as the factions have not got a foot hold...)
If the Turmoil Level reaches .9, all bases are set to the faction of the owner of that base (no neutral bases)
At 1.0 all bases are "Strong Faction"
Bases -
Neutral - allow all pilots to dock
Weak - allow all pilots that are not part of the opposing faction to dock, will fire on the opposing faction (light fire)
Strong - Allow only faction pilots to dock, will fire on all non faction pilots (light fire) and on all opposing faction pilots (Heavy fire)
--------*****--------
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.
|
Helevorn Feanaro
|
Posted - 2007.09.21 10:58:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Hamfast
Originally by: Helevorn Feanaro
My 0.02 ISK: I think it might be implemented as new 'contested regions' that open up in the new expansion. Various neigbouring factions then strive for dominance of the newly opened space. (Sovereignty?)
This space would have strong faction navy presence, but no CONCORD. Once inside a contested region, opposing factions become automatic wartargets to each other.
Players should be able access these regions from known jump gates that will be heavily camped by the owning faction navy. There should be multiple gates, in both lo-sec and hi-sec.
They might also access the regions via 'hidden' gates, cyno's (provided in missions?), and black ops BS.
This approach will allow current hi-sec to be largely unaffected, while providing consensual PvP options in neigbouring space.
Whatever the final design, I look forward to it.
Good ideas, but pure PvP, this leaves those of us that prefer the non-pew pew parts of the game out... unless we can in fact affect the outcome, we are not going to play (this is not play the game, we will just not be playing in the factional warfare)
...
Valid point.
It could be adressed by having non-combat missions into the contested space: Supply running, scouting, covert ops.
It could also be adressed by having some economic incentive. For instance, if faction navies were to place buy orders for war supplies (ships, mods, ammo), inside the contested regions. This would attract the producers, haulers and miners. More potential profit, but more risk too.
I like your idea of escalating levels of turmoil.
|
Typhado3
Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.21 23:54:00 -
[56]
one thing I have to say about missions as a whole is they don't provide much variety in my opinion. right now the majority of missions are warp in and kill a bunch of ships. for example you get a scout mission where you warp in and kill a bunch of ships, the assinate mission where u warp in and kill a bunch of ships, and the occasional hauling mission involving an outbreak of rat's, homeless or garbage.
One thing I'd love to see is missions that require some of the specialized ships, for example a assasinate mission where you actually have to use a cloaking ship to sneak up on enemies and assasinate him to get the bonus reward. if you don't sneak up then u don't get the bonus. Missions like this could also be done for Interceptors, cov ops (scout an area), stealth bombers, and maybe even command ships and logistics (would need to have friendly npc's with you for last two).
just pls pls pls if you do this make sure that the most profitable way to do it is using the ship/skill specified.
My Opinions are my own, not my corp's, not my friend's, and not my pet fedo's
|
Syndicus
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 00:33:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Syndicus on 24/09/2007 00:33:25
Would we get to see, for example, fleets of Amarr NPCs shooting at Gallente stations or Minmatar stargates? Would there be dilapidations, wreckages, and ruins left in the wake of factional warfare?
How would the storyline bring it about? The four houses decide to dissolve Concord and go to war?
Would we finally get to see expanses of 0.0 space between each of the territories?
This FW idea brings out many questions.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 16:00:00 -
[58]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
There's been a lot of discussion on this, and the exact point you bring up has been repeated multiple times The basic problem of blobbing is a difficult one to approach - but we're looking at ways of countering it by setting the system up so that, past a certain point, "more firepower =/= completing the objective faster". If your 20-man blob takes as long to do something as a five-man raiding gang, blobbing stops being quite so profitable - you'd work faster splitting up, and if you insist on blobbing, your enemy can complete objectives three times faster than you using the same resources.
The main problem is not time/effect, it is risk/effect.
Essentially, the problem is that risk is reduced expotentionally with a bigger gang size. If you have a 5 man gang and meet another 5 man gang of equal skill and ship strength you have (simplified) a 50:50 chance to win or loose. And either way will most likely loose ~3 ships either way.
So 50% chance to waste your time and get nothing but ship losses and even if you "win" you will still have to get enough isk/items to be able to compensate for your losses and actually make some profit, too.
Now lets take 10 people. Vs a 5 people gang of equal skill, equipment, etc they should have a 90% chance to win and it is highly unlikely that they will have more than 1 shiploss on average per battle.
There are 2 major problems here:
- win/loss ratios
Your average 5 people gang has to do 2 missions to "win" one. And will suffer around 5-6 shiplosses in both together - which the mission reward has to at least pay for.
10 people on the other hand will have to do on average like 1.1 missions to "win" one. And will suffer maybe 1 loss there.
So even if a 10 man group takes as long for a mission as a 5 man group it would STILL be able to successfully finish them at basically the same rate.
- rewards
As said already, a group of the "intended" size will need a rather substantional award to make factional warfare anything but something to loose isk in. However, if you do that a bigger group you will actually get more isk/person than the smaller group. Because they'll have essentially no losses and so have more isk (or items, etc) in pure profit to distribute.
So, what to do?
You would have to make the game able to see how many ships are used on each side. And need to reduce the rewards expotentially if one side brings "too many" ships. Like if one side brings twice as many ships the reward should not be half of normal total, but only 10% total.
One problem with THAT could be highly pimped out gangs with faction modules & implants which wipe lesser equipped gangs out pretty quickly and, if they still meet their betters simple hotdrop 5 capital alts on them. Their reward for that mission will be ****, but better than loosing a multi-billion ship. Those tactics would IMO break the risk-reward there. Maybe making it impossible to activate cynos in faction warfare areas?
They could then still have "regular" emergency support, but that does not appaear without any warning like a cpaital hotdrop nor is as convinient.
|
Popperr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.26 16:08:00 -
[59]
I hope you'll be nerfing super capitals in lowsec before you attempt any wide ranging program to rejuvinate it. |
ollobrains
Mission Invasion Squad
|
Posted - 2007.09.27 00:10:00 -
[60]
well the devs havent given us much so its a bit of conjecture at this point
Group mission invasions |
Jordan Musgrat
Convergent
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 02:50:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Jordan Musgrat on 28/09/2007 03:14:57
Oh man CCP, there's a ton of good ideas here, I hope you're still reading this. To summarize so far, I agree with the above that:
** Don't create another "thing" to do. Make faction warfare integrated into the way we play EvE now.
** Have mining/trading/producing have an impact in this please.
** Antiblob ftw.
** Have a daily limit on how much faction rewards (LP?) one can get. Otherwise, it would be like research agents, you would have guys farming faction rewards to a ridiculous extent. This means that faction rewards would have to be different from plain LP, but they should be exchangable, or similar in many ways.
** Contested space. More on this later.
I have a few ideas that I would like to take farther, but I fear that you would not go along with me :( for instance:
** Dynamic security rating. For now let's keep 0.0 out of this. You would have more or less the same number of .9, .8, .7 etc. systems in the universe, but say the Caldari faction wants to invade Amarr. First off, how would this happen? Maybe have a voting system where players in each faction can vote on where to move faction forces, or something like that. But end result is, the space between Caldari and Amarr space starts to lose security status, and the front shifts this way. The only way to make sure that this has its intended affect is to have just a few systems be the equivalent of 0.0, and the surrounding systems change to lower sec ratings as they approach the nexus of the conflict. And somewhere, systems that aren't contested have their sec ratings increased to balance. Now you will start to see truly awesome pvp, with dictors, capitals, and the like. A cool side effect is that pirates would be forced to move around much like the pirates of old, after a while the conflict on the other side of the map would cause certain systems' sec status to rise to the point that it becomes empire, with Concord there. The problem such a rolling security status system would have, is that one faction (read: Caldari) would start to steamroll all the other factions. This is where forming temporary alliances between factions could come into play. Also, the number of players for each faction might have to be externally controlled in some way, to ensure that no faction is left out.
** I'm not sure if I heard this about factional warfare, but the epitome of this would be to have a single player, or maybe a board of player-elected players, that influenced each faction. (dev might have mentioned this about faction warfare, can't remember) You could not have them control each faction obviously, but call them the military board of directors, and have their input determine where a faction will dedicate its npc forces, as well as possibly have them raise the rewards for something like ships, or another commodity that is in need, as long as it would mean lowering the rewards for missions, mining, etc. This is a touchy thing to do though, and it would need to be slight enough that no part of the chain ever becomes unprofitable or even undesirable, but at the same time you want to be able to login, look at your faction's state of affairs, see that your market is underdeveloped in the area of hacs, destroyers, and interceptors, rise to meet the need, and be rewarded more than you would for just doing your normal isk grind. This has the added bonus that the game mechanics would actively discourage large market hubs such as Jita. You may get a fast sell in Jita, but you will get faction LP by selling where it is needed. I hope you're following me :p
** It is a good thing that the game mechanics would support such a system, what I have described is very similar to what happens in 0.0. You have people that fight, fight, and at the end of the day (DT) the tallies are counted and the changes are effected across EvE. These changes Must be gradual, so you don't find yourself in hostile space just because you didn't log in for a week.
Continued...
-----------
Primary is family values, secondary is 0.0... |
Jordan Musgrat
Convergent
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 03:15:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Jordan Musgrat on 28/09/2007 03:23:14
** Also, faction rewards would need to be substantially higher for factions holding little space, or ones that are simply getting pounded. This way you can ensure that it is worth one's time to fight for a minority faction, to hold its space. Each faction would need a home constellation/system as well that could not be taken else you would see certain factions slide off the map. It would be cool to have incentives for pirates to choose pirate factions such as the Angels or whatever btw.
** Also, to complicate matters further, you could even fight for a specific corporation, and have station sov come into play. When the Contested level of a system peaks and it becomes equivalent to 0.0 for all parties involved in faction warfare, you can take stations for your corporation. This I think might be too much though, you might run out of places to mission. Though this could be countered by having an uncontestable "home" constellation where you can always find agents. It would be sort of cool though to take a system and be able to hire? agents to work for your corporation there.
** Does this sound too all-inclusive? Because I can see players taking a break, logging in, and finding themselves in the middle of the New Caldari Empire, unable to undock or move. You would need several things to counter this. Firstly, Concord-controlled "safe" areas, where anyone from any faction, can come to do what they do. You would need the basic agent types here so that the game could still be playable, but the rare agents are found deep in a faction's space. Also, you need the ability to remotely move assets from system to system, region to region. This is where freighter corps could have a place, they could be given "political immunity" to be able to move players' stuff through contested systems (all factions protect them). This would not be enough though, you would have to have a way for Concord to move your stuff, but it would need to cost isk, and take time, so that player hauling corps would have a chance to compete.
** The landscape I have painted would need some sort of "white flag" (French) mechanism in place, so that at the end of the day if you find yourself in the equivalent of 0.0 or 0.1 space, you can get safely out if you need to. But this would need to have dire consequences, say you would lose 2.0 points of standing with any friendly factions, bar this at 0 or 1 so you don't go negative, and you also lose a large portion of your LP/reward points.
EDIT: I forgot that having factions be able to invade each other is a completely new thing that I really didn't give the attention it deserves. I'm so tired I'm not sure if this is planned or not, but it would be cool.
And wow my novel is finished... for now
I hope you read through, or at least skim it. While this may be too extreme, you may find some useful ideas here.
-----------
Primary is family values, secondary is 0.0... |
ollobrains
Mission Invasion Squad
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 06:31:00 -
[63]
still nothing specific from the devs guess we wait for sisi update
Group mission invasions |
Max Tesla
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 18:32:00 -
[64]
You, CCP, said enemy npc boats will fire upon a human if the human fights for one side and the human enters a high sec system of the ôother sideö
My question is will the human be able to fire back without getting Concord to attack him
Will the Human be able to fire back without getting a gazillion npc spawns that will destroy him
Will them human be able to, if he has enough firepower and possibly friends, to destroy all ships firing upon him and then just continue to what ever destination he had?
|
Mos7Wan7ed
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 04:29:00 -
[65]
i think its a freaking awesome idea. and i like the idea of LP making it seamless and not sand boxing the war with specially designed missions and such. Also the idea of dynamic sec and sov in and around the contested space.
if we make contested space dynamic and use LP for player rewards then LP would be the way to balance the war out to prevent steamrolling. if caldari start overwhelmingly the opponents then caldari LP starts dropping (inflation) and loosing side's LP starts to rise. as long as your reputation is good/neutral to other faction you can go fight for the faction that is giving more LP. as that happens players slowly shift and they balance out. With dynamic LP steamrolling can't happen.
to prevent it from spilling out into general eve the faction standings allow you to attack anyone working for opposing faction only in the contested area for LP (cause killing someone several light years behind the line isn't going to affect a war).
the contested areas would have to include one ore more constellations for there to have enough agents and space to keep blobbing down. you could even throw POS warfare into it. Receiving LP for having a POS claiming for a faction. Anyone with faction standings could have shelter there and LP given for their removal.
|
Mos7Wan7ed
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 04:46:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Max Tesla
You, CCP, said enemy npc boats will fire upon a human if the human fights for one side and the human enters a high sec system of the ôother sideö
faction ships not concord. faction ships can't scram or web far as i know, its just concord. so it isn't going to be that difficult to run a gate. i think it's a good idea to have a faction camp just to prevent gate camping outside the contested area where concord isn't around to help. all tho, i don't think its a good idea to totally deny access to a faction space because you want to fight. A guy has to go from point a to point c and point b belongs to the faction your fighting. he shouldn't have to go 50+ jumps around that factions space because he wants to be in the faction war.
|
Roy Gordon
Caldari
The Star Wolves
Aunni Ti Tsuun Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 13:51:00 -
[67]
How about making rewards specific only to faction warfare? My idea would be that you could have a 'Faction LP pool'. Faction missions would reward you with only LP's which are put into this pool. At certain LP levels you will receive specific awards i.e. faction ships, faction mods, medals (Come on, medals have to be included in faction warfare, who would not like having a medal displayed on their character sheet?), military ranking (similar to being awarded a medal) etc.
That which does not kill us makes us stronger.
The Universe is ruled by three basic principles-
Matter, Energy and Enlightened Self-Interest! |
Dravius Luxor
|
Posted - 2007.10.28 13:51:00 -
[68]
A vision of the future, anyone?
It is the year ô2008ö. I wake up from a long nightÆs sleep at Rens 6 Moon 8, and check my buy/sell orders. After a brief chat with my agent, who happens to be based here, I accept an assassination mission and load my guns.
I undock, and with a nod to the regulars, fly away from the station towards the Frarn gate and align.
Suddenly, someone shouts in local ôamarr fleet - abudban gate!1!11!!ö.
Everyone around me, bar the carebears, immediately aligns for the Abudban gate, and warps to it almost in unison. When we drop out of warp, there are nearly thirty Amarr ôNPCö ships, they are being scrambled and webbed by what seems to be an endless stream of Minmatar ôNPCö EAS (Electronic attack Ships).
Well, it was a bad idea for them to come this far - but how did they get this far? I donÆt care - and neither do my comrades, the enemyÆs awesomely superior (Faction-Warfare-NPC-firepower) firepower rains down on us, obliterating the fragile hulls of our various ships - yet we keep coming back for more: every participant in this skirmish will receive lucrative rewards (from the Republic Fleet) based on the amount of damage we each deliver personally (more for a killing blow).
They may be powerful, but we have the frigates of the Republic holding them down for us, and these guys are as tough as the enemy. Who knows - if it wasnÆt for the exceptional rewards we receive as loyal Republic combatants, this could go on all dayà
I have already made more LP than I would in ten missions, and thanks to the Fleet overhauling their LP reward system - I no longer have to bother looting wrecks (which drives me NUTS btw), I can leave that to the clean-up (salvage) guys. Vultures.
Not only have I had the time of my life since the ôFaction Warö began, but I have learnt a lot too. Ships and modules are of less significance to me; they are merely tools at my disposal. When they get destroyed, I replace them. The more fighting I do, the more rewards I get - and these special Faction ships and modules are better than mainstream ones anyway.
If I run out of money, well IÆll just sell a small fraction of them to the freelancers.
All in all; I engage more enemies, I have more fun, I lose more - but I win more. Pilots and corporations previously unknown to each other find themselves fighting side by side.
Friendships are made, alliances formed, and petty in-fighting between small corporations is becoming a thing of the past. I never fear or shy from combat, instead I throw myself into the fray, trying to gouge as many LP as I can from the Amarr scum before they are annihilated by the combined efforts of every man and his dog.
Ah, the spoils of warà
Some say this is a dark time for the galaxy - but IÆve never had more purpose, more drive, more energy, and more pride. A while back, I was starting to feel as if I was just some character in a game - and the world was becoming less real to me, less alive.
Now I know thatÆs daft, and I donÆt have time to entertain such nonsense - IÆm too busy defending the Great and Glorious (and somehow prettier these days) Minmatar Republic.
|
Romana Zangi
|
Posted - 2008.01.17 18:04:00 -
[69]
Is the implementation of factional warfare cancelled?
Is CCP still working on that?
|
FarScape III
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 06:01:00 -
[70]
I am pleased that Factional Warfare will have the fun of missions combined with the fun of PvP
If we want to go that far and I admit I never hardly PvP.
But I would PvP and most likely like it if Factional Warfare mixes it up with missions.
*** |
Dravius Luxor
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 00:01:00 -
[71]
Since my original post in this thread, in October last year, I have checked it periodically for updates...
I had no idea how much time has passed until I noticed the date just now!
Damn it's quiet in here...
When I first posted I was a carebear and a missioner, I have come a long way and a lot of things have changed since then. Like many people I'm assuming, Eve is isn't simply Eve, it is medicine for an obsession I've had since playing Escape Velocity (and for others: Frontier, Elite etc).
We will always play the best 'space game'. We will always demand that it grows, in size, and in intricacy. We need it.
Eve has pride of place at the top of our lists; it is the best space game. But, despite the continual changes in my attitude to the remarkable universe that is Eve, my desire for Factional Warfare remains...
How about you, CCP?
Throw us a bone!
You have the best game, and in fact the only mmo some people would be prepared to play (like me). The human interaction and competition in this game are essential to the experience, but mmo gaming is not really my style. Eve carries it off extraordinarily by applying the same threats to everyone indiscriminately; noone is entirely safe, no matter where they are. The game dynamics ensure also that almost noone can be entirely trusted - making us all constant competitors.
Well done.
You did it.
But I hope to remind you (should I be so bold as to suggest you don't know it already), that someone else is likely to have a stab at it too before long...
... and if they have planetary interaction, factional warfare and fully customisable ships and modules, and a rip-off of Eve's general style and environment, won't they have the best space game?
Please, don't let that happen!
|
Rhaegor Stormborn
Volition Cult
The Volition Cult
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 17:06:00 -
[72]
This thread is over 6 months old and we have gotten nothing new what-so-ever. Almost 3 years now since this was first discussed. How embarassing for CCP.
Volition Cult Recruitment Post |
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 05:29:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Rhaegor Stormborn
How embarassing for CCP.
I strongly disagree. You have to have a sense of "shame" or "responsibility to your customers" before there can be "embarassment".
*
* |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.04.03 05:44:00 -
[74]
bloody hell CCP, 3 months ago EON said it would be in before trinity, and now well... wth?
I tolod you it's not going to happen.
I mean are you guys at least working on it , you do know that it's only 2 months until the next expansion right?
|
FarScape III
|
Posted - 2008.04.09 06:57:00 -
[75]
Edited by: FarScape III on 09/04/2008 07:05:06
IMO I think they will be starting to get the ideas for Factional Warfare together and for real actually start to work on it starting this summer 2008.
It makes sense to get it going after they take care of the Ambulation pretty much, not that ambulation will ever be done because it will just start evolving and have no end to it.
And after FW and Ambulation comes out that will be all I need in the game FW Ambulation will complment eachother big time. And what we already have besides for ideas like the Jove of course.
After that then they can just keep making it better.
I'm sure it will all be fine and they just need to have some time to get these big things out the way 1st.
*** |
RoyHunter MAXpayne
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 02:08:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Dravius Luxor
A vision of the future, anyone?
It is the year ô2008ö. I wake up from a long nightÆs sleep at Rens 6 Moon 8, and check my buy/sell orders. After a brief chat with my agent, who happens to be based here, I accept an assassination mission and load my guns.
I undock, and with a nod to the regulars, fly away from the station towards the Frarn gate and align.
Suddenly, someone shouts in local ôamarr fleet - abudban gate!1!11!!ö.
Everyone around me, bar the carebears, immediately aligns for the Abudban gate, and warps to it almost in unison. When we drop out of warp, there are nearly thirty Amarr ôNPCö ships, they are being scrambled and webbed by what seems to be an endless stream of Minmatar ôNPCö EAS (Electronic attack Ships).
Well, it was a bad idea for them to come this far - but how did they get this far? I donÆt care - and neither do my comrades, the enemyÆs awesomely superior (Faction-Warfare-NPC-firepower) firepower rains down on us, obliterating the fragile hulls of our various ships - yet we keep coming back for more: every participant in this skirmish will receive lucrative rewards (from the Republic Fleet) based on the amount of damage we each deliver personally (more for a killing blow).
They may be powerful, but we have the frigates of the Republic holding them down for us, and these guys are as tough as the enemy. Who knows - if it wasnÆt for the exceptional rewards we receive as loyal Republic combatants, this could go on all dayà
I have already made more LP than I would in ten missions, and thanks to the Fleet overhauling their LP reward system - I no longer have to bother looting wrecks (which drives me NUTS btw), I can leave that to the clean-up (salvage) guys. Vultures.
Not only have I had the time of my life since the ôFaction Warö began, but I have learnt a lot too. Ships and modules are of less significance to me; they are merely tools at my disposal. When they get destroyed, I replace them. The more fighting I do, the more rewards I get - and these special Faction ships and modules are better than mainstream ones anyway.
If I run out of money, well IÆll just sell a small fraction of them to the freelancers.
All in all; I engage more enemies, I have more fun, I lose more - but I win more. Pilots and corporations previously unknown to each other find themselves fighting side by side.
Friendships are made, alliances formed, and petty in-fighting between small corporations is becoming a thing of the past. I never fear or shy from combat, instead I throw myself into the fray, trying to gouge as many LP as I can from the Amarr scum before they are annihilated by the combined efforts of every man and his dog.
Ah, the spoils of warà
Some say this is a dark time for the galaxy - but IÆve never had more purpose, more drive, more energy, and more pride. A while back, I was starting to feel as if I was just some character in a game - and the world was becoming less real to me, less alive.
Now I know thatÆs daft, and I donÆt have time to entertain such nonsense - IÆm too busy defending the Great and Glorious (and somehow prettier these days) Minmatar Republic.
now thats what i am looking forward to. something random that happens other than a gate camp omg i must spam the jump button. would be nice to have broadcasts of fleets going for a raid be it npc or pvp led. think story line here, we get mail right
seen alot of good ideas here, making me froth at the mouth. I like that you get to sign up for duty as it where. also medals and or ranking is very appealing to me.
TL,DR; random events, ship lay out, mixed fleet NPC & player, WTF is that a GENERAL?!?!? ranking FTW |
|
CCP Ginger
|
Posted - 2008.04.14 11:17:00 -
[77]
We've all been rather busy over here but there will be an update to this soon (tm). Promise :)
|
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 11:29:00 -
[78]
Originally by: CCP Ginger
We've all been rather busy over here but there will be an update to this soon (tm). Promise :)
Busy doing what?
C.
New Scanner Idea!
|
Jonas Oneida
Caldari
Independent Galactic Network
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 12:18:00 -
[79]
Thanks for dropping by Ginger!
At least you are still alive... 
On another note, I like the ranking idea, much better than sec status. I would like to be a criminal (attacked on sight) in Amarr space, but perhaps call in reinforcements while in Minmatar Space (using my rank to determine how many loyal NPC's come to my aid)...
Blah blah blah not my game, it's yours though. You have a lot of eager ideas-men in this thread I think!
Keep it up!
|
Erikel
Cosmic Odyssey
Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 16:07:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: CCP Ginger
We've all been rather busy over here but there will be an update to this soon (tm). Promise :)
Busy doing what?
C.
Busy reading everyones whining probably. |
Lana Kent
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 16:33:00 -
[81]
um.. Hello!!! Busy with what???
Busy drinking beer and eating pizza of course and writing on napkins!!! They have to come up with ideas for AFTER Factional warfare and Ambulation !!! There has to be something coming up after all!!!
Busy reading the whining... Right!!! |
Doc Extropy
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.05.07 20:03:00 -
[82]
In Eve Online Com
A lot of whining, there is
Carebears finish last
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected]) |
Soporo
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.05.10 22:59:00 -
[83]
Factional warfare will be fiction heavy. There will be strong story leading up to it; there will be a strong fictional background around it.
It will be up to you if you choose to immerse yourself in fictional side or not, there will be no requirement to role-play.
It will not be instanced warfare; all of EVE is a battleground.
It will be centered around low security space, but not exclusively.
Opposing Faction navies will take a sudden dislike to you fighting for their enemies. The pansies who currently take you on will most likely get fired and replaced with people who know how to shoot.
There will be no "PvP lite".
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.
You will not need to leave your corporation to join factional warfare. Individuals as well as corporations can join the cause.
It won't be restricted game play, it will still be EVE and EVE is a free form sandbox, this is just another type of sand.
Fighting for an faction will have negative consequences on the enemy faction.
Just re-capping some of Gingers comments per this.
|
Dravius Luxor
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.15 14:57:00 -
[84]
Just saw the teaser video - nice one!
Looking forward to it...
|
Khanto Thor
Amarr
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.05.15 16:28:00 -
[85]
I'm looking forward to this Factional Warfare.
I want to start dipping my toe into the PVP waters. But I do not want to loose security status.
It would be cool if there was a way of being a wing commander and actually lead a small group of NPC ships and control what they do!
|
raven415
Caldari
Special Projects Corp
|
Posted - 2008.05.17 03:12:00 -
[86]
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.
non issue unless you enlisting all 3 avatars on your account
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.05.17 18:23:00 -
[87]
in these missions in deadspace. will there be enemy carriers etc? will there be capital ships? or battleships will be the biggest enemy up against? Will it be like a fleet battle, only this tme vs NPC, with them having like 50 bs 20 support etc, and you need a simlar fleet to take them on?
can capitals go in these new deadspace complexes where mwd is now allowed as well?
C.E.O.
Go Hard, or go Home.
|
Jane Indy
|
Posted - 2008.05.18 12:59:00 -
[88]
In one part of the blog there was written "you will be able to wardec factions". Does that mean that Alliances such as CVA or U'K will be able to wardec minmatar and Amarr respectively?
|
Tharrn
Amarr
Epitoth Fleetyards
Vigilia Valeria
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 12:17:00 -
[89]
Just for those who haven't noticed: this Devblog is from last december and might not reflect what we'll get now :P
Now recruiting! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |