These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page

For all the FW peeps: "Dockblocking" - working as intended?

First post First post First post
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Shadow Cartel
#1 - 2012-10-03 19:33:52 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
I wanted to get some input on a specific aspect of the Inferno change, the fact that stations lock enemy combatants our entirely.

Given the massive problem we have right now with FW corps and alliances quitting or relocated in response to the mechanic, I think its time to re-evaluate the value of this particular element of Faction Warfare.

The community has been very loud and clear that we need to get back to FW being a PvP-centric feature, where players enlist for the pew, and stay because they can afford to fight, as supposed to enlisting for the isk, and fighting if they have to (which is never.)

With that goal of increased pew pew in mind - in your experience, has "diagonal plexing" contributed to increased PvP? Is it a conflict driver, compelling you to take to the plexes to defend your space? Or does it make you not want to roam and PvP, because you can't dock and repair or reship?

Lets discuss the value of this mechanic, or alternatives if we decide it isn't helping to generate the conflict we so desperately desire these days.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Yuri Intaki
#2 - 2012-10-03 19:45:28 UTC
You will always push for a mechanic which will benefit your militia so why should we?
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#3 - 2012-10-03 19:50:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
any feature which kills off docking games is worth it IMO. It not only makes sense that you can't dock at the enemy station it is a strategical advantage for the defender. It clearly tells what is your space and what is not. Without docking rights it simply woudn't matter anymore for most people.

and there are enough high sec systems next to FW zones for permanent storage of your stuff.. (edit: certainly also a few low sec systems outside FW)

seriously. if you are minmtatar and have all your stuff in kourmonen its YOUR fault

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#4 - 2012-10-03 19:52:22 UTC
Oh god. In before Cerain. Roll If you made it an upgrade feature it would be nice if for the only reason that I could dock and repair on a roam. Noone would stage out of a system out of fear that it would simply be upgraded and shut out. Other then that working as intended.
Crispin McTarmac
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#5 - 2012-10-03 19:55:42 UTC
It would be a bit silly to spend all that time grinding for station upgrades if the enemy can just walz in and use them. Highsec is never far away, and nanite paste is not very expensive. From a story perspective it's important to give a sense that you are in enemy territory and not some weird gladiatorial theme park. With that in mind, why would you ever want to remove dock blocking?
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2012-10-03 20:09:41 UTC
I was not really sure about the station restriction mechanic pre inferno, do I like it when in space and have taken damage run out of ammo? No. Do I think it is a good mechanic and one of the few genuine system penalties when a system is lost? Yes.

As a solo player I now have a number of ships tucked away all over that I cannot access, often I have been able get ships out just before system loss or have made a little more profit than I might have expected by stripping things down and selling them at inflated prices to the new occupiers.

It also means that when I fly though a friendly system that if there are WT there then they are out in space. Sitting in stations is a passive defensive mechanic.

I actually would not change it although I guess it could be tied to a low level upgrade so that at least systems have to be kept off level 1.

The conflict has been a little stagnant lately, this I would actually put down to the recent overhaul proposals, FW seems to have become even more like farm world as people try to hoard LP before the payments are nerfed. I still think the existing warzone tier mechanic can be worked with and the NPC plex changes are required as soon as possible.
Gizznitt Malikite
agony unleashed
Agony Empire
#7 - 2012-10-03 20:17:24 UTC

IMO, dockblocking is a good mechanic.... It is one of the major motivations for deplexing a system, and, since neutrals can still access those stations, its no-where near as severe as nullsec station flipping.

Luc Chastot
#8 - 2012-10-03 23:02:44 UTC
Yeah, I also think it is a good mechanic. "Diagonal plexing" can be improved a bit, though.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#9 - 2012-10-04 09:52:40 UTC
Lockouts have their place, but not as currently implemented.

We (Me, my voices and a handful of others) warned CCP after FF presentation that it would condense fighting into a handful of systems even more than was the norm at the time.
We urged them to include it in the system upgrade paths as that would constitute a direct threat to complacent militias thus making sweet, sweet pew.

Add it into the upgrade path.
Make it so that I can dock in Auga if me and mine are allowed to plex unhindered for something like six to eight (6-8) hours, the only way to keep an enemy out should be to smash his face in and NOT merely by orbiting a frigging button "MOAR!" than him.
Address the horrible geographical issues (related, albeit tangentially).
Crispin McTarmac wrote:
It would be a bit silly to spend all that time grinding for station upgrades if the enemy can just walz in and use them. Highsec is never far away, and nanite paste is not very expensive. From a story perspective it's important to give a sense that you are in enemy territory and not some weird gladiatorial theme park. With that in mind, why would you ever want to remove dock blocking?

Just as (or more!) silly when the changes were made overnight giving two factions a massive helping hand while leaving the other two to flounder, craptastic implementation/launch. Would have been a non-issue if NPCs and plexing mechanics in general had been revamped at the same time, but ... Big smile

Majority of us** joined FW as a way to live in low-sec and shoot each other in the face .. not to live in high-sec and run gate camps in the hope of finding a face to shoot.
** Old timers, non-farmers. Probably a dying breed on the brink of extinction but 'meh'.
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
Spaceship Bebop
#10 - 2012-10-04 12:48:15 UTC
Don't give in to the lockout whiners. They give meaning to occupancy warfare and are easy to work around.

1. Lockouts give FW occupancy REAL meaning by providing REAL consequences to not defending your home system. Take them away and you'll have every tom, richard and harry complain that capturing a system has no real meaning (like before the patch).

2. There are many ways you can move your stuff out of system if you can't defend it.

3. There are plenty of systems littered all around the edges of the FW theater where you can base that are invulnerable to occupancy warfare.
Muad 'dib
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-10-04 13:53:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Muad 'dib
dont forget that trade and markets in low sec are extremely unstable while systems of priority and owner ship can flip.

when every one could dock everywhere the markets and supply were good in low sec, which i dont think anyone rally expected but the lock outs mean they are FAR smaller and far more localized and as we all know trade and manufacturing effect pvp just as much as how much stuff is blown up.

everyone should remember that low sec is not 10 jumps through null and the casual player wants to be a part of it, locking a whole side point blank is bad for everyone.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.

Noa Fuyu
Yub Yub
#12 - 2012-10-04 13:54:23 UTC
I like the station lockouts. Its good to know I can log in and not see 20 minmatar docked along side me waiting for me to undock.

but mostly I like the reasons that X Gellentius has given, not to give in to the lock out whiners. It actually means something to hold a system beyond a name on the top lefthand side because only your faction (and neutrals) can dock there. Id like some control given to lock out anyone not in militia from the militia specific stations though.
#13 - 2012-10-04 14:11:30 UTC
Dock blocking is a good mechanic, it is my biggest motivator for pushing systems.
mindstar technology
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2012-10-04 15:10:51 UTC
Blocking is good
Making it automatic until flip is bad.
Having it at level 1 means that capturing and holding is important.
So that you have to guard the buttons meaning pvp is required.

But really do something to remove the can always run away part.
I would say shortening the warp in distance to 25 or 30 km, suddenly more pewpew.
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#15 - 2012-10-04 22:55:59 UTC
Made sticky!

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2012-10-05 00:31:31 UTC
Station Lockout is great. I could handle seeing it extended to non-FW systems.

Haas Tabris
Peace Love n Harmony
#17 - 2012-10-05 00:43:27 UTC
This is a silly mechanic as it stands. It reduces opportunities for PVP 'cause it essentially forces the losing faction out of the warzone.

They should just make all Amarr stations lock out Minmatar players and all Minmatar stations lock out all Amarr players. This would be a lot easier to manage for the players. Also, make it so that station guns shoot the opposing faction players on sight. This would prevent players from getting camped in and improve PVP (you can't PVP if you can't undock).

If you want to have sovereignty mean something, link it to the gate guns. Make gate guns shoot the opposing faction on sight. Or make this a feature you can upgrade to in the systems that you control.

Also, i really liked someone's idea of roving bands of Faction NPC's. Just like you see rats on the gates or belts, have faction NPC ships patrol the lowsec systems. Tie it into sov if you want.

Last, while i'm on a roll here, get rid of button timers and make FW players kill all the NPC's in a plex. This will fix the speed-tanking exploit and make complexes more fun. And might even lead to more PVP.
Taoist Dragon
Quasi Stellar
#18 - 2012-10-05 03:26:55 UTC
The lock outs don't really bother me that much.

But it does somewhat break the immersion factor as bit. If the minnie cap a system that has a 24th station in it I should still be able to dock there. And minnie should never be able to dock there EVER. even if they cap the system.

Faction militia should be staging posts into the warzone and should be accessable to militia pilots at all times and enemy militia should be locked from these station at all time as well.

This would however lead to ppl being camped into thier militia stations so I would also have the station sentry guns actively attack any enemy militia ships in range of the station.

This would allow a certain freedom of movement in the warzone but limit it and also give some focus areas to fight over and possible change FW alliance bases around.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.

#19 - 2012-10-05 05:45:00 UTC
Having only skimmed the first post and having not read any of the replies;

How about a cost for docking at the enemy stations based on the systems tier level eg.

Tier 1 - 0.5m
Tier 2 - 1m
Tier 3 - 2m
Tier 4 - 4m
Tier 5 - 8m

(PS, I choose random numbers don't hate.)
Pinky Denmark
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2012-10-05 09:53:56 UTC
The only real problem is the fact it doesn't work for hi-sec...
But indeed the mechanic should at least be looked over at every major patch
123Next pageLast page