| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nose Snot
   |
Posted - 2008.08.28 17:22:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Nose Snot on 28/08/2008 17:25:01
Putting all the whines and biased opinions aside... FW is a new game mechanic, and some issues have arose and need to be re-examined. I'm posting as many that I can think of... NOT all I agree with or deem an issue, but I believe they need to be looked at.
Please support for the simple fact that all these issues in FW need to be looked at again under the microscope.
1. The effects of two wars with two separate rules of play.
A. Militia not being able to defend their own militia counterparts.
B. Safe space being given to those 'outside' FW deccing militia corps.
C. NPC navies ignoring corps outside FW deccing militia corps.
2. Neutrals (non-FW players) having battle impacts.
A. lootings
B. repping/boosting chosen parties
C. helping in hi-sec
D. security losses when engaging neuts involved in FW
3. Spies
4. Lack of worthy rewards for time and efforts
A. defense/offense plexing having little effect
B. no advantageous gains to persons or corps gaining victory points
5. Alliances and corps in alliances participating or staying out.
6. Idea that continued abuse of FW mechanics will lead to its demise and ruin the impact of what FW initially set out to be.
7. No clear objectives, no path to victory, no end in sight for FW players looking to 'change' the outcome. When does anyone win?
8. NPC navies need a boost?
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 17:26:00 -
[2]
No support. FW is not a pvp "instance" and never should be. It should definitely continue being open to influence from the rest of eve.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 17:31:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Jade Constantine
No support. FW is not a pvp "instance" and never should be. It should definitely continue being open to influence from the rest of eve.
Influence, yes, influence with several clear advantages, no.
You can add to the list:
NPC in your faction attacking you if you enter an enemy mission. I.e. Gallente Navy NPC attacking you if you enter a Caldari mission against Gallente (it don't happen in complex).
|
Nose Snot
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 17:31:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
No support. FW is not a pvp "instance" and never should be. It should definitely continue being open to influence from the rest of eve.
Okay, so you find nothing even remotely worthy to look at in the above list? What if this thread gets 200 supports that FW simply needs to be looked at again? That's the only real issue I'm proposing, and yet you think its perfect already? Damn... your personal opinion is what this thread is trying to avoid. Sorry you already see it that way, but I think its your job to listen to what people have to say. Right?
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 17:37:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 28/08/2008 17:38:19
Originally by: Nose Snot
Originally by: Jade Constantine
No support. FW is not a pvp "instance" and never should be. It should definitely continue being open to influence from the rest of eve.
Okay, so you find nothing even remotely worthy to look at in the above list? What if this thread gets 200 supports that FW simply needs to be looked at again? That's the only real issue I'm proposing, and yet you think its perfect already? Damn... your personal opinion is what this thread is trying to avoid. Sorry you already see it that way, but I think its your job to listen to what people have to say. Right?
We discussed 4 separate issues pertaining to faction warfare and provided the FW development team with a whole lot of direct feedback from the players involved with FW a month or so ago. Your list is mainly involved with arguing against external influence on FW by promoting it as a pvp instance and as such no, I don't find it at all useful or support worthy and I won't be supporting it.
And for the record I've listened to pretty much everything the pro-instancing lobby have argued for and reached an informed position in disagreeing with you completely.
FW is not perfect, and we have proposed many and significant changes already. But the things you are complaining about are not problems.
-note:
The only thing in your post that has merit is:
Quote:
4. Lack of worthy rewards for time and efforts
A. defense/offense plexing having little effect
B. no advantageous gains to persons or corps gaining victory points
And we've already said as much to the FW dev team in the direct consultation documents we submitted. They know.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 17:44:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Your list is mainly involved with arguing against external influence on FW by promoting it as a pvp instance and as such no, I don't find it at all useful or support worthy and I won't be supporting it.
Please explain to me what you think 'pvp instance' means? I'm not against external forces involving in FW, but I am against clear advantages of external forces using and abusing what they do, because of the existence of FW.
---------------------------------
Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man. |
Nose Snot
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 18:42:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
FW is not perfect, and we have proposed many and significant changes already. But the things you are complaining about are not problems.
where the heck do you get that I was complaining about problems? And quite frankly, I'm appalled that you can sit here and assume you know what I think is right and wrong with FW. I personally think you have your own idea, and should keep that to yourself and explore the ideas of others. Thus, promoting your job.
On another note... please link me to your public records of the council's discussions on FW issues. All the issues that have been listed, should be discussed. If you haven't, then you are pushing for your own Eve.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 18:46:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 28/08/2008 18:47:11
Originally by: Nose Snot
... I'm appalled that you can sit here and assume you know what I think is right and wrong with FW.
The clue was in the op post. 
If its not supposed to be an ISSUE thread then fine, I'll ignore it but I suggest its best moved to somewhere else? Jita Park maybe.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Nose Snot
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 19:00:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
The clue was in the op post.
If its not supposed to be an ISSUE thread then fine, I'll ignore it but I suggest its best moved to somewhere else? Jita Park maybe.
All I'm proposing is that Faction Warfare has issues, and ALL of them need to have a clear discussion and a clear response from what CCP sees and believes should be reviewed and focused on to eventually be fixed.
|
Uzume Ame
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 19:10:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Nose Snot
Edited by: Nose Snot on 28/08/2008 17:34:40
Edited by: Nose Snot on 28/08/2008 17:25:01
Putting all the whines and biased opinions aside... FW is a new game mechanic, and some issues have arose and need to be re-examined. I'm posting as many that I can think of... NOT all I agree with or deem an issue, but I believe they need to be looked at.
Please support for the simple fact that all these issues in FW need to be looked at again under the microscope.
1. The effects of two wars with two separate rules of play.
A. Militia not being able to defend their own militia counterparts.
B. Safe space being given to those 'outside' FW deccing militia corps.
C. NPC navies ignoring corps outside FW deccing militia corps.
2. Neutrals (non-FW players) having battle impacts.
A. lootings
B. repping/boosting chosen parties
C. helping in hi-sec
D. security losses when engaging neuts involved in FW
3. Spies
4. Lack of worthy rewards for time and efforts
A. defense/offense plexing having little effect
B. no advantageous gains to persons or corps gaining victory points
5. Alliances and corps in alliances participating or staying out.
6. Idea that continued abuse of FW mechanics will lead to its demise and ruin the impact of what FW initially set out to be.
7. No clear objectives, no path to victory, no end in sight for FW players looking to 'change' the outcome. When does anyone win?
8. NPC navies need a boost?
9. NPC in your faction attacking you if you enter an enemy mission. I.e. Gallente Navy NPC attacking you if you enter a Caldari mission against Gallente (it don't happen in complex).
LOL Jade, yes you're not biased... ok a closer examiantion of the OP:
1. Needs to be looked at... does not make sense at all. If you wardec one corp within the militia you should fight them all.
2. Non-issue, live with it.
3. Same, is an issue for almost every alliance out there.
4. Should be looked, if we want FW to have continuity, pew pew for the sake of it won't last long, objetives & real impact & probably rewards are needed.
5. Not sure which the issue is...
6. Should be discussed.
7. Read 4.
8. Maybe, should be discussed.
9. obvious.
So yes, FW some of this stuff needs examination. I support the OP.
Teh failure of a signature. |
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 20:05:00 -
[11]
If you haven't figured it out yet, the CSM reps have two priorities when pushing to have things worked on:
1) Their personal agendas concerning things that help them, as an individual not a corp or alliance member, get more for themselves out of eve.
2) The agendas for their 'groups' playstyle at the expense of everyone else's.
Oh, yeah!
10) Listening to the concerns and issues of the Eve userbase and bring those to the attention of CCP to have the situations examined for improvments.
On that note:
FW has some fatal flaws and needs immediate attention. Most especially those damn nuub neutrals.
|
Barstander
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 02:14:00 -
[12]
While I don't agree that all of the suggested areas are actual problems, I do agree that FW needs a look at and all of your issues merit real and impartial discussion.
|
Nemesor
Gallente
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 03:23:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Nemesor on 29/08/2008 03:24:19
Originally by: Uzume Ame
1. Needs to be looked at... does not make sense at all. If you wardec one corp within the militia you should fight them all.
I disagree with this. Currently, all corps within your faction are able to counter war dec. If you cannot convince anyone to do so, perhaps you need to work on your diplomacy.
Having just left FW, I have to say... there were corps that were on my side I would just as soon shot at myself. Don't ask people to fight your conflicts for you.
FW is supposed to be an introduction to 0.0 pvp with training wheels. Asking the devs to change game mechanics because you can't coordinate a defense for yourself is rather silly.
There are other points in there I could support... but I won't support this thread because of this one point.
|
Uzume Ame
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:52:00 -
[14]
Militia members CAN'T wardec these corps, not all people inside FW is in a corp. Also is more fun for all, more targets.
Teh failure of a signature. |
Skyy
Sigillum Militum Xpisti
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 15:02:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Skyy on 29/08/2008 15:02:20
Everything needs to be taken through the grinder again... examined with a fine toothed comb... support.
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.08.30 00:26:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Somealt Ofmine on 30/08/2008 00:26:03
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Your list is mainly involved with arguing against external influence on FW by promoting it as a pvp instance and as such no, I don't find it at all useful or support worthy and I won't be supporting it... and other crap...
You're doing that playing everyone for stupid thing again. Making those who war-dec a militia corp subject to the same mechanics as anyone else engaged in FW is not creating an "instance". You're intentionally throwing up a red-herring here Jade, by equating it to something that you know would have no support in Eve.
The devs, clearly, and explicitly, did not want FW dominated by existing alliances, otherwise, they would have just let them in from the git. You're promoting side-stepping that to further your own in-game objectives, and that, given you position is a shame. No two ways about it.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |