These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

CSM Minutes on Faction Warfare

Author
Shaalira D'arc
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-01-17 17:52:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Shaalira D'arc
The full link can be found here.

Quote:

Little things – Factional Warfare, Wormholes
Present: CCP Soundwave
Factional Warfare

CCP has begun some concept work on how they want FW to evolve in the medium- to long-term. Some iterations to FW may be possible as soon as summer 2012. They would like to merge the FW and 0.0 sov system capture mechanics somewhat, but are not happy with either of the current mechanics.

CCP would like to inject some of the drama that surrounds the CSM election system into FW, by having some sort of in-game election of militia leaders/admirals. This would help move some of the 0.0 style politics/revenge/spying into FW. Another important addition to this system would be some real power/consequences for system ownership, such as the elected leaders being able to set things like tax rates in lowsec stations that they control (and having some of this tax ISK flow to the faction). The leadership would be able to set strategic goals as well as adjust settings for the new FW benefits.

Some of the CSM members expressed some concern that FW issues would greatly impact pirate organizations that live in the area, and wanted to make sure that non-FW entities would be able to neutralize FW control in some way (by blowing stuff up, preferably). CCP agreed to take that into account when designing the system, but that the important thing was to make FW meaningful and fun.

CCP mentioned that letting alliances join FW was supposed to be a Crucible feature, but was not completed in time. It will be released in the very near future, so that groups that want to participate in FW don't need to break up their existing social structures in order to join. Some CSM members noted that this, in addition to the election mechanics, would allow nullsec entities to co-opt FW groups.

On the question of where FW revenues would go, CCP suggested that they would be able to be used for system upgrades; an example was to increase LP payouts or something similar.

The CSM suggested that one of the major issues with lowsec was the large increase in risk with a much smaller increase in rewards. It was suggested that allowing FW upgrades to decrease risk, such as making probes less effective in a system, would help draw people into lowsec. This brought up a side conversation about how the current probing mechanics has negatively impacted tactics like sniping, which is an issue CCP is aware of. CCP suggested that in the long term, they would like to see the possibility of FW folks taking over nearby high and nullsec systems, and turning them into FW-controlled systems. Some CSMs suggested that FW could be used as a testbed for new capture mechanics, since FW would be smaller scale than nullsec.

The CSM presented a list of smaller issues that were raised by the FW community. CCP promised to look at the list, but pointed out that issues that had to do with Crimewatch (the system that manages aggression timers, security status hits, criminal flags and other lowsec mechanics) were unlikely to be addressed without the Crimewatch rewrite that CCP is planning.

(Reference to 'Crimewatch' points to the introductory chapter in the minutes which says this....)

The first planned step in this direction (and remember, plans CAN change) is to take a look at War, i.e. what is it about conflict that needs to be iterated on so that all groups of players can enjoy it more? How can we further encourage conflict? Obviously the term ‘conflict’ is a very broad term, but it does encompasses 0.0, factional warfare, low sec, high sec, official war declarations, etc. The technical debt behind those systems is substantial and looking at those systems has become a priority. One particular example of this is the system called ‘Crime watch’ (an 8 year old system with countless patches and band aids) – the mechanism that handles all aggressions, who is flagged to whom, what timers are running on what characters, etc. Who isn’t familiar with the question of ‘can I shoot this can thief?’, ‘can I shoot the logi pilot repping that hostile?’ or ‘if I fly to this station will the sentry guns shoot at me?’ Thinking about it, players shouldn’t have to ask those questions, the information should be readily (and easily) available to them.
Dark Pangolin
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#2 - 2012-01-17 18:24:27 UTC
Maybe in Summer 2012 or 2013...if we are still in business...
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#3 - 2012-01-17 18:30:35 UTC
Quote:
CCP would like to inject some of the drama that surrounds the CSM election system into FW, by having some
sort of in-game election of militia leaders/admirals


Fleetwarp sujarento for president
Muad 'dib
The Nine Nine
#4 - 2012-01-17 18:49:06 UTC
"Fix FW" never meant delete everything, allow allinces in, force sov etc sounds terrible tbh.

It is fun now and has problems, but dont turn it into somthing SO different eveyrone currently in it who actually enjoys it leave again (most guys who left 0.0 due to bubbles, SOV and drama ANYWAY) *deep sigh*

I hope we do get a year more of the way it is if they are going to ruin it wiht these insane ideas.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.

Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#5 - 2012-01-17 19:18:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Mutnin
Congrats to CCP.. If I had a hat in my character creator I would take it off to you. You have figured out why people join FW to avoid the snore fest of null sec and plan to implement those changes into FW.

Just what FW needs.. EMO raging arm chair generals, structures to shoot and MOAR carebear! It will be awesome.. Roll

Why can't we have hats?
Deen Wispa
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2012-01-17 19:33:00 UTC
Quote:
CCP would like to inject some of the drama that surrounds the CSM election system into FW, by having some sort of in-game election of militia leaders/admirals. This would help move some of the 0.0 style politics/revenge/spying into FW. Another important addition to this system would be some real power/consequences for system ownership, such as the elected leaders being able to set things like tax rates in lowsec stations that they control (and having some of this tax ISK flow to the faction). The leadership would be able to set strategic goals as well as adjust settings for the new FW benefits.


I'm surprised but yet I shouldn't be. The current Nullsec CSM probably suggested these idiotic ideas and now wants to turn FW into nullsec as well.

People join FW so they can avoid the nullsec politicking.

High Five. Yeah! C'est La Eve .

Othran
Route One
#7 - 2012-01-17 19:40:25 UTC
Mutnin wrote:
Just what FW needs.. EMO raging arm chair generals, structures to shoot and MOAR carebear! It will be awesome.. Roll

Why can't we have hats?


But but but Hans says it'll be alright Roll
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#8 - 2012-01-17 19:55:19 UTC
The entirety of plexing mechanics has promise for variety of ship types to be used instead of just battleships, logi, and caps as the order of the day. All we needed was a meaningful reason to fight over plexes. Lower skilled pilots could have an impact on the "war" by fighting in minor plexes forcing the enemy to ship down in order to capture the complex. You had all sorts of fights, frig/dessie brawls, cruiser skirmishes, and BC engagements in majors, and then the eventual cluster **** where everyone flies as big as they want for the bunker bust. CCP should understand that having all shiptypes meaningful is really important to the playstle most of us enjoy in faction war. Players have the option of hoping in a frig and brawling cheaply, or flying bigger ships too. I enjoy the variety. All ship sizes are relevent.

Didn't a few frigs/dessies just recently cap a minor plex making a system no longer vulnerable while a minmatar blob was busting a bunker, buying time for the amarr to rally a counter fleet? I think the current system has a LOT of potential for something dynamic. You could have fights in multiple sized plexes as well as the bunker simutaneously. This excites me. Having one big fleet shooting a structure is kind of boring. I hope they don't completely scrap what's in place. It just needs improving, not removing.
Leeroy McJenkins
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2012-01-17 19:57:33 UTC
Bringing high level organization to FW can only be a good thing.

I Don't play EVE

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#10 - 2012-01-17 20:14:20 UTC
Leeroy McJenkins wrote:
Bringing high level organization to FW can only be a good thing.



You are either not serious, or not getting it.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#11 - 2012-01-17 20:19:00 UTC
I can see it now, as soon as "in game elections are held" everygoon puts an alt in each militia and votes for a mittens alt. This proposed tax Income is then syphoned off to somewhere not relevent to FW. Roll
Deen Wispa
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-01-17 20:24:28 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Leeroy McJenkins wrote:
Bringing high level organization to FW can only be a good thing.



You are either not serious, or not getting it.


He doesn't get it. High level organization brings high level espionage, manipulation, and metagaming. Everybody wants to win, ya know. Which is essentially nullsec; do whatever it takes to bring down your competitor.

There is a price to pay for that level of organization that many of you already have in nullsec. FW pilots don't want to pay that price.

High Five. Yeah! C'est La Eve .

Muad 'dib
The Nine Nine
#13 - 2012-01-17 20:31:26 UTC
FW only exists as it does now, imo, because players are only allowed so much control, thats sorta the freaking piont, its a semi rp/npc feature of the game and should remain so.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.

Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-01-17 20:35:52 UTC
Super Chair wrote:
The entirety of plexing mechanics has promise for variety of ship types to be used instead of just battleships, logi, and caps as the order of the day. All we needed was a meaningful reason to fight over plexes. Lower skilled pilots could have an impact on the "war" by fighting in minor plexes forcing the enemy to ship down in order to capture the complex. You had all sorts of fights, frig/dessie brawls, cruiser skirmishes, and BC engagements in majors, and then the eventual cluster **** where everyone flies as big as they want for the bunker bust. CCP should understand that having all shiptypes meaningful is really important to the playstle most of us enjoy in faction war. Players have the option of hoping in a frig and brawling cheaply, or flying bigger ships too. I enjoy the variety. All ship sizes are relevent.

Didn't a few frigs/dessies just recently cap a minor plex making a system no longer vulnerable while a minmatar blob was busting a bunker, buying time for the amarr to rally a counter fleet? I think the current system has a LOT of potential for something dynamic. You could have fights in multiple sized plexes as well as the bunker simutaneously. This excites me. Having one big fleet shooting a structure is kind of boring. I hope they don't completely scrap what's in place. It just needs improving, not removing.


I agree completely. This is a perfect description of exactly why I personally love FW. I hope CCP gets this.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

MobyMule
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2012-01-17 20:37:37 UTC
Super Chair wrote:
The entirety of plexing mechanics has promise for variety of ship types to be used instead of just battleships, logi, and caps as the order of the day. All we needed was a meaningful reason to fight over plexes. Lower skilled pilots could have an impact on the "war" by fighting in minor plexes forcing the enemy to ship down in order to capture the complex. You had all sorts of fights, frig/dessie brawls, cruiser skirmishes, and BC engagements in majors, and then the eventual cluster **** where everyone flies as big as they want for the bunker bust. CCP should understand that having all shiptypes meaningful is really important to the playstle most of us enjoy in faction war. Players have the option of hoping in a frig and brawling cheaply, or flying bigger ships too. I enjoy the variety. All ship sizes are relevent.

Didn't a few frigs/dessies just recently cap a minor plex making a system no longer vulnerable while a minmatar blob was busting a bunker, buying time for the amarr to rally a counter fleet? I think the current system has a LOT of potential for something dynamic. You could have fights in multiple sized plexes as well as the bunker simutaneously. This excites me. Having one big fleet shooting a structure is kind of boring. I hope they don't completely scrap what's in place. It just needs improving, not removing.



I agree with this post.
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#16 - 2012-01-17 21:06:57 UTC
If they do implement in game elections, giving all the militias tax resources to single leadership entity, its a r e t a r d e d idea considering that those not participating in faction war will find ways to harvest this resource remotely just like moons are. It seemed like CCP and the CSM wished for remotely controling resources to go away, according to the minutes.


If i were CCP I would give new meaning to the victory point system. As militia corps/militia alliances kill the enemy and capture/defend systems/plexes (earning VP) they then could use their earned victory points to "bid" for stations on a corp/alliance level (note that you have to be in militia to do this) to control whatever benefits/upgrades from having occupancy would be purchased. Of course there would be upkeep on having control, not just having isk to throw at maintaining a station, but also having to continue fighting for their faction and earning VP having to spend it to keep the factions favor in order to keep the station under their control. It'd be like fighting for your lord and them rewarding you with a little bit of real estate. Something like this would implement safegaurds that those participating in faction war reap the benefits, not some entitiy with enough numbers to make mass alts to vote in a mock leader to steal isk (or at least would force outside entities to really work at it). Also this would allow for corps/alliances that participate in FW to choose where they want to base, they could all base in one system like how heyd/enaluri used to be. But there would be incentives to spread out (especially if the warzone is expanded by making all of lowsec FW) to get their own slice of the pie by bidding for stations that are not in the "main systems".

Anyhow just some rough ideas from a crazy FW bittervet, I want to improve faction war just as much as the next guy thats in it. I think there some good ways to go about it, some better than whats was proposed during the CSM meeting.
Shaalira D'arc
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2012-01-17 21:47:15 UTC
Super Chair wrote:
If i were CCP I would give new meaning to the victory point system. As militia corps/militia alliances kill the enemy and capture/defend systems/plexes (earning VP) they then could use their earned victory points to "bid" for stations on a corp/alliance level (note that you have to be in militia to do this) to control whatever benefits/upgrades from having occupancy would be purchased. Of course there would be upkeep on having control, not just having isk to throw at maintaining a station, but also having to continue fighting for their faction and earning VP having to spend it to keep the factions favor in order to keep the station under their control. It'd be like fighting for your lord and them rewarding you with a little bit of real estate. Something like this would implement safegaurds that those participating in faction war reap the benefits, not some entitiy with enough numbers to make mass alts to vote in a mock leader to steal isk (or at least would force outside entities to really work at it). Also this would allow for corps/alliances that participate in FW to choose where they want to base, they could all base in one system like how heyd/enaluri used to be. But there would be incentives to spread out (especially if the warzone is expanded by making all of lowsec FW) to get their own slice of the pie by bidding for stations that are not in the "main systems".


Victory points should let you bid on moon mining rights within that empire's low-sec space. Without VP, you get evicted from the juicy tech moons.

Trolololol.

In all seriousness, I agree that FW benefits should go to those most active in fighting in FW zones. Elections can and will be gamed by people who aren't remotely connected to what's going on in the battlespace.
Capitol One
The Congregation
No Handlebars.
#18 - 2012-01-17 22:32:53 UTC
Quote:
Some CSMs suggested that FW could be used as a testbed for new capture mechanics, since FW would be smaller scale than nullsec.


Really now, that's a bit arrogant.

Faction Warfare is not a "stepping stone" or a "testbed" for Nullsec. On the contrary, it is the endgame for many people.
While yes, I agree that a change to the sovereignty mechanics of FW could lead to something good, simply considering FW as a sort of a "test server" for the elite Nullsec players ... meh, I don't like it.

A change to Faction Warfare should be more about improving Faction Warfare, not Nullsec.

This needs more input from people who actually play FW and not those who only know of it in passing.

Pulgy
Doomheim
#19 - 2012-01-17 22:42:40 UTC
I hope CCP realizes a lot of us joined FW to avoid/escape null sec stupidity...but then again this is CCP we're talking about.
No range? No problem!   Join the Church of the Holy Blaster™ . A Hybrid religion.
Deen Wispa
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2012-01-17 23:24:00 UTC
Pulgy wrote:
I hope CCP realizes a lot of us joined FW to avoid/escape null sec stupidity...but then again this is CCP we're talking about.


Well, given how much manipulation that Nullsec CSM intends to do when they hold power again for this upcoming election, I wouldn't be surprised if FW and non-nullsec space is screwed over for good. From Mitten's speech on Branch;

Quote:
The parentheticals demonstrate the rule – the CSM can wield a frightening level of influence if someone of sound mind and a knack for political manipulation is in charge. The experience of the previous CSM demonstrated to everyone in nullsec the galaxy-destroying risk of locking random ignoramuses in a conference room with CCP Greyscale.

So: we are approaching Election Season once more. Last year we – along with other like-minded members of nullsec – swept the election and helped remake EVE into a spaceship game. There will be many more votes this time around, as CSM6 raised the stakes for the entire game. I will once again be running for the Chairmanship, and we will be fully mobilizing to ensure that the voice of ~the people~ (ie, our people, and everyone of like mind to us) is heard. This will be a high-stakes election, not merely because of the power we have created within the CSM, but because after blowing up thousands of miserable Empire barges, I suspect the pubbies don’t like us much!



Given the size of GSF now versus last year, it is safe to say that this will be another Nullsec CSM only interested in their own agenda and no one else.

High Five. Yeah! C'est La Eve .

123Next pageLast page