These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Faction Warfare: Moving Forward.....

First post First post
Author
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#1 - 2011-10-05 22:13:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
*UPDATE* We did it!! The Faction Warfare expansion is HERE. Inferno is out May 22 - and with it a whole host of feature changes, upgrades, rewards, and consequences. Welcome to the new war - it won't be easy, but I have faith in the community. There's a bloodthirsty lot of you out there who find every possible way to make the most of the new system!

Dev Blog: Inferno Changes for Faction Warfare

What's next for Faction Warfare?

CCP has made a public commitment to iterating on Faction Warfare all the way through into Winter Expansion. If there's something you hate, and it ends up *actually* breaking the feature in an un-fun way, chances are we can get it fixed, along with adding a lot more cool features as well.

Top Trending Faction Warfare Quick Fixes - "the little stuff"

1.) Plexes only spawn after downtime. This means plexing is an activity only for one timezone, the rest of the militia rarely participates due to lack of spawns. *UPDATE* Fix completed as per Crucible patch notes. GREAT JOB, CCP!! FW community - be sure to share your appreciation....

2.) Pirate frigates widely considered too powerful to be included in a plex designed for tech 1 frigates and destroyers. Faction Frigates make sense for Faction Warfare, but if interceptors are banned than Dramiels and Daredevils should be as well.

3.) Repping a militia member with low security status currently kills faction standing. This unduly penalizes logistics pilots while working in a fleet regardless of whether a crime is being committed. *FIXED!! As of Crucible patch 1.1*

4.) Repping a friendly militia member who is a victim of aggression results in GCC if friendly pilot is low security status. This causes confusion in fleets, as pilots attempting to save their friends end up dying to gate fire even when no crime is committed. *CCP has stated they are working on a fix for this, due out Soon TM*

5.) Lack of highly visible alert or intel system for when territory is threatened. If Faction Warfare is meant to deliver pickup and play PvP, an alert system (Captain's Quarters TV screen?) would get fights much faster than relying on aimless wandering patrols. Even just adding alerts in real time in the militia office tab (like POS fuel notifications in your mail, or broadcast history in fleets) would be great and increase frequency of PvP fights. *FIXED!! Brand new Faction Warfare UI coming in Inferno

Top Trending Major Underlying Issues "The Big Stuff"

1.) Plexing is not rewarding. Victory points are arbitrary and meaningless, and do not serve as proper motivation to encourage regular activity. *FIXED!! Plexing payouts coming in Inferno

2.) NPC presence in plexes needs adjustment. EWAR and general difficulty is imbalanced between the races. AI is poor, easily fooled by speedtankers. Also, NPC presence isn't required to complete plex, making fighting them rather pointless. NPC's should have a purpose - either they must be killed to cap the plex, or simply eliminate the PvE aspect of plexing entirely. *PENDING - NPC balancing likely coming in post - Inferno release


3.) Faction Warfare missions easily farmable in a Stealth Bomber. Result is missions that encourage PvP as intended (by nature of being on overview), but do not encourage diversity of ship types or cooperative gangs to complete. “PvP” that surrounds current mission system is primarily limited to interceptors chasing bombers. NERFED!! Station Lockouts coming with Inferno will drastically reduce mission farming for the losing faction, forcing them to PvP in order to access agents again

4.) Imbalanced EWAR fielded by mission NPC's means some missions are easier to run than others, resulting in imbalanced market value for faction items and causes certain militias to be flooded with mission farming alts. *CHANGES COMING!! Inferno brings a scalable LP store depending on Victory Conditions


5.) Sovereignty is more or less meaningless. The lack of consequences for owning a system means little motivation to go out and cap plexes. *FIXED!! Rewards and consequences galore coming in Inferno

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#2 - 2011-10-05 22:14:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
This space will be a dedicated set of links to relevant threads and discussions, so CSM and CCP can review the feedback as part of their discussion on how to improve Faction Warfare. I will continue to add and update, please feel free to make suggestions as to what should be stickied here.

CSM Minutes on Faction Warfare - another discussion thread on the effects of making FW just like nullsec.

Team Pink Zombie Kittens announces they will allowing Alliances into Faction Warfare. Please respond here with feedback.

CSM Proposal to implement station occupancy and sentry gun fire

New EvE Chronicle reveals upcoming FW change?

This newly posted essay is a clear breakdown of the profit motivator in Faction Warfare, its an excellent resource for anyone that's ever wondered why we all complain about Alt-farmers infesting the militias. Great ideas in here, folks, I highly recommend everyone take a look:
The Economics of War, A Treatise on Factional Warfare

Sovereignty Wars Blog discussion regarding Soundwave's "remove highsec NPC's" suggestion:
Gallente Response
Minmatar Response
Amarr Response
Caldari Response

Past CSM involvement record:
Alliances and Faction Warfare
Alliances and FW Part 2
Lack of Development
Focus and Goals
Complex Spawning
Complex Spawning Part 2
NPC Review
CCP Inaction towards Bugs / Exploits
Autopilot Settings for Faction Warfare

Additional Forum Threads containing Faction Warfare discussion / feedback:
CCP - Did you miss the fanfest round table for FW?
Faction Warfare Redesign Thread
CCP - I'm on my knees begging for an update on Factional Warfare
Faction war and small scale pvp improvement
Nice to see so many "blues"...thanks Dev's!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Dehlandrae
Tandoori Tunafish
#3 - 2011-10-05 22:42:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Dehlandrae
On the topic of Alliances, why not also allow Militia and non-Militia corps to enter into Alliances with one another? Creating a Military-Industrial Complex of a sort.

Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed.
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#4 - 2011-10-05 22:56:06 UTC
No no no. . .

Sorry m8, I think you are starting from wrong end. FW needs a little more fundamental mechanic changes before any of those changes (especially the supercap/alliances bit - that is the least of the problems.)

Lets start with not having single rifters tanking an entire Amarr plex - especially if you want FW to actually have meaning.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#5 - 2011-10-05 22:58:43 UTC
Dehlandrae wrote:
On the topic of Alliances, why not also allow Militia and non-Militia corps to enter into Alliances with one another? Creating a Military-Industrial Complex of a sort.

Another thought that comes to mind is allowing individual capsuleers to join the Militia without the participation of their corporation. They would in effect be similar to National Guardsmen for their Militia. I would be willing to bet that FW would get an influx of players if this were to be allowed.


Both great suggestions. However you slice it, there are many ways to allow more player participation that won't interfere with the spirit of FW. I agree - the militia is indeed about citizen-soldiers. Those that are willing to take up arms for their race REGARDLESS of what their day job is. Allowing individuals, Alliances, to participate, or to expand the ability of the Republic itself to be run AS a player Alliance (cutting the strings so to speak) all address one of the issues that limits Faction Warfare participation.

If FW is all about pickup and play PvP, that relies on numbers. There are a number of artificial boundaries like this that arbitrarily shut out interested players, and the scene is established enough now to handle broader participation levels safely. FW pilots can fly anything anyone else can, and the veterans know how to defend themselves and lead others in doing the same.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#6 - 2011-10-05 23:23:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Ruah Piskonit wrote:

Lets start with not having single rifters tanking an entire Amarr plex - especially if you want FW to actually have meaning.


I guess we'll have to disagree on the true "meaning" of Faction Warfare.

Don't get me wrong, plex mechanics are a big issue. They are boring, broken, and have nothing to do with PvE. But there is a fundamental difference between Faction Warfare mechanics, and Faction Warfare as a scene in the Eve Universe.

For those that have enjoyed Faction Warfare enough to stick around for a while, most can testify it has nothing to do with the mechanics. Its the characters, storylines, the overall mentality, the good sportmanship, and the fun of a perma-wardec in a static location, without things that hamper gang warfare such as bombs and bubbles.

To those that don't stick around long enough, the perception is often that "Faction Warfare is dead" or they just see FW as a broken mechanic (like defender missiles) that needs "fixing" to be worth bothering with. They don't see the people, the fights, the kills, the gang action they complain doesnt exist in the game. I'm certain there are pilots that have blown off FW as being not even worth trying, despite being bored and searching for the kind of gameplay the FW scene offers, if not the mechanics.

Blogs like these document the many ways pilots enjoy Faction Warfare and the fun that is had pvp-ing everyday. There is an established scene despite broken mechanics, that is completely player-driven. If the Faction Warfare pilots can enjoy themselves and come up with fun fights in the absence of any mechanics tinkering, than part of sustaining the scene is simply allowing more player involvement overall.

Ultimately though, fixing FW will involve both increasing the number of players that can participate, and giving the factions more fun, rewarding, meaningful reasons to fight with in the first place.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Tyraeil Starblade
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2011-10-05 23:32:46 UTC
I agree with everything you said, except for this:

Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

1.) Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare.


FW doesn't need to be made into a blobfest like null sec. Getting into a fleet and pressing F1 is the last thing I want via massive blobs. That's exaclty how you learn to NOT PvP effectively. Getting frigates blown up is. How do you learn about manually piloting, spatial awareness, and various other fundamental PvP tricks if you're just part of some massive blob. How boring and useless.

Leave alliances out in null where they belong.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#8 - 2011-10-05 23:40:09 UTC
Tyraeil Starblade wrote:
I agree with everything you said, except for this:

Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

1.) Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare.


FW doesn't need to be made into a blobfest like null sec. Getting into a fleet and pressing F1 is the last thing I want via massive blobs. That's exaclty how you learn to NOT PvP effectively. Getting frigates blown up is. How do you learn about manually piloting, spatial awareness, and various other fundamental PvP tricks if you're just part of some massive blob. How boring and useless.

Leave alliances out in null where they belong.


If the mechanics are fixed, and plexing is interesting and useful again, this won't happen. Alliances such as UK and CVA would still have to ship down to enter the appropriate plex to fight alongside their militia brothers. Alliances are very much a part of Faction Warfare scene (again, differentiating from FW mechanics) regardless of whether CCP allows them mechanical entry, so the goal should be to make the local warfare mechanics discourage massive blobs, not simply barring Alliances from entering the militia or allowing alliance corps to enter the militia.

If you've ever fought against the Amarr, you'd know that blobs by no means require an Alliance to exist :) I think the "how" of FW fighting is a seperate issue than the "who".

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Dirk Smacker
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2011-10-06 00:19:28 UTC
Bah, the board ate my reply. I'll try this again:

Quote:
1.) Allow Alliance participation in Faction Warfare.

Yikes. That would draw sov alliances away from endgame while negating the corps that just want to be in FW.

They need to have a non-sov alliance classification so FW can join forces and be more effective. Maybe limit the number of corps in one and give it a new name like "conglomerates".

Quote:
4.) Make plexing a PvP exercise, not a PvE exercise

I like what you put below that, especially the blinking alarm. However, to improve the PvP in plexing, you need to make the PvE more involved. It should require a gang or higher to take one, and they should resemble the new incursion system. The system should also be set up so a corp can plan on bringing a fleet of 10-20 and taking a system in a reasonable amount of time. Right now, taking a system is so out of our control, few bother.

With a system like that, you would increase the amount of gangs and fleets active throughout the day. As anyone in FW will tell you, nothing gets a fleet up faster than a war target fleet roaming around. If you knew exactly where one was and have a time limit to respond, it would increase the urgency to fight them.

And make the bunker a functional space fort, not a space box.

There's other tweaks I would like. An occupancy meter and LP store consequences for controlling systems come to mind. But I'll stop there for brevity's sake.

I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one.

Dehlandrae
Tandoori Tunafish
#10 - 2011-10-06 00:20:50 UTC
I remember reading or discussing with former corpmates in the past the idea of giving 4 CCP employees control over one of the Militias each in a Commander-In-Chief type capacity. From there, the Militia Rank system could be used to establish a chain of command of a sorts. CIC would hand down broad objectives (i.e. Minmatar CIC sez "establish a forward operating position in Devoid") to the highest ranking members of their Militia who would then hand down directives to their subordinates which could amount to anchoring POSes/SBUs (or maybe something in-between that is only available to the Militia) in Ezzara. The next tier below could be tasked with various duties like going on patrols into Devoid, camping all the gates into Ezzara or running supply lines into Ezzara from Rens.

Having a framework like this could serve as a stepping stone for allowing the Republic to be run as a Player Alliance. Yeah, CCP would have a hand in it, though only to nudge it in one direction or another, allowing players to command the bulk of the responsibility for seizing systems from those slaving Amarr dogs, er, I mean, their enemy Militias.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#11 - 2011-10-06 00:37:02 UTC
Dirk Smacker wrote:

Yikes. That would draw sov alliances away from endgame while negating the corps that just want to be in FW.


For many of us, faction warfare IS the endgame. The old mentality of high, low, and nullsec as being beginner, intermediate, advanced PvP needs to be thrown out the window. While that may have been the original intention, it doesn't reflect the norm nowadays.

For many players, if you're wanting to get a start in PvP, an alliance is actually a better choice. Alliances have dedicated educational teams, classes, and very large fleets with easily defined, easily instructed roles. They also have the benefit of mandatory call-to-arms, and concrete objectives to point hungry noobs at.

In Faction Warfare, every man needs to be able to fight for himself, and know how to find their own fights as well. As it stands right now, jumping in a ship and roaming about, throwing an "x" into militia chat, is a quick way to get yourself really bored, or really killed. The faction warfare corps are self-contained, competitive entities, who fight for killboard glory but aren't truly networked like an Alliance, as there is zero economic incentive to work together and get over the trust issue. Faction sovereignty changes and their consequences could fix that.

A good faction warfare pilot needs to be skilled in small gang warfare, which gets pretty cutthroat and relies on a certain experience and skillpoint level for everyone in the gang. The actions of one pilot make or break the team.

Lack of plexing motivation means gangs are on their own for finding each other - this also bores the hell out of new players. Newbies want to be told want to do, not taught how to go find fights for themselves (which is what the militias do now, just like pirate corps do)

All these things are why I continue to reject the notion that FW is "gateway PvP" for players to dabble with on their way to "endgame" nullsec PvP. While that was the original intention, the reality couldn't be further from the truth. CCP should heavily consider this point when further developing FW, in my opinion.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Jimmy Nickson
The Lucky Star
#12 - 2011-10-07 13:53:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Jimmy Nickson
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
2.) Get Supercaps out of lowsec. This may not seem like a FW fix, but supercap drops by non-participating Alliances are a huge faction warfare killer. Having Pandemic Legion in the thick of things pretty much ground regular fleetwork to a halt recently, as no one wants to organize any fleet large enough to attract a supercap gank. Supercaps need to be balanced anyways, but short of giving us new HEAVY bomber ships to fly, or another time-consuming counter to develop, the easiest way to foster normal fleets and shelve the who’s-got-a-better-batphone escalation nonsense, is to banish titans and Mom’s from lowsec. Dreads and carriers still need to be around, for POS support/takedown of course. Barring the banning of super’s from lowsec, enabling Alliances to actually fully join the militia would help to give each faction some much-needed muscle to counter these threats without annihilating their sec status in the process.



This would conflict with null alliance warfare of supercaps sadly and highly doubt it would be put into game. Supercaps when traveling from north to south, east to west can't just jump from starting system to end system, and restricting them to null would be confining them to enemy space filled with supercap fleets and cyno jammers causing a ability not to reinforce forces or retreat to the otherside of the map like an ordanary fleet would be able to do but in smaller scale. Perhaps not allowing Fighterbombers to be luanched in low-sec? and for titan's I dunno....

The Consquenses part to sov I agree with and encourage such playing station games can get rather anoying and often is the only pvp I see half the time and its a tarp!!!

The plex mechanic's as you have said needs an overhual is pretty much every fw player who's done it would say, the plex's are often abled to be solo'd, and imbalanced between factions, even though I know I can solo a major plex in a gila or tengu against minmatar I know the minmatar have a fair easyer time being able to do it solo in a vigil, Same thing with gallente and caldari. I don't know how you would change the plex'ing system to make it more pvp orientated, though I do know NPC's can be usful against the enemy when flying, an example I could use a little while ago is a griffin with caldari NPC's perma jamming a vagabond whilst the griffin pin'd the vagabond down slowly draging it to death. Perhaps NPC's could be usful like that in the pvp terms but not that overpowered... The idea of the Alert system Jagerblitzen has stated is a very common thought aswell I completely agree with it, if somone is going to do a plex I want to know about it so I can go after him or get somone to come after me.

Other mechanic's of fw that is bad are like RR in fleets around friendlies who are GCC causing faction loss etc.. I know FC's in past have been very complaintive of this and it can be very anoying when your standing is important for your income (missions) or allowing you to even stay in the milita.

Contesting systems perhaps putting a bar up like the incursions layout saying how much a system is speicificaly contested would be good also, often people just seeing a bubble on a map is rather like seeing your progress having little effect its so small and there is no numbers; puting a progress bar would likely cause more motivation to defend or attack towards the later part of contestment and thus more pvp encouraged as we have more reason to fight rather than just run away!


Edit: P.S. I do appologise for any spelling grama errors half asleep when writting this.
Fire ze missiles!
Jandin Kobera
Young British Arsonists
#13 - 2011-10-07 14:07:22 UTC
A small fix which would greatly affect small gang pvp in FW would be to even out plex spawns over the course of the day. As it stands, 90% of plexing is done and finished within an hour or so of the server coming online. If these were instead to spawn constantly during the course of the day, they would create a large supply of arenas for small gang warfare to take place in.
Shaalira D'arc
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2011-10-07 14:07:54 UTC
I've heard one interesting proposal that strikes a good compromise in the 'alliances in FW' issue:

Quote:
Alliances can join FW. However, militia alliances cannot hold sov in nullsec.


That should permit militia members to benefit from alliance mechanics, while still drawing a big red line between FW and nullsec blobs.


In any case, I don't think CCP lacks for feedback or suggestions on FW at this point. They've had years of bug reports, petitions, and forum threads about all of its shortcomings. In fact, you had entire roundtables of veteran players speaking their minds at the last fanfest (whose opinions were apparently recorded by a lower-echelon CCP employee). If CCP comes out right now and asks 'soo.... what do we need to do to fix FW?' then that only confirms that they haven't been listening at all.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#15 - 2011-10-07 14:18:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Hans nice post.

I think Hirana's idea that if alliances want to join they can't also hold sov is a good one.

As far as station guns firing I think this should only be for the militia specific stations. That is 24th imperial crusade stations will fire on minmatar but not carthum conglomorate. That way faction war militias can base out of a station without so many station games but the winning side doesn't get too strong. There was a time when caldari had all the systems. Gallente had few pilots in fw. If they also had the all the station guns hitting them that would have been pretty bad.

I'm not sure what can be done with supercaps but I don't really do allot of the larger fleet stuff so I can't really speak to that. They can't enter plexes so I really don't care how many there are.

Here is a list of 22 ideas that were discussed regarding faction war plexing and a short pro and con of each:

http://eve-search.com/thread/1564233

I think some of those ideas would be pretty nice. Including the one about sensor strength in the plexes getting a large boost for that faction when inside their plex. So if I am in a minmatar plex with a minmatar ship I would be almost impossible to jam.

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

Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#16 - 2011-10-07 14:33:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Rodj Blake
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:


2.) Get Supercaps out of lowsec. This may not seem like a FW fix, but supercap drops by non-participating Alliances are a huge faction warfare killer. Having Pandemic Legion in the thick of things pretty much ground regular fleetwork to a halt recently, as no one wants to organize any fleet large enough to attract a supercap gank. Supercaps need to be balanced anyways, but short of giving us new HEAVY bomber ships to fly, or another time-consuming counter to develop, the easiest way to foster normal fleets and shelve the who’s-got-a-better-batphone escalation nonsense, is to banish titans and Mom’s from lowsec. Dreads and carriers still need to be around, for POS support/takedown of course. Barring the banning of super’s from lowsec, enabling Alliances to actually fully join the militia would help to give each faction some much-needed muscle to counter these threats without annihilating their sec status in the process.



If people are flying around in small gangs instead of large fleets, then that's a good thing. Or rather it would be a good thing if there was something for small gangs to fight over all day long rather than just a couple of hours after downtime.

Dolce et decorum est pro Imperium mori

Bengal Bob
Slymsloot Enterprises
#17 - 2011-10-07 14:50:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Bengal Bob
Distribute plex spawns throughout the day.
Have the same NPC spawn for every factions plexes - easy fix and balances them out remove ECM from NPC, this is just silly.
Increase the number of different levels of plexes. Faction ships are overpowered against T1 ships, and the newer players no longer plex as they are insta popped by older players in Drams, Daredevils, Cynabals, Vigilants that also have a neutral booster in system.

eg:
T1 Frigate Minor plex
Minor plex as existing
T1 Cruiser Plex
Medium as existing
T1 Major plex
Major as existing

Make it a requirement that no NPC are on grid for the plex counter to continue, this will stop speed tankers.

I like the station gun idea, hopefully this will not include gate guns, although I suspect it might be hard to reprogram them as different guns. I wouldn't go for any further advantages, as this will only lead to people blobbing up. It still needs to be viable for solo pilots to go out and roam happily.

Cut the LP for missions, they pay out way too much and most militia members are now there for the missions only.
Increase LP for kills.

Fix faction standing loss, so Logi alts can also be in the militia without having to worry about standings

Do I need to say supercaps?

Add some militia bling to the LOL shop for the RP guys - maybe they can plex for Aurum?

Look at the distribution of space, the choke points between systems and access to high sec. Change as necessary to encourage free flowing movement.

The poor Amarr are bottled up in just a few systems bordering high sec and can't leave without a huge blob. Add some gates so they can experience low sec.

The Minmatar have to deal with whoever the campers of the week are in Amamake. Sadly, the use of neutral alts in all surrounding systems, means the gate campers run as soon as a fleet moves towards them - leaving them uncounterable.
Add more high sec gates so our noobs don't get popped. Couple in Auga, couple in Dal, couple in Arzad will almost match the Amarr access to high sec.

Whatever you decide to do, ask for feedback afterwards, and then continue to make improvements - not after another 18 months please.
You can expect a flood of people coming back to see if FW is fun again, don't fail to keep it moving forward again.

Also, fix FW and I will redo my portrait so you don't have to keep looking at my shaven testicle.
Dirk Smacker
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#18 - 2011-10-07 15:30:50 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Dirk Smacker wrote:

Yikes. That would draw sov alliances away from endgame while negating the corps that just want to be in FW.

For many of us, faction warfare IS the endgame.

It is the endgame PvP for a lot of the people who stay in FW. However, it can not be the best endgame option for the game of EVE at large. The game needs to be set up for players to be drawn out there.

We all agree FW shouldn't be a repellant. However, it just shouldn't be as strong of a magnet as nul sec for the typical EVE player.

I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#19 - 2011-10-07 15:31:01 UTC
Great post but I can't possibly agree with everything.

Bengal Bob wrote:
Distribute plex spawns throughout the day.
Have the same NPC spawn for every factions plexes - easy fix and balances them out remove ECM from NPC, this is just silly..


Do this in the missions! Make all missions like the amarr missions where the rats have painters and missiles so you can't solo them in a sb.


Screw npcs in plexes do away with them, or at least make it so we don't have to fit a pve tank. With a notification system we can have players fighting for plexes instead of npcs. But if you can't stand scrapping the npcs all togehter here is an idea that I think would work:

1) every 3-6 minutes an alarm will spawn. How often depends on the size of the plex. I think a minor plex would have this thing spawn at 3 minutes and 6 minutes. That alarm will be able to tank different amounts of damage but not do any damage. An alarm in a minor plex would tank say 50 dps. An alarm in a medium plex would tank 120 dps, major closed plex 300 dps and major open 500 dps.

2) If you kill that alarm in under 90 seconds, or there is a player ship friendly to the faction in the plex, no npcs will come. If you don't kill it and you are against that faction then npcs will spawn. The rats in the larger plexes will be fit with lots of target painters and missiles so smaller ships can't speed tank them.



Bengal Bob wrote:

Also, fix FW and I will redo my portrait so you don't have to keep looking at my shaven testicle.



Does this explain why hirana wants them to postpone fixing fw?

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

Count NULL
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2011-10-07 15:46:56 UTC
Make it possible to kick out known spies. While not most pressing issue, there is nothing more annoying than to have a roaming fleet to be followed by a spy: who is in your militia, who you can't kill without loosing standing for yourself and your corp. Make it possible for general militia to vote them out without possibility to comeback for 3 month. This will go a long way towards making militia channels useful for anything else besides trolling. As it stands right now newbies are being kept in dark about all the action going on closed channels. Being able to kick people out of militia is just as important as letting them in.

Second thought: Add an other faction BS to LP store. It's stupid when everyone has to grind missions just to flood market with same item (i.e. Navy Domies ) as it gives best Isk/LP ratio. If you want to have more people in FW then you have to make sure that LP items market doesn't collapse, as it will force people to grind even more missions (or what ever else you replace them with) to support their PVP.
123Next pageLast page