These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Federation vs The Amarr Empire

Author
Cromwell Savage
The Screaming Seagulls
#61 - 2014-05-03 00:21:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Cromwell Savage
Cearain wrote:
Cromwell Savage wrote:


Not quite...controlling home systems is 'winning' FW...if you can even call it that...

Who gives a rats ass about non-station systems or other systems that do not matter. The only system that really matters is the one you call home. The rest is Farmville garbage.

This douchery of occupancy is what is wrong in the first place...


Controlling your "home system" is what its all about huh? You can lose the other 99 systems but if they can't take this one then you are "winning."


When the occupancy war means nothing to you...then yes.

When the squids own 99% of the systems...my LP items are worth far more on the market (and I mission with my squid toon in a manticore no less) and PvP goes through the roof for us.

For me....that IS a win-win-win...

And when it is the way it is now...I don't have to chase farmers (as much), and can still roam for PvP if I so desire....or just relax....so I still "win".

I could give a rat's ass about what color the map is...the only system that truly matters is the one called 'home'...and that is ONLY because of the docking mechanics.

Not everyone in FW cares about occupancy...
GavinGoodrich
Perkone
Caldari State
#62 - 2014-05-03 22:52:33 UTC
"K guys, here's the game. Ball goes in this hole/net, but if it doesn't, you don't win or lose anyway. Also there's no timer, so the game goes on forever, even if your team was ahead at one point, it's irrelevant 'cause they'll be behind later, 'cause there's no timer to end the game at any point."

"there's no stoppage of play, there's no referees. Here's the ball and have fun! The net's over that way, if you...you know...want to."


Now tell me exactly how you "win" this game? Long as you're playing the game sounds like you're winning as it is.

Haaaaaalp my head's on fire

JAF Anders
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2014-05-03 23:03:38 UTC
Cearain, I'm not sure what you're getting at with the idea of victory conditions. To give you a better idea of where I'm coming from, I present a few ideas that I believe to be true about the warzone. If you disagree with any of them, simply point out which one:


1) The plexing mechanic dramatically favors offense in terms of LP reward.
2) Systems are meant to be taken, not held.
3) The number of pilots in inhabited systems is insufficient to hold fully half of any warzone.
4) Each warzone is well under capacity.
5) It is unreasonable for the total number of pilots who reside in low-sec to police or conquer all of the systems at once for any side.

Thus,

A) In holding the few home systems during a wave of influence, it should be a reasonable statement to claim victory in defiance.

The pursuit of excellence and stabbed plexing alts.

Merdaneth
Angel Wing.
#64 - 2014-05-04 09:44:47 UTC
Cromwell Savage wrote:

Who gives a rats ass about non-station systems or other systems that do not matter. The only system that really matters is the one you call home. The rest is Farmville garbage.

This douchery of occupancy is what is wrong in the first place...


This is why I suggested to make warzone control and LP payout depend on the number of days that one side holds a particular system. The longer the system is held, the higher payouts become. Systems that go back and forth then gain only few rewards.

In that way the rewards reflect the reality.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#65 - 2014-05-04 13:57:19 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Merdaneth wrote:

This is why I suggested to make warzone control and LP payout depend on the number of days that one side holds a particular system. The longer the system is held, the higher payouts become. Systems that go back and forth then gain only few rewards.

In that way the rewards reflect the reality.
Not a bad idea. However, might lead to a stable war front as farmers will pile on and keep the winners at the top.
Merdaneth
Angel Wing.
#66 - 2014-05-04 14:08:50 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Merdaneth wrote:

This is why I suggested to make warzone control and LP payout depend on the number of days that one side holds a particular system. The longer the system is held, the higher payouts become. Systems that go back and forth then gain only few rewards.

In that way the rewards reflect the reality.
Not a bad idea. However, might lead to a stable war front as farmers will pile on and keep the winners at the top.


A system full of farmers and real warriors? If it did happen, it would be a gankfest for everyone, attackers and defensers. Fighting intensifies the longer it lasts. I like it.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#67 - 2014-05-05 15:48:42 UTC
GavinGoodrich wrote:
"K guys, here's the game. Ball goes in this hole/net, but if it doesn't, you don't win or lose anyway. Also there's no timer, so the game goes on forever, even if your team was ahead at one point, it's irrelevant 'cause they'll be behind later, 'cause there's no timer to end the game at any point."

"there's no stoppage of play, there's no referees. Here's the ball and have fun! The net's over that way, if you...you know...want to."


Now tell me exactly how you "win" this game? Long as you're playing the game sounds like you're winning as it is.


You and several others make some good points let me give my perspective. Sorry for a long post.

I used to play basketball every morning before work with some co-workers. We kept score but I can't say now what percent of games I won. It wasn't like there was a buzzer and then the game ended. The teams switched up day to day. It was really just like what you describe it was like a forever game.

But we would all try to score points for our team and we played the game as it was designed. Its not like someone said well I think basketball horrible and I just like the sound when I whip the basketball against the backboard really hard. So instead of trying to score I just want to whip the basketball against the backboard more times than my opponent. If I do that then I am calling it a win!

We played basketball as it was designed because it was fun. I do sort of remember what each player would bring to the team they played for though. One guy could shoot, another was pretty strong and could box out for the boards, another could think up decent plays and find an opening, I was pretty fast so I was good at finding a fast break and play defense. But we all played the game trying to score points for our team (which might change day to day) and I think most of us had fun doing it.

In eve there are certain skills players to varying degrees think have merit. Usually these involve pvp skills. Flying a ship, fcing, fitting a ship, figuring out fleet doctrines, and even making isk. Cromwell says occupancy means nothing to him. I think that is because it’s not fun. I think it’s not fun because the occupancy war in 99% of systems doesn't involve any of the skills eve players value. Even making isk isn't required because you can run plexes in cheap ships. Occupancy needs some changes to the mechanics to make it fun and it will be fun when it starts to require some skills players value.

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

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#68 - 2014-05-05 15:52:14 UTC
Anyway yes this has likely drifted off the topic of the op. But I think op has his answer and can arrange his fight through evemail if anyone from amarr is interested. I think allot of excellent points were raised in this thread that really get to the bottom of what we want faction war plexing to be like so I am giving my views here.

Cromwell says he runs missions for the squids and roams for pvp. Before inferno I would do the same. Except I would do missions for amarr. He says he cares about his home system only because of docking rights. Another gallente explained that means he gets out an alt in a stabbed ship and deplexes his home system. Is that fun? It seems to me that now you need to do that if you want to be in the middle of the war. But instead of making the game more fun docking restrictions put another barrier to fun. Now you need to have this second account deplexing while your main roams.

Sure docking restrictions will occassionally offer up the big fight. Not nearly as well as null sec does but its pretty much the same idea just with small stakes instead of large ones.

He ends by saying not everyone in fw cares about occupancy. I agree and would say *very* few do. That just shows that ccp has not really made occupancy fun yet. Most suggestions to make occupancy fun will not ruin your ability to run missions or go on roams - just like you always could. It will just add to the game.

IMO ccp should have made occupancy warfare fun first. (IMO it woudl be fun if it involved more pvp spread out throughout the warzone.) After they made it into something that is fun then they should have added consequences. Instead they through tons of isk at it and said "there now look at all the people playing faction war. Obviously we did a good job making it fun." When in fact allot of the people doing faction war were just in it for the isk. It wasn't really fun it was more isk per hour and or less of a pain than some other way to get isk. IMO you get isk so you can play eve. It doesn't makes sense to play eve just to get isk.

JAF makes some good points as well.

I agree with points 1 and 2. I think this is good about faction war. But I still think they should make it fun to try to hold onto the space.

3,4 and 5) I mostly agree with you. I agree we do not have enough of the right types of pilots in faction war to fight for each system. There are over 20,000 pilots in faction war. There are 171 systems total. This number of pilots should be enough to defend the space in pvp. But of course, most of these pilots have no interest in pvp at all. This is why the current mechanics don't work and they need adjustment.

It would be silly for me to suggest that these pilots will all of a sudden have interest in pvp if the mechanics change to emphasize pvp. They won't. But what will happen is that if fw occupancy becomes a haven for small gang pvp on a scale 5-10xs what it is now, well then not only will more pvp pilots join but more people will play eve. No offense to EVE its a great game, but Eve can get kind of boring when your looking for fights.

I think your point 3,4 and 5 does in fact point out a problem though. Even if we get 3xs the pvpers we would not be able to police all the systems under the current mechanics. This is why some people have proposed to just reduce the number of systems. I think that is going in the wrong direction toward less strategy and more blobs. Instead I think ccp should give mechanics and tools to help pvpers police the space. This includes rollbacks and better intel of when plexes are being run.

I think in the end you look at the current mechanics and claim holding your single system is a win. I don't really mind that. But it seems to me that faction war tiers and rewards were structured such that it should have been much more than just getting your stabbed alt out there to deplex your home system and the rare blob warfare to take a home system by force. But regardless of intent, I think a few tweaks can make occupancy for the other 99% of systems a lot of fun to fight for. It won't hurt people who want to claim holding a single system is winning.

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

X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#69 - 2014-05-05 16:20:07 UTC
o Lack of docking restrictions is like playing basketball where defense is optional.

o The "backwater systems" in FW are like the warm up area on the other court. Complaining that leisurely shooting the ball against an imaginary opponent is not exciting as playing in a real game, and then not wanting to play on the real court (where the opposing FW players live) is a bit weird.

o FW low sec is a haven for solo and small gang pvp. Check the killboards. Compare it to any other low sec in the game - or even null sec. Only Barlequet when BNI was living there could compete with FW space in terms of pvp.

o There are definitely enough pvp'ers to police the entire warzone. They don't do it because it's boring. People who like to pvp go to the areas where they know they're going to get a fight. They don't go to High Sec Unour Constellation in Placid to look for a fight, and they don't complain that they can't find one when they do. They're smarter than that.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#70 - 2014-05-05 16:39:48 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
o Lack of docking restrictions is like playing basketball where defense is optional.


Unless its fun to fight for those plexes. You know it's a game. Negative consequences just make you do things like have an alt account that sits in a stabbed ship to deplex your space. If you don't have the biggest blob (or have no interest in having a stabbed alt deplex) then you will just dock outside low sec space. This just means you will waste more time reshipping.

X Gallentius wrote:

o The "backwater systems" in FW are like the warm up area on the other court. Complaining that leisurely shooting the ball against an imaginary opponent is not exciting as playing in a real game, and then not wanting to play on the real court (where the opposing FW players live) is a bit weird.


Yes because small scale pvp is just a warm up for blobbery.

X Gallentius wrote:

o FW low sec is a haven for solo and small gang pvp. Check the killboards. Compare it to any other low sec in the game - or even null sec. Only Barlequet when BNI was living there could compete with FW space in terms of pvp.


Just because there is more small scale pvp in faction war than there is in other areas of eve doesn't mean there is enough. EVE in general needs more small scale pvp opportunities. Like I said eve is great, but it can be quite boring when you are wasting time looking for fights. IMO FW should be nonstop fighting.

X Gallentius wrote:

o There are definitely enough pvp'ers to police the entire warzone. They don't do it because it's boring. People who like to pvp go to the areas where they know they're going to get a fight. They don't go to High Sec Unour Constellation in Placid to look for a fight, and they don't complain that they can't find one when they do. They're smarter than that.


What does high sec have to do with anything?

Yes its boring because the current mechanics make it efficient to hide and seek plex. If the mechanics made it more efficient to win occupancy by pvp it wouldn't be so boring.

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

X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#71 - 2014-05-05 16:57:55 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Cearain wrote:

Unless its fun to fight for those plexes. You know it's a game. Negative consequences just make you do things like have an alt account that sits in a stabbed ship to deplex your space. If you don't have the biggest blob (or have no interest in having a stabbed alt deplex) then you will just dock outside low sec space. This just means you will waste more time reshipping.
Yes, you have options if you don't want to play real FW. Use them. Put up a POS if you don't want to waste time reshipping. Be a pirate outside of FW. Almost all of the hot spots in FW are within 1-3 jumps from non-FW space. The benefit of station lockouts (forcing the other side to actually defend) vastly outweigh your inability to put up a POS or make 1-3 jumps every time you lose a ship.

Cearain wrote:

Yes because small scale pvp is just a warm up for blobbery.
That's a big step there. There's plenty of small scale pvp in home systems throughout the warzone.

Cearain wrote:


Just because there is more small scale pvp in faction war than there is in other areas of eve doesn't mean there is enough. EVE in general needs more small scale pvp opportunities. Like I said eve is great, but it can be quite boring when you are wasting time looking for fights. IMO FW should be nonstop fighting.
It already is nonstop fighting - if that's what you want. If you want nonstop fighting you go to the hotspots on the map. We've gone over this point for the past two years. I can easily find and get fights almost any time I want. Not a problem, and not a problem for anybody in FW low sec. No, it's not non-stop fighting in every single system - that's not how it works anywhere.
Cearain wrote:

X Gallentius wrote:

o There are definitely enough pvp'ers to police the entire warzone. They don't do it because it's boring. People who like to pvp go to the areas where they know they're going to get a fight. They don't go to High Sec Unour Constellation in Placid to look for a fight, and they don't complain that they can't find one when they do. They're smarter than that.


What does high sec have to do with anything?

Yes its boring because the current mechanics make it efficient to hide and seek plex. If the mechanics made it more efficient to win occupancy by pvp it wouldn't be so boring.
No, it's boring because nobody who wants NONSTOP pvp is out there. They aren't in lightly populated high sec areas either. If you run the farmers out of lightly populated systems, then you'll be left with nobody out there because people who want to pvp are somewhere else looking for a real fight. Do I want the farmers run out? Heck yeah, but it's not going to lead to more pvp in those areas.
ALUCARD 1208
Did he say Jump
Dock Workers
#72 - 2014-05-05 17:20:58 UTC
imo running the farmers out will lead to complete dead systems like its been said time and time before Backwaters are wastelands
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#73 - 2014-05-05 20:07:59 UTC
XG

Yeah we are back to your view that there is already "plenty" of pvp in faction war. According to you no one who knows what they are doing could ever get bored looking for fights. Yet this very thread was started from your corp mate saying:

Deen Wispa wrote:
Best of the Amarr Militia vs Best of the Gallente. We've both wiped out our respective opposition. We're both bored.


in an attempt to find a fight with a militia at the other end of new eden. But yeah everyone gets "plenty" of fights and no one who knows what they are doing is ever bored.

I am not saying to drive farmers out of 95% of fw space (what you call "backwaters") just to drive them out. I am saying give pvpers tools so that they can control the fw space. That way space will be controlled based on pvp fights.

You think only the small scale pvp that happens in your home systems are "real faction war." Well you can believe whatever you want.

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

X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#74 - 2014-05-05 20:46:22 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Cearain wrote:
stuff...
Deen is looking for different types of fights than you.

You want quick 1v1 (or 1v2, 2v1, etc...) fights in plexes - these I can personally get within 10 minutes of logging in - proven repeatedly over a year ago. While you were ranting about not being able to do so, I was documenting case after case of doing just that (in Fliet where WTs were very active).

Deen wants big cruiser level or higher fights. 50 on 50 brawls.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#75 - 2014-05-07 13:54:01 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:


You want quick 1v1 (or 1v2, 2v1, etc...) fights in plexes - these I can personally get within 10 minutes of logging in - proven repeatedly over a year ago. While you were ranting about not being able to do so, I was documenting case after case of doing just that (in Fliet where WTs were very active).


Your funny about your "proof." No one cares whether it is possible to get a fight within a few minutes or even seconds of undocking. It can happen. The question is are you getting in a fight every 10 minutes consistently, or is that just random luck. There was a time soon after inferno came out when we still had the cashout tiers that you could get about that many fights. Chatgris posted proof by his killboard showing different fights about that often. I also could get a ton of fights I had streaks like his but not quite as good. But then it started to dry up.

Your proof is always just your claim that "oh look I got a fight right away." You then claim that you log on and off quite a bit and that explains the long gaps of time between your fights. That might be true that you do that. But it would be better evidence if you said I am going to play eve on some future date say from 15:00-17:30 on may 25th. Then lets see your 2.5 hours and if you get 15 1v1 or 1v2 fights in that time. Then we see if that is repeatable. That is how you prove something.

I like all sorts of pvp. But yeah I recognize the probabilities. If I join a larger fleet the chances of actually finding a similar sized fleet that will give us a good fight is much less likely. It will likely be either some bait or one side or the other will have very little chance. That said some fcs do a great job beating those probabilities and are good at finding decent fights for their fleets. But on the whole your chances of finding fights is better if you keep the gang small. If you're in a larger fleet roaming you are likely to get far fewer good fights.




X Gallentius wrote:

Deen is looking for different types of fights than you. ...
Deen wants big cruiser level or higher fights. 50 on 50 brawls.


If you want to know know Deen actually said you can find it in this very thread:

Deen Wispa wrote:


We're no where near the numbers you think especially in the age of attrition warfare where some people can't get out of a meta fit frigate. Most of us are scattered across numerous home systems and a 40 man fleet isn't something we're capable of. I'd say 10-20 hac fleet is doable. 15-30 t1 cruisers is doable on weekends.

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

Pannax Ni
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#76 - 2014-05-07 14:06:27 UTC
SPOILERS BELOW

Amarr Won!

Video

Battlereport
Salicaz
Verrimus Caelum
#77 - 2014-05-07 14:08:51 UTC
Even after some serious downtime from Eve I return to the same people, complaining about the same stuff, the same people replying and the same. *******.****.

The only thing that changes is the topic title but it's derailed by page 2.

Give it a ******* rest. Big smile
Dread Operative
Lowlife.
Trigger Happy.
#78 - 2014-05-07 14:24:02 UTC
It was so nice without Cearwine mucking up the threads with his tired arguments. Go away!
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#79 - 2014-05-07 15:06:14 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Everyone is always lying to me.



Why do you think that?
RavenNyx
Tax 'n Death
#80 - 2014-05-07 15:06:59 UTC
Cearain wrote:

[...] Yes because small scale pvp is just a warm up for blobbery. [...]

Not in my perspective. I might be doing it wrong, but small-scale, especially in FW areas, to me is closer to a FPS. Instant action and gratification, if you actively seek it. To blob requires a big-ish group of "friends" online, and time. If you'd like fun here and now, that's two things you rarely have available.