open All Channels
seplocked Warfare & Tactics
blankseplocked Proposal for FW
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Kael'Jierr
Posted - 2010.03.28 23:11:00 - [1]
 

As a possible fix for the current meaningless system-capture play, I propose that members of a faction receive a bonus to shield/armor/structure HP (1%? 5%?) while in a system their faction currently controls.

Thoughts?

Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta
Posted - 2010.03.28 23:41:00 - [2]
 

We need the people inside the plexes fighting for plexes.

That is not going to help with it.

Aerilis
Gallente
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2010.03.29 00:33:00 - [3]
 

This isn't bad.... do this CCP!

Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
Posted - 2010.03.29 00:50:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Jin Nib on 29/03/2010 00:50:23
The answer is minefields. Minefields solve everything.

Seriously though, thats not a bad direction to be considering, however it needs to be worked out a lot more then that. If an idea like this were to be implemented though, it still doesn't solve the awful mechanics of the plexxing system. Also it'd be nice to have degrees of occupancy affecting the amount of bonuses.

In addition while its great to give the defenders something, in systems where the sovereignty or whatever is originally of the other faction (lets say occupancy Calamari sovereignty Frog for instance) it be good to give the attackers something (like more agility or whatever) as well (representing dissident forces helping them or whatever fluff).

Once again it's obvious that there is a lot of potential with FW, but no drive to realize any of it on CCP's part, or even come up with goals they want to see happen out there.

Lord Zekk
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
The Fourth District
Posted - 2010.03.29 01:23:00 - [5]
 

We said the same things for over a year. It's been a year since we left for 0.0 and you guys are echoing the same stuff yet again. CCP doesn't care.

GavinGoodrich
Posted - 2010.03.29 03:37:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Lord Zekk
We said the same things for over a year. It's been a year since we left for 0.0 and you guys are echoing the same stuff yet again. CCP doesn't care.


This.

Hidden Snake
Caldari
Inglorious-Basterds
Posted - 2010.03.29 06:52:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: GavinGoodrich
Originally by: Lord Zekk
We said the same things for over a year. It's been a year since we left for 0.0 and you guys are echoing the same stuff yet again. CCP doesn't care.


This.
unfortunately this .... i am waiting for major change since I left 22nd BRDU and they went to null

Vincent Death
Inglorious-Basterds
Posted - 2010.03.29 10:40:00 - [8]
 

Every time a system is taken every player in the opposing Faction loses a random ship.

Hidden Snake
Caldari
Inglorious-Basterds
Posted - 2010.03.29 14:21:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Vincent Death
Every time a system is taken every player in the opposing Faction loses a random ship.
ok we are fine with our hangars full of Condors.

Lord Ryan
Derailleurs
Posted - 2010.03.29 14:58:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Vincent Death
Every time a system is taken every player in the opposing Faction loses a random ship.


I lose enough ships, thank you!

I3igJo
Awakened Brotherhood
Atomic Deliverance Construction
Posted - 2010.03.30 14:26:00 - [11]
 

The Idea is not bad but in fact, this can make a system impossible to own for ennemies. especialy those big PVP Alliance witch most of them are allready so strong and realy well trained.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2010.03.30 21:18:00 - [12]
 

I'm not sure the meaninglessness should be fixed.


If they implemented your proposal who would want to join the losing side? Right now Amarr is losing pilots and systems. This would just accelerate that trend. Even I might leave the Amarr militia if I have to fight all the war targets with a hp handicap.


I think CCP first should fix the bugs of plexing before they tie any sort of significance to it. Then award more LP for capturing plexes. I also think they should remove npcs from plexes and just let the player militias know what plexes are being run. That way the players can decide if they want to fight for them or not. NPCs are unbalanced and having CCP trying to balance them is just a big pia IMO.

Guillame Herschel
Gallente
NME1
Posted - 2010.03.30 22:28:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Lord Zekk
It's been a year since we left for 0.0 .


Cool story, bro.

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2010.03.30 22:58:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Cearain
I'm not sure the meaninglessness should be fixed.


If they implemented your proposal who would want to join the losing side? Right now Amarr is losing pilots and systems. This would just accelerate that trend. Even I might leave the Amarr militia if I have to fight all the war targets with a hp handicap.


I think CCP first should fix the bugs of plexing before they tie any sort of significance to it. Then award more LP for capturing plexes. I also think they should remove npcs from plexes and just let the player militias know what plexes are being run. That way the players can decide if they want to fight for them or not. NPCs are unbalanced and having CCP trying to balance them is just a big pia IMO.



This ^^. Also : pvp stats are bad, but I fully support (rich) financial incentives. I'd love to see free repairing in stations: good for combat pilots, and it could open up a whole new industry for FW players.

Julius Foederatus
Posted - 2010.04.01 01:22:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Julius Foederatus on 01/04/2010 01:22:42
Personally I'd like to make it so that militiamen can't dock in a station in a system under the control of the enemy militia. It's rather ridiculous atm that the biggest strongholds for the Gallente militia are in Nisuwa, and the big forward posts for the Caldari are in Oicx and Ladistier, Ladistier being the only system controlled by the Caldari militia.

GavinGoodrich
Posted - 2010.04.01 01:32:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Julius Foederatus
Edited by: Julius Foederatus on 01/04/2010 01:22:42
Personally I'd like to make it so that militiamen can't dock in a station in a system under the control of the enemy militia. It's rather ridiculous atm that the biggest strongholds for the Gallente militia are in Nisuwa, and the big forward posts for the Caldari are in Oicx and Ladistier, Ladistier being the only system controlled by the Caldari militia.


This. It's not the most complicated incentive, and actually adds strategic value.

Please. Something. Anything. Most people I've talked to in FW are cool with some sort of incentive like this involving the stations.

Super Chair
Caldari
Hell's Revenge
Posted - 2010.04.01 03:37:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Julius Foederatus
Edited by: Julius Foederatus on 01/04/2010 01:22:42
Personally I'd like to make it so that militiamen can't dock in a station in a system under the control of the enemy militia. It's rather ridiculous atm that the biggest strongholds for the Gallente militia are in Nisuwa, and the big forward posts for the Caldari are in Oicx and Ladistier, Ladistier being the only system controlled by the Caldari militia.



Under that logic wouldn't you guys lose the ability to reship in heyd? Surprised

Wallinstar
Posted - 2010.04.01 04:01:00 - [18]
 

Istead of docking restrictions occupancy should affect system gate guns. You have occupancy? Gate guns shoot your enemy. Simple change but oh so quite powerfull incetive.

Addition to the above could be guns in stations which would in additoin stop docking games.

lookatzebirdie
Posted - 2010.04.01 06:59:00 - [19]
 

sounds like a great way to make sure fleets refuse to engage except in their own back yard, just another reason to blob.

Lord Zekk
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
The Fourth District
Posted - 2010.04.01 09:29:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Wallinstar
Istead of docking restrictions occupancy should affect system gate guns. You have occupancy? Gate guns shoot your enemy. Simple change but oh so quite powerfull incetive.

Addition to the above could be guns in stations which would in additoin stop docking games.


This is a bad idea considering FWar is meant to get people in to PVP. This means there will be a lot of frigates. You don't want to be worried that the gate guns will get you every time you warp to or from a gate.

Seriously guys, stop wasting your time. CCP isn't listening. I really wish they were. We have discussed the issue to death and plenty of really good and bad ideas have been thought of and worked on.

Though I still secretly hope that one of you guys will get through to CCP. It's not that I think they don't care, because they do so much for this game, but FW is not high up enough on their list of priorities.

Julius Foederatus
Posted - 2010.04.01 12:26:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Super Chair
Under that logic wouldn't you guys lose the ability to reship in heyd? Surprised


Yeah, so what? Just creates more of an incentive to take it back.

Annie Anomie
Shadows Of The Federation
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:49:00 - [22]
 

Making the system capture mechanic better is the way forward imo.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2010.04.01 15:29:00 - [23]
 

There is no need for hard feelings that faction war doesn't do/mean more. I mean, lighten up, it's faction war. Its a great way to pvp in this game without taking sec status hits and also avoiding null sec anxiety issues. FW is even more laid back than wormholing, and I'm glad about that.

The issue of denying access to stations was brought up at the below link.

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1289813

FW doesn't have allot big consequences. I think that is a good thing. If you start adding big advantages to the winning side no one will join the losing side.

I think CCP needs to fix some bugs and do a few other things that would improve fw. But on the whole I think it works pretty well. I also happen to think the changes CCP has made to fw have more often been good than bad.

Julius Foederatus
Posted - 2010.04.01 15:49:00 - [24]
 

Revoking docking rights is something that's tangible enough to encourage people to participate in system capture, but not harsh enough to penalize people too much. Plus, it will mean that pvp will occur in other systems besides the bloody Tama/OMS pipe, as you'll have to actually own a system to use it as a base.

Greg6
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2010.04.01 16:06:00 - [25]
 

I'd vote against tying docking rights or station guns to occupancy. Either one brings FW closer to 0.0 and if I wanted to go 0.0, with the alarm clock operation, huge slugfests, and so on I would.

The plexing system is obviously unfun to a big chunk of players and should be fixed. My vote would be to change the respawn mechanic so that plexes always, immediately, respawned in the system the were closed in. Want to take a system? Run 20 plexes in it in a row and it's yours. Or at least make that true in two or three CCP designated "hot spots," each week. Also give LP for taking plexes and systems.

But really, if we're serious about seeing any attention given to FW by CCP I think we need to focus on running FW focused candidates to the CSM. Every year. Bring a consistent set of reasonable observations to CCP via the mechanic they have in place. Do that for a few years and we may see progress, me thinks. :)


Kel Nissa
Posted - 2010.04.01 18:36:00 - [26]
 

Quote:
We said the same things for over a year. It's been a year since we left for 0.0 and you guys are echoing the same stuff yet again. CCP doesn't care.


This.

FW is more or less constantly dying since it was released. It does not seem like CCP wanted to finish it. There was a dev collecting some ideas some month ago (feel free to find his thread) but it just felt like he was also not really interested into fixing FW.

Unctom
Minmatar
Nomadic Wayfarer Syndicate
Posted - 2010.04.01 19:00:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Unctom on 01/04/2010 19:00:59
This is proof CCP cares about FW:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvvbbVlaJ44

Try not to notice how bored CCP Hammerhead looks while people are talking.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2010.04.02 14:28:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Unctom
Edited by: Unctom on 01/04/2010 19:00:59
This is proof CCP cares about FW:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvvbbVlaJ44

Try not to notice how bored CCP Hammerhead looks while people are talking.



Yes there are certain bugs that everyone agrees need to be fixed in fw. But IMO they do not equate to fw being "broken." Players consistently reject ideas like the ops. I have nothing against the op and even though I disagree with his proposal Im glad he is at least offering a concrete idea.

The problem with the ops idea is many/most fw players are not interested in being faced with the bleak ultimatum of either orbit a button for hours on end, or fight with a hp handicap.

There are only two types of posts that really get support in assembly hall: 1) vague "fix faction war" posts, where specifics are officially proposed. Or 2) fix specific bugs.

Sure the first one (fix fw) gets lots of support but the thing is people often have drastically different ideas of what fix fw might *mean*. Some want more npcs and more npc interaction (eg you must make gallente/amarr npcs tougher, they must all be killed in order to take a plex, or even use the sleeper ai) Then on the other hand you have people like me who want less npc involvement. I think Npcs should be done away with entirely in plexes. Then we have the Nerf missions! and Boost missions! crowds. I can go on and on. Yes everyone wants a fix for fw but they often have drastically different ideas of what this means.

As for bug fixes and few things that I consider more or less minor tweaks(albeit not technically bugs) there is agreement. Yes the npcs should be balanced if they are going to play a role. Yes the timer bugs should be corrected. Yes if we are going to use npcs they should attack the opposing militia despite the standing of that militia member.

However, whenever we get specific idea that really makes occupancy important proposed it gets very little support. That is true for this topic and its true for the idea of not allowing docking. See the thread I posted.

Yes when it comes to the bugs I agree CCP needs to move on this. But since occupancy really doesnt effect anything I can see why bugs about occupancy take a back seat to fixing lag that is causing fleets of capital ships to be lost. Its not that I think the Null sec is more important I almost never go into null sec. Its just that I can understand that the bugs where players have a bigger stake should take priority within reason. CCP does need to draw a line and say at some point they will get these fw bugs fixed.

But beyond this I dont think CCP is ignoring us. Its just that we are not in agreement on what exactly we want done in fw. If we want specific changes then specific changes should be proposed in the assembly hall. If any get significant support then csm should raise the issue. But dont be surprised if when we get down to *specific* proposals (other than bug fixes) for faction war we find very little agreement.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only