| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Qduhaf
   |
Posted - 2008.06.16 20:37:00 -
[1]
What would you rather have FW be a different take on 0.0 warfare for system control or easy to find small scale PVP?
|
Waxau
Unus - Vir Exercitus
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 20:39:00 -
[2]
Currently, its awesome. It combines both.
Today, ive been in 3 fights of 4 v 4 etc, and been in two 100 man fleets. Tbh, its fine how it is. Once you dodge past the noobs and drake pilots (in caldari atleast), and such...thats when you get the pewpew
|
Furb Killer
USC Militia
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 20:40:00 -
[3]
small scale.
I could still live with the rougly 60 people fleets when they would for once leave in time. Last one would leave at xx:15. At xx:05 i predicted it would still take an hour (got almost kicked from fleet for that). xx:10 i wondered if it was about time to get ready. To make a long story short, at xx:45 the fleet was still in its original position and i left for another one.
|
Stuart Price
Black Water.
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 20:41:00 -
[4]
As long as people can bring more ships, they will. The only solution that will ever stop blobbing (in any part of space) is to hardlimit the amount of people from the same corp/alliance/gang/whatever from being in the same system.
Which is a terrible idea.
Basically, people like safety in numbers. Newer pvp'ers more so. Ergo: Blobs are an almost certain eventuality.
"I got soul but I'm not a soldier" |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 20:49:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Stuart Price
As long as people can bring more ships, they will. The only solution that will ever stop blobbing (in any part of space) is to hardlimit the amount of people from the same corp/alliance/gang/whatever from being in the same system.
Which is a terrible idea.
Basically, people like safety in numbers. Newer pvp'ers more so. Ergo: Blobs are an almost certain eventuality.
Not always!
Why do people bring more ships to a battle? Because there is no instance, ever, where bringing more ships to the same location will hurt you more than it hurts the enemy - lag doesn't take sides.
Solution? Create mechanics that makes keeping all of your offensive/defensive forces in a single location counterproductive. FW has already done this to an extent by creating complexes that only require one ship to capture and as such don't have an immediate benefit (like POSes that can be removed more quickly with more ships). I've already heard of several instances where a slightly-outnumbered force has split up into numerous small groups in order to accomplish different objectives, forcing the opposing blob (which is less mobile) to slowly crawl from one objective to the next, chasing away small numbers of ships only to have them return once the blob has left.
CCP needs to do more of this. As quickly as possible.
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8) |
Qduhaf
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 20:59:00 -
[6]
my suggestion has been to make missions in FW PVP based, and limited in some way to numbers and types of ships.
I'd propose several mechanisms put in place to make this happen:
1)Every mission needs 2 parties to make it happen (eg, 1 caldari, 1 gallente): This would not only ensure that it was PVP focused but also balance out the sides (if everyone is caldari, then there wouldnÆt be missions for them as there were no gallente sides)
2)Mission sends both parties to a contested system victory point, those victory points can not be scanned out, nor can ships/drones, etc be scanned out within them. One side is the defender, the other the attacker.
3)Each mission/side has a point structure, allowable ship types and a recommended and maximum number of allowable points. Assume that Level 1 missions are for tech 1 or 2 frigs and 4 players, level 2 are for tech 1 or 2 frigs tech 1 cruisers and tech 1 battlecruisers/battleships and 8 players, level 3 are for all ship types, 8 players and level 4 for all tech 1 and 2 battleship and below and 32 players (fleet warfare). These point structures change by mission, and arenÆt always the same on each side so no ôwinningö formulas (ie, dual guardian for the slow painful win), and each side is given an indication of what they will face based on how the points are allocated, of course instead of 4 interceptors, one side might take 8 noob ships that total out to the same points so you really wonÆt know how many or what ships you will face.
4)Winning side gets rewards, based upon 2 factors: a) total point value of their ships that entered the victory point with 0 reward if exceeded max allowed points and b) the ranks of the opposing playerÆs team. This means you would get a lot more rewards for beating top ranked players with a small group, less if you won with a large group against noobs and nothing if you blobbed the victory point.
Of course either side could camp the gates in between, etc but at least this would guarantee that the end PVP result would be what I think most new and older players regard as fun.
|
Demio Olaron
Aktaeon Industries
R-I-P
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 21:10:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Qduhaf
my suggestion has been to make missions in FW PVP based, and limited in some way to numbers and types of ships.
I'd propose several mechanisms put in place to make this happen:
1)Every mission needs 2 parties to make it happen (eg, 1 caldari, 1 gallente): This would not only ensure that it was PVP focused but also balance out the sides (if everyone is caldari, then there wouldnÆt be missions for them as there were no gallente sides)
2)Mission sends both parties to a contested system victory point, those victory points can not be scanned out, nor can ships/drones, etc be scanned out within them. One side is the defender, the other the attacker.
3)Each mission/side has a point structure, allowable ship types and a recommended and maximum number of allowable points. Assume that Level 1 missions are for tech 1 or 2 frigs and 4 players, level 2 are for tech 1 or 2 frigs tech 1 cruisers and tech 1 battlecruisers/battleships and 8 players, level 3 are for all ship types, 8 players and level 4 for all tech 1 and 2 battleship and below and 32 players (fleet warfare). These point structures change by mission, and arenÆt always the same on each side so no ôwinningö formulas (ie, dual guardian for the slow painful win), and each side is given an indication of what they will face based on how the points are allocated, of course instead of 4 interceptors, one side might take 8 noob ships that total out to the same points so you really wonÆt know how many or what ships you will face.
4)Winning side gets rewards, based upon 2 factors: a) total point value of their ships that entered the victory point with 0 reward if exceeded max allowed points and b) the ranks of the opposing playerÆs team. This means you would get a lot more rewards for beating top ranked players with a small group, less if you won with a large group against noobs and nothing if you blobbed the victory point.
Of course either side could camp the gates in between, etc but at least this would guarantee that the end PVP result would be what I think most new and older players regard as fun.
Please go back to WoW
|
Qduhaf
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 21:34:00 -
[8]
Never played WOW, but I don't think it is a PVP game. Sure lots of missioning in large teams, but you are killing mindless NPCs. Not sure that it would be much different here, based on your response it would be killing mindless PCs.
Seriously, why does everyone encourage people to play WOW on the EVE site. Maybe if CCP instituted PVP system that offered an alternative to blob FTW or hours of 0.0 roaming for a fight, then more people would pay to play it.
As a corp mate said. "most games you spend your time figuring out how to win the fight, in eve you spend your time looking for the fight". This was ofc after first hour, and 20 jumps in 0.0 with no engagements. After 2 hours we did manage to engage a single iteron 5, and only got that kill because he jumped through gate when he should have warped away and he wasn't smart enough to log off.
|
Everyone Dies
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 21:53:00 -
[9]
small scale 0.0 warfare none of this ******** noob fw.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:31:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Everyone Dies
small scale 0.0 warfare none of this ******** noob fw.
0.0 warfare is not small scale.
in FW there is NO REASON to have more than one ship. unless they bring more.
but there are over 100 sites a t a time to fight in thus you MUST SPLIT UP OR LOSE>
|
JeremyCrow
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:32:00 -
[11]
It's fine the way it is... most fun I've had since I joined Eve.
|
Qduhaf
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:37:00 -
[12]
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: Everyone Dies
small scale 0.0 warfare none of this ******** noob fw.
0.0 warfare is not small scale.
in FW there is NO REASON to have more than one ship. unless they bring more.
but there are over 100 sites a t a time to fight in thus you MUST SPLIT UP OR LOSE>
Only if people are playing FW the way it was designed, seems that the more mission orientated Caldari players did so and actually flipped a system, but everything I have seen the other factions care more about getting killmails than ranks, or control points.
Unfortunatley there are few incentives to play FW the way it was designed. Yes some epeen for first flipped system, but that thread will be short lived as soon as everyone involved is done patting themselves on the back, and the next one will be off the first page of the forums in less than 4 hours.
|
Mirana Niranne
Federal Noob Mercs
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:44:00 -
[13]
I love FW just the way it is, thanks! There are some blobs, some small gangs, some mid sized fleets. Some people doing plexs, some people just looking to shoot. It's a nice chaotic hodge podge and you never know if you're going to be on the next capital ship killmail when some alliance goes to stick their nose in the beehive.
Phear the PHAIL |
Cailais
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:47:00 -
[14]
FW is spot on as it is. If you want to fight in a large fleet battle, you can. If you prefer to fly as a small gang you can. Heck you can even solo.
Easily the best fun Ive had in EVE in two years - its brilliant.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:50:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Stuart Price
As long as people can bring more ships, they will. The only solution that will ever stop blobbing (in any part of space) is to hardlimit the amount of people from the same corp/alliance/gang/whatever from being in the same system.
Which is a terrible idea.
Basically, people like safety in numbers. Newer pvp'ers more so. Ergo: Blobs are an almost certain eventuality.
Not always!
Why do people bring more ships to a battle? Because there is no instance, ever, where bringing more ships to the same location will hurt you more than it hurts the enemy - lag doesn't take sides.
Solution? Create mechanics that makes keeping all of your offensive/defensive forces in a single location counterproductive. FW has already done this to an extent by creating complexes that only require one ship to capture and as such don't have an immediate benefit (like POSes that can be removed more quickly with more ships). I've already heard of several instances where a slightly-outnumbered force has split up into numerous small groups in order to accomplish different objectives, forcing the opposing blob (which is less mobile) to slowly crawl from one objective to the next, chasing away small numbers of ships only to have them return once the blob has left.
CCP needs to do more of this. As quickly as possible.
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS!
Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route. |
Hannobaal
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:52:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Hannobaal on 16/06/2008 22:54:13
It's both, which is great.
Solo combat was also easy to find in the first couple of days, but that seems to have changed as people quickly became more organized. 
|
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:55:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Hannobaal
Edited by: Hannobaal on 16/06/2008 22:54:13
It's both, which is great.
Solo combat was also easy to find in the first couple of days, but that seems to have changed as people quickly became more organized.
don't stay low sec then...tash murkon awaits
Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 23:01:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Qduhaf
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: Everyone Dies
small scale 0.0 warfare none of this ******** noob fw.
0.0 warfare is not small scale.
in FW there is NO REASON to have more than one ship. unless they bring more.
but there are over 100 sites a t a time to fight in thus you MUST SPLIT UP OR LOSE>
Only if people are playing FW the way it was designed, seems that the more mission orientated Caldari players did so and actually flipped a system, but everything I have seen the other factions care more about getting killmails than ranks, or control points.
Unfortunatley there are few incentives to play FW the way it was designed. Yes some epeen for first flipped system, but that thread will be short lived as soon as everyone involved is done patting themselves on the back, and the next one will be off the first page of the forums in less than 4 hours.
As a fleet commander for the minatar is a matter of I can't lead 10 fleets at once and I can only play 2-6 hours tops a day :(
|
gpfwestie
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 00:17:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Qduhaf
Stuff
Please do not post suggestions like this anymore until you have played for a while, I have not played WOW or any other MMORPG but have had arena's explained to me before, and we do not want them.
|
Qduhaf
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 00:31:00 -
[20]
Originally by: gpfwestie
Please do not post suggestions like this anymore until you have played for a while, I have not played WOW or any other MMORPG but have had arena's explained to me before, and we do not want them.[/quote
well I guess in your very extensive play time you have never heard of an alt posting, or because of your very high level of intelligence you might not understand why you would want to avoid all the a**wipes by doing so, and with an extremely high level of reading comprehension you can't discern between an arena system and PVP missions within an persistent world environment.
I really get sick of people that think including references to WOW is their whole argument.
FW will need incentives, or it will dry up and become lowsec all over again. Its on a rush right now, 2 weeks and that rush will be over (noobs run out of isk, epeen for system flipping is over, gangs get smaller and pirates come back, gangs get bigger and it becomes a blob fest) Introducing a PVP missioning system will be just one way to play the game, its a sandbox after all.
|
Jeramon Castro
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 01:04:00 -
[21]
People who aren't really getting FW and just want a fight go to Nourvukaiken for the Tama blob.
Those who do run off and capture enemy points in small gangs.
|
Qduhaf
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 01:16:00 -
[22]
Is there anything that prevents the defender from blobbing a single control point to prevent system take over?
CCP should really put in small incentives for taking systems, a faction frigate for everyone that contributed (ie, waited out the timers) to a system flipping, or defending a system and bringing it out of disputed status. As long as the rewards aren't direct ISK and minimal isk value (which faction frigates are) I don't think they will upset the play of the game. OFC these same action should result in rank points as well.
|
Jeramon Castro
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 01:36:00 -
[23]
Quote:
Is there anything that prevents the defender from blobbing a single control point to prevent system take over?
Organisation mostly. If you blob one system it means there's 40-odd systems completely undefended. For a 5000 man alliance, considering probably a quarter of that is on at any one time, half of that is hi-sec moving and half of what's left is in the major blob, that's about 5 men per system at most.
Quote:
CCP should really put in small incentives for taking systems, a faction frigate for everyone that contributed (ie, waited out the timers) to a system flipping, or defending a system and bringing it out of disputed status. As long as the rewards aren't direct ISK and minimal isk value (which faction frigates are) I don't think they will upset the play of the game. OFC these same action should result in rank points as well.
Too exploitable/farmable really. Small/medium LP rewards are the best option if anything.
|
MrChook
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 02:05:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Qduhaf
Is there anything that prevents the defender from blobbing a single control point to prevent system take over?
Mainly that you have no idea when the system will become vulnerable. Once a point is captured by either side it plays no further role and will disappear (not sure what triggers the despawn as some seem to hang around for quite a while).
Will it be the next site that spawns in that system that makes it vulnerable? Will it spawn a new one in this system in the next minutes... hours... days? Nobody knows.
People are slowly "getting" how FW works.
If you want to run around in a T1 blob killing anything that is red (war target or flashy red, no matter) then that is fine, it's great fun but it contributes little to the mechanics of capturing systems.
If you want to progress your faction you either
- capture points in your own systems which is easy as the NPCs don't shoot at you... but the bad guys can show up and try to stop you (at which point you kill them, die to them or hide from them for a while so you can call in reinforcements, which may well be the previous mentioned blob looking for targets)
- run off into enemy space and capture points in their systems, which is a bit harder since the NPCs tend to shoot you and the bad guys come in and help them out (at which point you kill them, die to them or hide from them for a while so you can call in reinforcements, which may well be the previous mentioned blob looking for targets)
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |