open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked A personal plea to the new CSM
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Seriphyn Inhonores
Gallente
Eleutherian Guard
Posted - 2011.03.26 21:50:00 - [1]
 

The new CSM is composed of 6 nullsec players. Two of which are Goons. Out of the remaining two, there is a Rooks & Kings member, so I suppose that speaks for lowsec.

I, however, want to bring up the point that FW has received no attention by Fanfest or the recent CSM candidates. Over 20,000 people play FW right now. CCP spent all this development time on incursions; why couldn't they make a similar mechanic for factional warfare?

Anyway, I request to the new CSM that you take into the count this considerable section of the playerbase, by passing on concerns of FW to CCP. Perhaps it could be a nullsec-lite in terms of territory control? Make occupancy MATTER?

All the same stuff that has been said since June 2008 when it was first introduced. It is still 1.0

Cheers.

White Tree
Gallente
Broski Federation
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.03.26 21:56:00 - [2]
 

For the most part we're aware that faction warfare is basically terrible, and lowsec generally needs a lot of work. I'd love to see some changes made that would make lowsec more profitable for smaller alliances and corporations, and making PVP easier to do in lowsec.

Pirokobo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.26 22:04:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Pirokobo on 26/03/2011 22:05:25
Originally by: Seriphyn Inhonores
The new CSM is composed of 6 nullsec players. Two of which are Goons. Out of the remaining two, there is a Rooks & Kings member, so I suppose that speaks for lowsec.

I, however, want to bring up the point that FW has received no attention by Fanfest or the recent CSM candidates. Over 20,000 people play FW right now. CCP spent all this development time on incursions; why couldn't they make a similar mechanic for factional warfare?

Anyway, I request to the new CSM that you take into the count this considerable section of the playerbase, by passing on concerns of FW to CCP. Perhaps it could be a nullsec-lite in terms of territory control? Make occupancy MATTER?

All the same stuff that has been said since June 2008 when it was first introduced. It is still 1.0

Cheers.


I believe everyone will find that nullsec players are far more interested in the balance and long term health of lowsec then anyone else is, as we have a much greater investment in the health of the entire game.

Faction Warfare is broken, but there aren't many solutions to the problem that aren't exploitable. CCP won't incentivize people to blow each other up because it's easy to farm.

I agree with your assessment that occupancy must matter. Turn this idea over in your head:

Consider if CCP created a new belt resource used for something important (new t3 stuff?) that is:
A. Only extractable from FW system belts.
B. Specific to each faction based on system control.
C. ONLY extractable by FW participants.

The second point being important, that the success of one faction has an impact on the supply of the other faction's resource. Whichever faction controls the system determines what spawns. The market price of the resources encourages more people to participate in one faction's side.

Draco Llasa
Thundercats
Posted - 2011.03.26 22:40:00 - [4]
 

im with ya mate.. i think factional warfare had the potential to be a great game mechanic but it was left to rot like so many.. personally i think the incursion AI and mechanics should have been wrapped up and put out as a type of FW2, along with some sort of low sec sov mechanics that resembled 0.0 stuff.. obviously adjusted for proper use in low sec.
too much pve, not enough pvp, and no real point. holding space in FW doesn't appear to mean anything.

Im not a FW person and can not represent it 100% from personal exp, but def willing to take feedback and present it during any relevant conversations.

Seriphyn Inhonores
Gallente
Eleutherian Guard
Posted - 2011.03.27 01:36:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Seriphyn Inhonores on 27/03/2011 01:38:02
I do not hang out with the blob-fleets much, instead I sit back and take part in plexing. I've done this since September 2009 and thus have extensive experience in it, that I can share in depth with you at some point, but I'll do a quick ramble about it here.

Plexing is a fantastic method for small-group or solo PvP. I've had the best fights ever in these plexes, it's basically the same as belts; no station docks, no gate jumping, no escape. With Gallente NPCs (the blaster range of which suck, making them non-existent), you literally have this open area of space to shoot around in and manuever. Really fantastic fights that demand a LOT of skill that I cannot stress enough. This is the one good thing about the FW mechanic I can point out.

But then, these plexes mean nothing other than kudos. Take Caldari NPCs. They jam. So you can't have these fantastic fights in Caldari plexes; you have to warp out (moreover, you have to fit for PvE!). I also hear Minmatar web, and Amarr tracking disrupt; all this form of EWAR makes plexfighting a lot more difficult compared to Gallente's weak damping.

With Tyrannis, CCP missed an opportunity to integrate Planetary Interaction with Factional Warfare. I, as a Gallente, can go build PINs on New Caldari Prime. I can build it on worlds in Caldari lowsec. Apparently in nullsec, you can't build PINs in planets you don't have sov in? Why does this not apply to FW?

CCP could have, in the interim of providing a FW 2.0, altered the NPCs exclusively used for FW. Remove EWAR for all factions, for example. They did not, however.

I will pose one thing I would like to take you to CCP; will DUST and FW be connected? IMO, it HAS to be. There is no way around this in terms of creating their "believable" universe. What is the point of the Minmatar controlling an Amarr system, if the planets are all controlled by non-aligned mercenaries?

Thanks for showing interest! Smile

Quick edit - CCP has also stated they want players to affect the storyline, by talking about live events and incursions. FW did this with the Gallente and Caldari during 2009-10. So why are they ignoring it now?

Chinwe Rhei
Minmatar
Tribal Liberation Force
Posted - 2011.03.27 10:19:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Chinwe Rhei on 27/03/2011 10:25:58
Originally by: Pirokobo

I agree with your assessment that occupancy must matter. Turn this idea over in your head:

Consider if CCP created a new belt resource used for something important (new t3 stuff?) that is:
A. Only extractable from FW system belts.
B. Specific to each faction based on system control.
C. ONLY extractable by FW participants.



I hope that's just meant to be a troll and not a sample of a typical nullsec player's understanding of FW because jesus christ the militia dosen't need belt miners.
There are enough stealth bomber mission runners that avoid all pvp as it is (did we mention faction warfare is just fine isk incentive-wise and you can make a fortune out of FW LPs).

What Occupancy should give is something like system-wide bonuses to one faction's ships or another's or even having FW militia stations change sides to the occupying force (e.g. a TLF station becomes a 24th crusade station on Amarr occupancy and it now gives missions for that faction instead and the standings adjust accordingly).

In addition they need to fix the plexes already so t2 and the new faction ships are in the same plex size and dramiels don't **** on every newbie's plexing fun.
Having plexes spawn at other times except downtime would be nice as well.

Btw there's been one small FW iteration back in 2009 (devblog) which was pretty decent actually. But their promise of that being "the first step of many to put its implementation back into the original vision that was ours during the Empyrean Age release" never materialised (surprise).

If any of you CSM people is actually seriously interested about representing FW warfare you should probably contact the leaders of some of the major FW corps (don't listen to me, i just poke around every once in a while, but there's plenty of bitter FW vets) rather than do the same thing you accused the previous CSM of doing and thinking you can give feedback based on what you imagine FW might be like.

Butch Leupold
Caldari
Garden of Kadesh
Beanbag Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.27 12:24:00 - [7]
 

I actually did talk about this in my election campaign.

Quote:
Ok lets talk about a few things... - Faction Warfare. What's the point? So you get to be up another race (kinda like a constant war dec for those who wish to participate). But what do you really get out of it? what is the benefits of being part of the militia? some recommendations have been a boost to LP (to to double depending on how much control of a system you have for missions.) Others recommend LP for every kill you get. For you militia out there, what do you think?


Notwithstanding the Alt spies that are rampant in Caldari Militia, would love to see some type of bonus other than standing for FW.

Whatcha say there CSM? Fly safe guys!

Butch

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.27 16:07:00 - [8]
 

Both lowsec and factionwarfare desperately need iteration, according to elvenlord (who I'm having coffee with in this reyk cafe) there's a pile of fw-related items languishing in the backlog already from past csms. That backlog, in general, is the primary issue confronting the whole playerbase.

Flynn Fetladral
Royal Order of Security Specialists
Posted - 2011.03.27 16:30:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Seriphyn Inhonores
The new CSM is composed of 6 nullsec players. Two of which are Goons. Out of the remaining two, there is a Rooks & Kings member, so I suppose that speaks for lowsec.

I, however, want to bring up the point that FW has received no attention by Fanfest or the recent CSM candidates. Over 20,000 people play FW right now. CCP spent all this development time on incursions; why couldn't they make a similar mechanic for factional warfare?

Anyway, I request to the new CSM that you take into the count this considerable section of the playerbase, by passing on concerns of FW to CCP. Perhaps it could be a nullsec-lite in terms of territory control? Make occupancy MATTER?

All the same stuff that has been said since June 2008 when it was first introduced. It is still 1.0

Cheers.


+1 Faction Warfare needs a hug!

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.27 18:44:00 - [10]
 

I don't think anyone disagrees that FW needs love.

The problem is that there are so many areas of the game that need love, and the challenge for CSM is making the best possible representations to CCP about where they are going to get the most bang for the buck with their limited development resources.

I personally would like to see some work done on FW and lowsec -- but I also think that "fixing" lowsec, in particular with regard to making piracy less marginal as an occupation, is probably the hardest game design challenge in EVE.

With respect to getting FW love in the short term, probably the most likely way to do it is to identify a menu of small changes to the current system that would eliminate the biggest problems, so that they could be attacked in whole or in part by a group like Team BFF.

Pirokobo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.27 20:39:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Pirokobo on 27/03/2011 20:51:13
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
identify a menu of small changes to the current system that would eliminate the biggest problems


That's easy.

1. There is no compelling economic reason for people to be there.
2. There aren't many economic incentives CCP can grant for activity in lowsec that aren't:
2A. Easily exploited (pvp kill rewards).
or
2B. At risk of being monopolized by nullsec alliances.

There is a compelling socioeconomic reason which compels nullsec alliances. Our space is literally ours, we own the stations and can build them where we will, we decide who gets to dock and use services, we decide what systems we connect with bridges, we control the income from our moons.

None of this is the case in lowsec. There is no really apparent gain or loss in controlling or losing space for your faction.

The faction warfare players fight for their respective empire "alliances" but they receive absolutely none of the benefits that they would be afforded as "par for the course" in anything but OWN Alliance. The paltry faction lp rewards are hilariously pitiful compared to the ship reimbursement programs offered by every serious spaceholding entity. If I lose a drake or a maelstrom in a system I've been told to be in on a sanctioned op, I get a new drake or maelstrom. That simple, end of story, because I was present when my alliance needed numbers in location x at time t.

If a faction warfare player loses his ship in a faction warfare system, what does he get for his troubles?

An Ibis and 1 unit of Tritanium.

Butch Leupold
Caldari
Garden of Kadesh
Beanbag Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.29 01:23:00 - [12]
 

Quote:
If a faction warfare player loses his ship in a faction warfare system, what does he get for his troubles? An Ibis and 1 unit of Tritanium.


Here here!

How about a Militia Store where we can get Faction goodies?

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.03.29 08:10:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: The Mittani
... there's a pile of fw-related items languishing in the backlog already from past csms. That backlog, in general, is the primary issue confronting the whole playerbase.

Well yeah, we have been screaming for CCP to address it almost since beginning and gotten bugs (and later fix for bugs) in return Very Happy

Problem is that for a meaningful FW/Low fix to be made an obscene amount of man-hours has to be allocated, which translates into a full expansion or more.
I would much prefer that my home be properly renovated rather than having putty thrown in the obvious cracks.

Lag is draining server and developer resources. Sort out Dominion as originally envisioned (small scale pew/flux) so that the blobbage ebbs and send the freed up devs our way .. we don't bite, honest!

Kalle Demos
Amarr
Helix Protocol
Posted - 2011.03.29 08:52:00 - [14]
 

Honest question to the CSM here, can you guys actually explain what is wrong with FW? I mean its like you guys are saying "FW is broken", hell even during the campaigning Mittani and other Goons said 'Faction Warfare wasnt lucrative" WTF?

Do any of the CSM even have a clue what is wrong with FW and why people ***** about it?

Pirokobo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.29 16:07:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Kalle Demos
Do any of the CSM even have a clue what is wrong with FW and why people ***** about it?


So are you saying that you disagree and that FA is fine as is? Or are you merely trying to equate lack of a definition with insincerity?

Centri Sixx
Posted - 2011.03.29 16:16:00 - [16]
 

You don't get it, the whole point of the null bloc getting elected was to forestall any nerfs to null space. That's why they spammed voting with their botting alts. Don't expect them to do anything but that.

Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
Posted - 2011.03.29 18:15:00 - [17]
 

I'm glad to hear this csm is of the mind that fw is worth ccp time. I can certainly agree with seriphyn that the small scale fights that happen in plexes are a real boon to eve as a whole. And I really think CCP could greatly increase the subscriptions if they done some well thought out fine tuning here. I also agree that npcs in plexes work to prevent pvp on many different levels.

Realistically I don't expect much for fw until incarna is nailed down and they finish up some dominion mechanics. I just hope incarna doesn't linger on sucking resources past the 18 months (December of 2011).

A couple of general points about fw. As has been mentioned FW is sort of a unique situation. It never really ends. And players can choose whatever militia they want.

The problem is if you make the winning side get direct advantages people will tend to join the winning side. I mean do you want to join the side that has unique or better resources and maybe even a boost to shields and armor, or the side without these benefits? Other than the odd role player, people will continue to pile on the winning side making the war more and more lopsided.

Right now players may actually join the losing side so that they have more targets. Thatís really a pretty good thing. That said I do think they can make some consequences for occupancy. But they would need to be more of the indirect variety.

Karadion
Posted - 2011.03.29 19:16:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Pirokobo
Originally by: Kalle Demos
Do any of the CSM even have a clue what is wrong with FW and why people ***** about it?


So are you saying that you disagree and that FA is fine as is? Or are you merely trying to equate lack of a definition with insincerity?
What do you expect from a blithering idiot who attacks Mittani just because Mittani is a goon? A good post? HA! When pigs fly.

E man Industries
Posted - 2011.03.29 19:31:00 - [19]
 

To bad people did not vote for Rippard Teg as he was actually an FC is faction warfare fairly recently.

Zelda Wei
Caldari
New Horizon Trade Exchange
Posted - 2011.05.28 14:33:00 - [20]
 


Mocam
Posted - 2011.06.06 04:05:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Chinwe Rhei
Edited by: Chinwe Rhei on 27/03/2011 10:25:58
Originally by: Pirokobo

I agree with your assessment that occupancy must matter. Turn this idea over in your head:

Consider if CCP created a new belt resource used for something important (new t3 stuff?) that is:
A. Only extractable from FW system belts.
B. Specific to each faction based on system control.
C. ONLY extractable by FW participants.



I hope that's just meant to be a troll and not a sample of a typical nullsec player's understanding of FW because jesus christ the militia dosen't need belt miners.
There are enough stealth bomber mission runners that avoid all pvp as it is (did we mention faction warfare is just fine isk incentive-wise and you can make a fortune out of FW LPs).

What Occupancy should give is something like system-wide bonuses to one faction's ships or another's or even having FW militia stations change sides to the occupying force (e.g. a TLF station becomes a 24th crusade station on Amarr occupancy and it now gives missions for that faction instead and the standings adjust accordingly).

In addition they need to fix the plexes already so t2 and the new faction ships are in the same plex size and dramiels don't **** on every newbie's plexing fun.
Having plexes spawn at other times except downtime would be nice as well.

Btw there's been one small FW iteration back in 2009 (devblog) which was pretty decent actually. But their promise of that being "the first step of many to put its implementation back into the original vision that was ours during the Empyrean Age release" never materialised (surprise).

If any of you CSM people is actually seriously interested about representing FW warfare you should probably contact the leaders of some of the major FW corps (don't listen to me, i just poke around every once in a while, but there's plenty of bitter FW vets) rather than do the same thing you accused the previous CSM of doing and thinking you can give feedback based on what you imagine FW might be like.



Honestly, if they don't have alts involved in it, they probably don't know what the hell is going on and will find it of little importance. That doesn't mean CCP will ignore it.

Check the answers to the community. FW was talked about with more certitude of "known issues" than gallente ships/hybrids so at least you can hold onto the fact that CCP is "aware".

Do I hold this to mean CCP *WILL* fix it? Hell no. I do see it as something they *MAY* do regardless of what the CSM may want as a priority. The CSM helps provide feedback but they don't decide what CCP will or will not do.

Rer Eirikr
Gallente
Clearly Compensating
Concordiat Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.06 06:55:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Zelda Wei
CSM 6 Leading you into disaster.


Yea, how dare they read threads and have legitimate conversations about game mechanics, even going so far as to admit they don't know everything! Rolling Eyes


 

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