Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
A random internet commenter had a good idea.
There is a better way for Factional Warfare to flip sov/ownership: Turn the current static Bunkers into Nullsec-style Outposts, dockable only by the owning Militia. No need to lock off already-existing stations. No getting alts involved. Allow this Outpost to give certain benefits to owning militia; tax-free production, free repairs and clones, etc. Systems turned by putting this Outpost into reinforced, and popping it 24 hours later. Give it sentry guns to impede enemy camping. Make it a tactically important little piece of floating property. If your stuff is inside when the system turns, fight for it back, or jump into a clone inside. Give it cloning facilities, with the new owner able to revoke clone contracts.
This is a simple, easy way to tackle factional warfare. |

Deen Wispa
Screaming War Eagles Incorporated
204
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote: ridiculous suggestion to turn FW into more fail nullsec warfare .
Goons trolling FW now. How quaint....
. |

Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Deen Wispa wrote:Powers Sa wrote: ridiculous suggestion to turn FW into more fail nullsec warfare . Goons trolling FW now. How quaint.... I'm actually not trolling at all. This is a great way to add more time to help the FW militia members not get locked out. I was originally been trolling gamerchick on twitter, and on her website. I decided to stop trolling when i saw that comment on EN24. CCP's currently suggested options would have you locked out in 8 hours according to gamerchick42. How is this idea any more terrible. |

Dirk Smacker
Inglorious-Basterds
22
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 23:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
Did you watch the FW presentation at Fanfest?
Not a bad idea, but they have a general roadmap that is equally not bad which doesn't include 0.0-style outposts. I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one. |

Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 23:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dirk Smacker wrote:Did you watch the FW presentation at Fanfest?
Not a bad idea, but they have a general roadmap that is equally not bad which doesn't include 0.0-style outposts. I watched the whole thing, I thought it was entertaining. I personally have no vested interest in Factional Warfare. This just seemed like a better way to do what they talked about in the presentation found here. He seemed like he was shooting from the hip during that presentation. All very much in the conceptual stages. |

Deen Wispa
Screaming War Eagles Incorporated
205
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 01:12:00 -
[6] - Quote
My apologies then. I just get the heckles when people start suggesting features that results in structure shooting. And that's what alot of people would object to with your suggestion.
Alot of the current FW players want a solution that will:
a) avoid structure shooting b) mitigate blob warfare c) encourage LPmaking through PVP
The prevention of docking in enemy stations is a toss up and split down the middle. Some want it because it gives more immersion. Others hate it because it's a nuisance to casual pvp and/or RL priorities.
And yes, the presenter was shooting at the hip. Fortunately, he did say nothing was set in stone. Unfortunately, this is CCP being CCP and not always listening to the playerbase. . |

Tanaka Sekigahara
United Space Marine Corp
60
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:13:00 -
[7] - Quote
Deen Wispa wrote:My apologies then. I just get the heckles when people start suggesting features that results in structure shooting. And that's what alot of people would object to with your suggestion.
Alot of the current FW players want a solution that will:
a) avoid structure shooting b) mitigate blob warfare c) encourage LPmaking through PVP
The prevention of docking in enemy stations is a toss up and split down the middle. Some want it because it gives more immersion. Others hate it because it's a nuisance to casual pvp and/or RL priorities.
And yes, the presenter was shooting at the hip. Fortunately, he did say nothing was set in stone. Unfortunately, this is CCP being CCP and not always listening to the playerbase. CCP soundwave, in his interview ( and he is lead game designer) said they are GOING to do these things
|

sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade Lost Obsession
174
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 10:36:00 -
[8] - Quote
Because if FW players wanted Null Style play, oddly enough we would just be in null sec. What is it about that people don't get? I fail to see whats wrong with just letting FW guys undock shoot people dock up. I however don't mind the station changes. I just hope they tweek the plexing alittle so one time zone cant lock a system out in seven hours before another logs on.
If people don't like there stuff getting locked away in a station, funny thing, you'll be able to stop it by pvp'ing. Shocking I know, but alas a War Zone that asks you to engage in War to maintain your home, whatever next?
Smart people will just set up home in a couple of systems, and use a Pos to store a group of plexing ships so members who lose a system can continue to fight for its return.
Its a war, Pressing Pause is for console games.
Eve is Hard, man the **** up or go to Hello Kitty high sec. |

Lock out
Shadows Of The Federation Drunk 'n' Disorderly
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 11:05:00 -
[9] - Quote
Great ideea OP, would give a nice incentive for fights, a nice reward and yet not rewarding enough to turn thing is to 500 vs 500 blob warfare. Just the perfect line in the middle.
+1 |

praznimrak
Level Up
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 12:53:00 -
[10] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:A random internet commenter had a good idea.There is a better way for Factional Warfare to flip sov/ownership: Turn the current static Bunkers into Nullsec-style Outposts, dockable only by the owning Militia. No need to lock off already-existing stations. No getting alts involved. Allow this Outpost to give certain benefits to owning militia; tax-free production, free repairs and clones, etc. Systems turned by putting this Outpost into reinforced, and popping it 24 hours later. Give it sentry guns to impede enemy camping. Make it a tactically important little piece of floating property. If your stuff is inside when the system turns, fight for it back, or jump into a clone inside. Give it cloning facilities, with the new owner able to revoke clone contracts. This is a simple, easy way to tackle factional warfare. Best idea till now
My youtube chanell: http://www.youtube.com/user/EveOnlineGameplay |

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate Villore Accords
149
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 13:08:00 -
[11] - Quote
Didn't the fanfest video say the change from bunker to sov outpost was COSMETIC only ?
|

praznimrak
Level Up
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 14:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
praznimrak wrote:Powers Sa wrote:A random internet commenter had a good idea.There is a better way for Factional Warfare to flip sov/ownership: Turn the current static Bunkers into Nullsec-style Outposts, dockable only by the owning Militia. No need to lock off already-existing stations. No getting alts involved. Allow this Outpost to give certain benefits to owning militia; tax-free production, free repairs and clones, etc. Systems turned by putting this Outpost into reinforced, and popping it 24 hours later. Give it sentry guns to impede enemy camping. Make it a tactically important little piece of floating property. If your stuff is inside when the system turns, fight for it back, or jump into a clone inside. Give it cloning facilities, with the new owner able to revoke clone contracts. This is a simple, easy way to tackle factional warfare. Best idea till now I like the idea of outpost but no nead for 24 hours reinforce,we dont want 0.0 stuff in fw.Thats why we have plexing,and thats why guerilla tactics still work in fw.You dont have to wait to gather 300 man fleat to switch the sistem,yo can do it whih 5-10 ppl,and that is the way fw shoud be.Praz
My youtube chanell: http://www.youtube.com/user/EveOnlineGameplay |

Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
176
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 16:50:00 -
[13] - Quote
The whole point of RF timers was to prevent timezone warfare, while there is some of that present in FW today, CCP can simply tweak the amount of VP/plexes needed to make a system vulnerable, rather than making a RF timer so that small gang pvp is still "in". |

Kirith Vespira
Border Zone Excursions
14
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 16:53:00 -
[14] - Quote
I like the idea... I'm 50/50 on the station-lock-out thing, but then when I'm in FW I don't set up home in the warzone. Never understood that, really, except as maybe a lazy approach. Getting locked out of a station has zero bearing, since ships and modules are available everywhere. Leave war zone, dock, use your JC. Problem solved. |

Altaen
Lutinari Syndicate Electus Matari
5
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 18:02:00 -
[15] - Quote
sYnc Vir wrote: I just hope they tweek the plexing alittle so one time zone cant lock a system out in seven hours before another logs on. [/i]
POCO-style reinforcement timer on Bunker, problem solved. |

Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 18:49:00 -
[16] - Quote
I dont think that having stations in all FW systems is a good idea.
However, replacing the current FW miliita stations with conquerable stations could be an added feature. |

Kirith Vespira
Border Zone Excursions
15
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 20:00:00 -
[17] - Quote
Kade Jeekin wrote:I dont think that having stations in all FW systems is a good idea.
However, replacing the current FW miliita stations with conquerable stations could be an added feature.
Having a conquerable, non-destrucable militia station would add a very interesting element to the game. No like POS warfare, but the meta-gaming would be interesting! |

Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
90
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 20:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
Zverofaust wrote:Susan Black wrote:Powers Sa wrote:A random internet commenter had a good idea. Turn the current static Bunkers into Nullsec-style Outposts, dockable only by the owning Militia. No need to lock off already-existing stations. This is a simple, easy way to tackle factional warfare. An interesting idea, but it would essentially push FW over the edge toward being exactly like nullsec. While that's not inherently bad, it seems wasteful and a shame to start mimicking nullsec, since the whole point of Faction War was to create a new kind of warfare within the game. A lot of people who are ultimately interested in 'taking sovereignty over space' and doing upgrades and having outposts, live in nullsec where there are actually resources and etc. to merit them taking the effort to build something like that up. It does nothing of the sort. Nothing. When you lose an Outpost/system in Nullsec you are completely ****** and inable to live in that system whatsoever until your blob alliance retakes it, if they ever do. In the proposed system, the owning of the Outpost simply gives the owning militia an advantageous position from which to continue the effort of war and death in that system (and systems nearby) by providing a relatively safe, beneficial location to dock up that the enemy can't touch. It doesn't stop the enemy docking elsewhere in system, basing their ships elsewhere in system, getting repairs or staging from that system, like it would in Nullsec; this just gives you a clear, immediate and tangible benefit in the form of free repairs, tax-free market transactions, and free cloning (among others), in a station that is harder to camp by turds with instalocking arty Tornados, of which I am one. As for the structure-bashing, this already exists and there really isn't any fair way to do it. By giving these "Garrisons" a reinforcement timer it at the very least allows the defending militia time to prepare a fleet ops. Militias love timing fleet ops because often fighting in militia is an irritating quagmire of random people being on at random times. Knowing the system will become vulnerable in 12 or 24 hours gives you time to plan accordingly and put together some impressive defense fleets that we currently almost exclusively get during POS attacks which are boring as hell. It also means a system can't be turned in 7-8 hours by a handful of dedicated people with too much time on their hands, which is currently the case. To expand on the idea you can keep the current plexing mechanics of constant plexing causing the system's sov to deteriorate until a certain point is reached in which the owning NPC empire begins to pull out of the system after taking too many losses and the Garrison Outpost goes into a 24-hour timer, after which point the enemy militia may assault and incap it, turning the system. It'd be up to the defending militia as the ~last line of defense~ to stop this from happening. ~The Notorious Z.V.
|

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
636
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 20:48:00 -
[19] - Quote
additional to docking rights for the militia stations.. why not. a eve-style bounty system https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105 You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |

Dirk Smacker
Inglorious-Basterds
23
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 15:00:00 -
[20] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:The whole point of RF timers was to prevent timezone warfare, while there is some of that present in FW today, CCP can simply tweak the amount of VP/plexes needed to make a system vulnerable, rather than making a RF timer so that small gang pvp is still "in". Bingo. I hope the devs working on this see this post.
But I would like to see a system invul timer before the station switchover. I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one. |

Meditril
T.R.I.A.D Defiant Legacy
55
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 15:10:00 -
[21] - Quote
Leave FW alone with timers. The only problem I see with current mechanics is that once you have taken the bunker then the system is locked until down time which means 23 hours in the worst case. Therefore, just change this: If a bunker is taken, then simply do not lock the system just change the side of the system and create a new bunker of the side which has taken the system. Then people can continue fighting over it.
Anyway, I really hate structure shooting therefore I would be really happy if we could get rid of bunkers in total. |

Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
73
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 15:17:00 -
[22] - Quote
Two comments:
I actually like this idea because it gives every FW system some sort of functionality, unlike now where you have systems like Oinasiken or Pynekastoh that have no stations and no practical use.
Secondly, RF timers are really bad tbh. The idea behind it is nice, allowing one side enough time to rally up its forces and make a legitimate defense of the area. But in practice, what it amounts to is giving enough time for the defenders to rally every acquaintance and/or bored 0.0 alliance they can find to come drop on the attackers. I won't rant too much about nullsec supercap blobs being able to run half way across the galaxy in a small span of time just to **** in some small time guy's wheaties, but it does get a little ridiculous and if we can introduce mechanics that make it harder for them to form up, so much the better imo. |

Tobiaz
Spacerats
90
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 15:37:00 -
[23] - Quote
My impression is that the FW-peeps want nothing to do with null-sec structure grinding. They want to shoot each other, so it'd be better to make the Sov of the system be determined by a manner that mainly involves killing ships, not shooting at a station or whatnot for an hour.
Incursion style sites where the two Factions compete to claim it, just like Vanguards, except you can shoot the other fleet now as well. Sites of different sizes and levels of difficulty paying out different amounts of LP. Blobbing means you get less LP.
An Incursion-style bar showing the progress of both sides towards claiming the system by crowd-sourcing (less FW-politics BS) and a MOM-style site for 20-40 pilots as a hard cap on claiming the system in the end.
Give the system a FW-only station that can be used by who-ever controls the system for say 75%, with NPC defenses and extra cheap services (something that's only worth something if all NPC services are increased in price significantly, but we have too much inflation and they are cheap as dirt anyway, so it's not a bad thing to do) http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Tobiaz/sig_complaints.gif
How about fixing image-linking on the forums, CCP? I want to see signatures! |

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate Villore Accords
149
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 16:43:00 -
[24] - Quote
The current bunker busting mechanic is painful, but not too bad...
I would just like my character to receive a ribbon to display to the Eve community (to show what a loser I am) for every bunker busting fleet I've been a part of. Barring that, at least some visuals better than the glorious special effects we have now: The small text in the upper left hand corner changes from "Vulnerable" to "Lost" (I guess my ship's lock on the bunker is broken too - I guess that counts as special effects as well).
|

Aristeia Cersei
SQUIDS.
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 18:11:00 -
[25] - Quote
Originally I was up in the air about the idea behind not being able to dock in enemy stations. I of course think it's silly that a WT can dock in a station owned by a faction they are at war against but I also understand FW is more casual in play style.
However until CCP comes up with a better solution for system captures that doesn't allow for time zone ganking of systems then I'm against the no docking idea. Example, yesterday when I left for work Brarel was completely de-contested. About 9 hours later when I came home the system had been flipped in the middle of the night by Gallente.
Much the same thing happened in Agoze & Intaki as they used support of Minmatar with a combined fleet of some 80 players to lock out the systems for a few hours allowing them to flip them. Vey will likely be done the same way as will Annacale.. Quick flips when they have numbers advantage. There was very little fighting just proof that these changes will encourage more blob shooting structures & less fighting for systems.
Caldari has done the same with system captures as well, so it's not like Gals are alone in this but it's clear the current plex mechanics now allow a side to flip a system in only a few hours thanks to the constant resupply of plex spawns every 20 mins.
this means in the time that the average player spends at work or asleep he could come home or wake up the next day not having access to his stuff. While I'm all for making things matter, I must also lean toward the idea that this is still a game and needs to be enjoyable.
At this point I think CCP should not take away docking rights once a system is flipped as they will just encourage blobbing out systems for a few hours ensuring there is no fights to be had and just gives the system captures to the side that can form the biggest blob for a few hours..
At most CCP should deny station services and have station guns fire on the WT of the opposing faction if they aggress someone on the station. |

Cromwell Savage
The Rock Hard Roosters Villore Accords
49
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 21:25:00 -
[26] - Quote
Aristeia Cersei wrote: At most CCP should deny station services and have station guns fire on the WT of the opposing faction if they aggress someone on the station.
Ohhh...I like that idea.
Meh...now I must take a shower for agreeing with a squid...   |

Deen Wispa
Screaming War Eagles Incorporated
210
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 21:43:00 -
[27] - Quote
I concur with all of this. I just gave you your first space like. Spend it wisely .
This also raises the issue of how giving rewards/bonuses for holding a system is moot. Because when we go to sleep, you can easily flip the station back in your hands. This constant flipping won't allow anyone to enjoy the rewards and bonuses that CCP intends to offer.
The people who says that it needs to be hardcore needs to realize that it won't matter what you think if you don't have enough people who also want to go hardcore with you and engage in the constant structure shooting, prevention of undocking, etc...
I'm not saying the casual majority wins out either because I really don't have quantitative data as to how much people want casual and how many people want hardcore immersion.
Aristeia Cersei wrote:Originally I was up in the air about the idea behind not being able to dock in enemy stations. I of course think it's silly that a WT can dock in a station owned by a faction they are at war against but I also understand FW is more casual in play style. However until CCP comes up with a better solution for system captures that doesn't allow for time zone ganking of systems then I'm against the no docking idea. Example, yesterday when I left for work Brarel was completely de-contested. About 9 hours later when I came home the system had been flipped in the middle of the night by Gallente. ( I left for work @ about 21:00 eve time and the system was captured at 3:11. That means the system was flipped and bunker blown up in less than 7 hours) Much the same thing happened in Agoze & Intaki as they used support of Minmatar with a combined fleet of some 80 players to lock out the systems for a few hours allowing them to flip them. Vey will likely be done the same way as will Annacale.. Quick flips when they have numbers advantage. There was very little fighting just proof that these changes will encourage more blob shooting structures & less fighting for systems once LP is involved. Caldari has done the same with system captures as well, so it's not like Gals are alone in this but it's clear the current plex mechanics now allow a side to flip a system in only a few hours thanks to the constant resupply of plex spawns every 20 mins. this means in the time that the average player spends at work or asleep he could come home or wake up the next day not having access to his stuff. While I'm all for making things matter, I must also lean toward the idea that this is still a game and needs to be enjoyable. At this point I think CCP should not take away docking rights once a system is flipped as they will just encourage blobbing out systems for a few hours ensuring there is no fights to be had and just gives the system captures to the side that can form the biggest blob for a few hours.. At most CCP should deny station services and have station guns fire on the WT of the opposing faction if they aggress someone on the station.
. |

Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
73
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 22:20:00 -
[28] - Quote
The solution to that is painfully simple: just require more plexes so that it takes longer than just a few hours to flip a system. It really is that simple. If you're not paying attention beyond that, I don't have any sympathy for you getting locked out of your stuff. |

Pulgy
Shadows Of The Federation Drunk 'n' Disorderly
53
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 23:52:00 -
[29] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote: They want to shoot each other
Well some of us do  No range? No problem!Join the Church of the Holy BlasterGäó . A Hybrid religion. |

Proud Blackman
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.30 01:16:00 -
[30] - Quote
Most importantly, CCP wants us to shoot each other. They are unfamiliar with Black Plight in America. |
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |