Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shamrock1
Raiders of Cerberus.
4
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
The faction war guys are really unsettled about the unclear changes that have NOT but fully published to the players. CCP we would sincerely appreciate a friggen dev blog about what you propose for faction wars. It doesn't even have to be complete just give us a fraking idea already! |
Takashi Matsuoka
Seraphim Rising
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
Agreed. Its time we were told whats going on. If its true about the stations being taken over by factions then wtf are you doing ccp ? You are turning low sec into 0.0. And that is just ********. Low sec FW does not want to be 0.0. |
Tressin Khiyne
The Tuskers
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Typical. Whine about FW not getting enough attention and then whine that the attention it gets isn't what you want.
Quote: If its true about the stations being taken over by factions then wtf are you doing ccp ? You are turning low sec into 0.0. And that is just ********. Low sec FW does not want to be 0.0.
So you'd rather fight in FW and have your victories (and losses) mean nothing? |
fgft Athonille
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 19:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
they r removing all missions said enuff of that carebear bull and on to the pee vee pepepepepepepepepe |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
312
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 20:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tressin Khiyne wrote:Typical. Whine about FW not getting enough attention and then whine that the attention it gets isn't what you want. Quote: If its true about the stations being taken over by factions then wtf are you doing ccp ? You are turning low sec into 0.0. And that is just ********. Low sec FW does not want to be 0.0. So you'd rather fight in FW and have your victories (and losses) mean nothing?
I sort of see your point. I hope ccp doesn't publish a dev blog (at least not one that sets anythign in stone) until they have heard from some of the fw community - or at least hans.
But just because we do not some lame null sec sov system does not me we want our victories and losses to mean nothing. You are setting up a false dichotomy. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1422
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 20:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
I would like to see FW affect the security level of low sec systems.
If fact I'd like to see something controversial... namely I'd like to see FW not only be able to turn a low sec system into an area just as secure as high sec is now, but (while they retain control of the system) have the option to make it even MORE secure than current high sec.
Before anyone has a heart attack, there is a reason for this statement coming from someone as outspoken as myself on maintaining the dangerous nature of the EVE universe.
If a Faction that managed to get complete, top level control over a system had the ability to say disable the targeting systems of all ships in the system (except when targeting NPCs or war targets), and if the ability to lose control of the system still existed through various means, you would gain:
1: The knowledge that as a FW pilot you made significant, earth shaking changes to the game as a whole. 2: Empire dwellers would cheer you on by the thousands, throwing support in your direction at an unprescedented level. 3: Motivate the opposing factions (and perhaps others) to break your control over that system at ALL costs. 4: Motivate your Faction, and the civilian corps profiting from the enhanced security, to fight like never before to retain complete control of the system. 5: More combat would happen than ever before in the FW setting, all to protect those who desire an area of complete safety. 6: Whenever we hear the phrase "High Sec is supposed to be safe" we can cheerfully direct them to speak with the FW corp of their choice.
Just something I've been playing around with... I'm also a fan of shaking things up in unexpected ways.
Edit: A pop up when you enter system advising you that it is under Martial Law would add an interesting touch of flavor. When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Shukuzen Kiraa
47-Ronin Outer Ring Excavations Syndicate
80
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 21:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:I would like to see FW affect the security level of low sec systems. If fact I'd like to see something controversial... namely I'd like to see FW not only be able to turn a low sec system into an area just as secure as high sec is now, but (while they retain control of the system) have the option to make it even MORE secure than current high sec. Before anyone has a heart attack, there is a reason for this statement coming from someone as outspoken as myself on maintaining the dangerous nature of the EVE universe. If a Faction that managed to get complete, top level control over a system had the ability to say disable the targeting systems of all ships in the system (except when targeting NPCs or war targets), and if the ability to lose control of the system still existed through various means, you would gain: 1: The knowledge that as a FW pilot you made significant, earth shaking changes to the game as a whole. 2: Empire dwellers would cheer you on by the thousands, throwing support in your direction at an unprescedented level. 3: Motivate the opposing factions (and perhaps others) to break your control over that system at ALL costs. 4: Motivate your Faction, and the civilian corps profiting from the enhanced security, to fight like never before to retain complete control of the system. 5: More combat would happen than ever before in the FW setting, all to protect those who desire an area of complete safety. 6: Whenever we hear the phrase "High Sec is supposed to be safe" we can cheerfully direct them to speak with the FW corp of their choice. Just something I've been playing around with... I'm also a fan of shaking things up in unexpected ways. Edit: A pop up when you enter system advising you that it is under Martial Law would add an interesting touch of flavor.
Awesome awesome ideas dude!
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
312
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 21:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ranger
I haven't thought through your idea entirely -( would enemy militia still be able to fight eachother if not how could they win the system back?)
But the thing is you are on the right track because the benefits do not go directly to the militias. The changes that happen can be very big but not give the winning side a direct advantage in the war. Otherwise everyone will continue to join the winning team.
The way you are thinking is the way I hope ccp starts thinking about this. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Jita Alt666
982
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 22:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ranger where is your blog? |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Angry Mustellid Iron Oxide.
113
|
Posted - 2012.04.02 22:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
Losing docking rights would be fine if it took more than 7 hours to flip a system.
If there was plexing and then a timer before the bunker went vulnerable to actually give defenders a chance it might be ok, I dont know about you but I frequently sleep / work for more than 7 hours at a time. |
|
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
312
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 03:51:00 -
[11] - Quote
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:Losing docking rights would be fine if it took more than 7 hours to flip a system.
If there was plexing and then a timer before the bunker went vulnerable to actually give defenders a chance it might be ok, I dont know about you but I frequently sleep / work for more than 7 hours at a time.
I wonder if it shouldn't take less time to flip a system. Right now I can run a plex and have several wartargets just sit in system and not even bother trying to stop me. There is absolutely no sense of urgency. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Graelyn
Knights of Kador
229
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 04:46:00 -
[12] - Quote
Assuming big things like station ownership will change, and that things like 7hr flip possibilities won't change, seems short sighted.
Save the rage for we have some solid intel to really freak out about. + Cardinal Graelyn + Owner/Operator, "The Summit" YR113 Amarr Loyalist of the Year
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
1427
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Ranger
I haven't thought through your idea entirely -( would enemy militia still be able to fight eachother if not how could they win the system back?)
But the thing is you are on the right track because the benefits do not go directly to the militias. The changes that happen can be very big but not give the winning side a direct advantage in the war. Otherwise everyone will continue to join the winning team.
The way you are thinking is the way I hope ccp starts thinking about this.
Cearain, since the Factions are technically at war with each other in their own way I think it would be fairly easy to justify combat between them to continue normally.
The interesting thing about this would be the fact that if targeting was not allowed (except NPC's and War Targets... and I think normal criminal flagging would have to apply as well) then neutral repping from outside the Faction could not happen in this system. About the only way a neutral party could really get involved would be via smart bombs (very limited) or boosting via gang links.
It's quite possible that these Martial Law systems would become not only a haven for those that do not wish combat (but sure don't mind watching it happen around them... and profiting from it), but they could also become the perfect place for people to retreat to if they have a war declaration and do not want the normal interference from neutral reppers.
Jitaalt666 I'm ashamed to say I've never taken the time to start a blog.
Shukuzen Kiraa, thanks! When I check troll in the dictionary, it has a photo shopped picture of you standing somewhere in the vicinity of a point.
Also, I can kill you with my brain. |
Shamrock1
Raiders of Cerberus.
7
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
If things are going to be as they say they are the GL caldari. As For my Amarr brosefs be at teh 2:30 fleets to be blobbed in to submission at least we'll have a laugh. |
Shamrock1
Raiders of Cerberus.
7
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:53:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tressin Khiyne wrote:Typical. Whine about FW not getting enough attention and then whine that the attention it gets isn't what you want. Quote: If its true about the stations being taken over by factions then wtf are you doing ccp ? You are turning low sec into 0.0. And that is just ********. Low sec FW does not want to be 0.0. So you'd rather fight in FW and have your victories (and losses) mean nothing?
Its not that they mean nothing its the fact it can be a one sided affair, that is the real concern. Yes I agree that FW's a great tool to prepare noobs/corps/alliances for the road to come if they wish to further themselves in a 0.0 life style. But on the same hand Faction wars is faction wars and they're needs to be outlandish differences in the way things are handled. Station take overs sound amusing and add dimension to the FW system. There are out going fleets but not enough of them, CCP needs to address the issue that it is WAR and in war you kill ppl. With that said up the LP for a player being killed by an enemy militia member flat LP of 1k and varying degrees of LP for the rank killed. Add standings gain for enough players killed that attribute towards promotion.
I've been known to be a mean frak so if a system is taken by an enemy faction take 10k LP for a corporations LP bank. Oh did i mention maybe corps should have an LP bank not just for FW corps but for all corps. This would(I hope) encourage most corps to actively do things with each other and in turn for the FW corps who don't normally have indy guys to be industrious. Or the Pure PvP corps to have a supporting feature for they're members. **** tax when you can go LP! |
kiki mo
Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
22
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 15:59:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:I would like to see FW affect the security level of low sec systems. If fact I'd like to see something controversial... namely I'd like to see FW not only be able to turn a low sec system into an area just as secure as high sec is now, but (while they retain control of the system) have the option to make it even MORE secure than current high sec. Before anyone has a heart attack, there is a reason for this statement coming from someone as outspoken as myself on maintaining the dangerous nature of the EVE universe. If a Faction that managed to get complete, top level control over a system had the ability to say disable the targeting systems of all ships in the system (except when targeting NPCs or war targets), and if the ability to lose control of the system still existed through various means, you would gain: 1: The knowledge that as a FW pilot you made significant, earth shaking changes to the game as a whole. 2: Empire dwellers would cheer you on by the thousands, throwing support in your direction at an unprescedented level. 3: Motivate the opposing factions (and perhaps others) to break your control over that system at ALL costs. 4: Motivate your Faction, and the civilian corps profiting from the enhanced security, to fight like never before to retain complete control of the system. 5: More combat would happen than ever before in the FW setting, all to protect those who desire an area of complete safety. 6: Whenever we hear the phrase "High Sec is supposed to be safe" we can cheerfully direct them to speak with the FW corp of their choice. Just something I've been playing around with... I'm also a fan of shaking things up in unexpected ways. Edit: A pop up when you enter system advising you that it is under Martial Law would add an interesting touch of flavor.
Interesting ideas here...more than what I've seen CCP put forth.
In addition to the actual empire 'factions' you talk about, what about including some criminal factions as well? for example:
- Criminal faction ownership in a lowsec system would reduce the security rating of the entire system. -- Gate Guns would respond to positive-security invaders (and anyone with negative standing towards that criminal faction) just as hisec gate guns and NPC police respond to criminals there and lowsec gate guns fire on those with negative faction - Criminal faction ownership of a station would reduce docking rights for those negative to that faction. -- Station Guns and NPC 'Police' around the station would respond to invaders as well.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |