These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Faction Warfare and Citadels: Bonuses

First post
Author
Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#1 - 2015-11-02 02:14:49 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Logibro
Hi again,

The structure revamp is well on its way and we are looking to see Citadel enter the game next year. I'd like your thoughts on a few things regarding potential bonuses that could be connected to warzone control.

(I am writing a separate post to discuss Citadel anchoring in the warzone)

Over the last two years, Faction Warfare has lost several bonus aimed at improving the quality of life of a Militia Pilot. The removal of clone costs for instance. With the arrival of Citadel, I feel that we are in a position to look into recreating bonuses to the Militia Pilot for living in their space. What I am looking for is a list of potential bonuses to structure owner's with warzone control.

A simplest example is: a fuel consumption bonus so that the structure consumes less fuel.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
Villore Accords
#2 - 2015-11-02 03:42:34 UTC
The option to use LP to clear out unopened plexes. It's not hard to be that guy that opened all the enemy buttons. This could help save LP investments if other sources of LP are reduced with changes, and allow us to invest a little more in keeping upgrades high in home systems during down-times.

The option to burn out active cloaks in system.

Bonus to PI resource pools planet side.

I realize some of those are not structure specific. Allow Citadels to be anchored/linked to ihubs permanently (or until they are destroyed), and give them a unique style appropriate to faction, with a discount to upgrade costs for system level depending on structure size. Have them become the ihub, basically.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#3 - 2015-11-02 07:31:50 UTC
if ccp decides to give structures a FW bonus please make sure that it only applies to structures whose owner is in FW. Last time this could not be done because of legacy code but luckily the structures are all new code now.

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

May Arethusa
Junction Systems
#4 - 2015-11-02 15:02:03 UTC
Fuel consumption, obviously.

Administration Hubs
System level should dictate the level of agents available for FW missions.
They should also allow corporations/alliances to tax LP earned in plexes within that system, feeding it either directly to the iHub, or to a pool for distribution to other systems.
System level should determine the frequency and efficiency of the new NPC patrols we can expect, and Admin Hubs should allow us some degree of control over their actions (whether they patrol hostile/friendly space, clear plexes, etc.)

Observation Arrays
Increased effectiveness based upon adjacency and system level.

I'm sure there's more.
Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#5 - 2015-11-02 15:20:26 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
if ccp decides to give structures a FW bonus please make sure that it only applies to structures whose owner is in FW. Last time this could not be done because of legacy code but luckily the structures are all new code now.


That is my goal. That the bonuses would be for those who own the warzone.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#6 - 2015-11-02 15:24:25 UTC
LP taxes to corporations and alliances have been discussed with CCP. Both will require an extensive rework of the lp store and lp distribution system. While that would be lovely, and the current state of the LP store has been extensively discussed, taxing LP is out of the scope of these structure changes.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Andre Vauban
Aideron Robotics
#7 - 2015-11-02 17:20:10 UTC
The fuel bonus is nice, although I'd also like to see a fuel penalty (ie use considerably more fuel) for ANY Citadel that allows a faction who does not hold sov to dock at it. I'm worried without this, we will see too many medium citadels anchored in hostile space effectively making the FW docking restriction mechanic obsolete. The fight for docking rights is really the biggest conflict driver in FW right now and citadels have the potential to shift that conflict driver. In other words, the conflict driver will switch from FW sov mechanics for docking rights to citadel structure fights for docking mechanics.

.

exiik Shardani
Imperial Spacedrill and Logistics
Rezeda Regnum
#8 - 2015-11-02 20:21:31 UTC
Do not forget about "neutral citadel" where neutral corp can allow to dock anyone of any militia... Tbh FW docking mechanics go obsolete with citadels, so that is one of reasons why all tier's bonuses must be apply only to faction holding system...

sry for my English :-(

Arla Sarain
#9 - 2015-11-02 20:27:29 UTC
If the only point of this discussion is to establish a range of bonuses that improve the QoL of a militia pilot, here's a thought:

consider what people want from stations as things are now - hardly anything TBH. Stations provide a safe haven, repair facs, and some market function should you need certain items in a pinch, subject to whatever bright entrepreneurs decide to supply. All of which pretty much sums up whatever a typical average militia member would want from a dockable structure.

But on top of all that, Citadels offer the removal of station games, making them the safer option for docking up compared to NPC stations. Supplemented with guns and EWAR, one could likely expect the grids of Citadels free from any sort of threat, making available Citadels the primary docking choice.

This is all waaaay before you even start factoring in whatever bonuses people will start conjuring up for these structure.

In favor of focusing on improving "Militia pilot QoL", please recognize that, whilst the fuel reduction bonus is nice, it hardly improves the QoL for typical mil members - each individual FW member is highly unlikely to cash-out 608mill for their own personal Citadel. Hence, the fuel reduction bonus is unlikely to ever graze the concern or interest of the typical FW participant.

I think the range of bonuses the Citadels (and hopefully NPC stations) could provide for FW members depends entirely on how game changing are the mechanics that CCP is willing to give us access to.

One of the barriers that stops a typical FW member from living in deep LS is logistics. CCP, in one of their presentations, was talking about how they want Citadels to offer micro import/export of goods between Citadels and other trade hubs. But even this is coming to all types of space (except WH) and not unique to FW.

In conclusion, if your goal is to introduce QoL for the typical member, it's likely more prudent to focus on S sized structures - deployables. Militia Grade Mobile Depots that are cheaper but have less time on them would likely be extremely popular with the FW community, seeing as the main focus is PvP, which in turn revolves around counters and counters to counters, hence making refits a high demand. Not that regular Depots are a challenge to afford for more established players, but considering that they cost more than some frigate hulls, their purchase is likely avoided by newer FW members.

TL;DR - Citadels by their very nature are the defacto QoL change for typical FW members, as their availability and design circumvents all the BS associated with both POSs and Stations, even without any further bonus introductions. Any further bonuses would just likely devalue NPC stations in FW space even more.


Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#10 - 2015-11-02 22:28:42 UTC
how about the owners get to restrict access to anybody? sounds like a bonus to me of putting up the isk to get one then anchoring it.

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro

Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#11 - 2015-11-03 00:42:17 UTC
Tough question. Fuel Bonuses for service modules seems solid. Other than that, possibly allowing them to use service modules typically restricted for SovNull (should any be anticipated) might be an interesting incentive for FW pilots.

One idea would be to introduce a Service Module that increases the chance of NPC Patrols (or their strength) visiting the system. Have the percentage increase based on the system's upgrade level. Call it a militia resupply point or whatever, have it take an office away or something. Could lead to interesting gameplay where FW militias drop defensive Citadels with these things to make casual plexing in their homes more difficult - or anchor them in enemy space to harass defensive plexers.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#12 - 2015-11-03 05:11:57 UTC
i don't know if thats a good idea but the other elephant in the room beside fuel is the vulnerability window.

lets say the window is set to 1h, the upgrade lvl could change that +-15mins or so (just as example, balancing would be difficult i imagine)

but again, not sure if thats a good idea given how broken plexing currently is. Adding stronger bonuses to the upgrade lvl with a weak foundation might break even more. (small vulnerability windows are bad for content etc etc)

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

per
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#13 - 2015-11-03 16:38:23 UTC  |  Edited by: per
Bienator II wrote:
if ccp decides to give structures a FW bonus please make sure that it only applies to structures whose owner is in FW. Last time this could not be done because of legacy code but luckily the structures are all new code now.


just thinking about this, this can still be easily bypassed by neutrals by having one man fw corp who gives all access to the citadel for the neutral block - no need to be in FW you can still use the spoils of war you never helped to gain
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#14 - 2015-11-03 21:29:09 UTC
per wrote:
Bienator II wrote:
if ccp decides to give structures a FW bonus please make sure that it only applies to structures whose owner is in FW. Last time this could not be done because of legacy code but luckily the structures are all new code now.


just thinking about this, this can still be easily bypassed by neutrals by having one man fw corp who gives all access to the citadel for the neutral block - no need to be in FW you can still use the spoils of war you never helped to gain

yeah. but that is the case for all citadel FW bonuses and was also the reason why we never got useful bonuses in past

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

exiik Shardani
Imperial Spacedrill and Logistics
Rezeda Regnum
#15 - 2015-11-04 00:49:17 UTC
some of my ideas:

citadel atributes
2% bonus to all citadel resists(hp or anything like that) per tier
-from RP view is logical, that militias things would be more dangerous, because war conflict etc

citadel repair service
20% reduction of repair cost per tier -> T5 = free repair for militia ppl which has docking rights
..
citadel market module
5-10% reduction for broker fee or sales tax per tier

citadel production/research module
1% reduction in manufacturing/research required materials per tier

+ special citadel module

24th crusade(+others) LP shop/fw agent service in citadel
-works only in T5 system
5% sale on LP requirements in LP shop

+ not citadel relevant

mobile things decay
scan & cyno inhibitors, siphons, mobile mjd and other things get doubled lifetime in upgraded Tier5 system

sry for my English :-(

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#16 - 2015-11-04 05:52:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Veskrashen wrote:
Tough question. Fuel Bonuses for service modules seems solid. Other than that, possibly allowing them to use service modules typically restricted for SovNull (should any be anticipated) might be an interesting incentive for FW pilots.

One idea would be to introduce a Service Module that increases the chance of NPC Patrols (or their strength) visiting the system. Have the percentage increase based on the system's upgrade level. Call it a militia resupply point or whatever, have it take an office away or something. Could lead to interesting gameplay where FW militias drop defensive Citadels with these things to make casual plexing in their homes more difficult - or anchor them in enemy space to harass defensive plexers.


Ive spent years telling cerain to go to homesystems if he really wants a fight. Now you want homesystems to be the hub of pve with increased NPC patrols making it harder to find pvp without simulated intervention. Homsystems dont need npc by virtue of people living there. Everywhere else doesnt need NPC patrols because its a bad mechanic shoehorned into fw for experimental purposes which has no beneficial impact that is worth the negative impact on pvp.

One viable change to NPC strength based on a bonus system would be their tank. Level 5 (or whatever) gives the plex rat 2x the tank. This does not impact on those seeking pvp. Many single frigs can still complete a novice. But it would encourage more micro gang content if you actually want to take a larger plex.

Though im sure my simple suggestion is just an immature gimmic and your convoluted and intrusive Npc patrol suggestion is golden lol.
Nameira Vanis-Tor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2015-11-04 08:24:22 UTC
It would be interesting to see how citadels tie in with DUST regarding system bonuses.

Perhaps abilities that decrease the time required to wait for an orbital strike to be possible?

Perhaps abilities that increase or decrease the % influence Dust can have on contestation?
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#18 - 2015-11-04 14:27:36 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Veskrashen wrote:
Tough question. Fuel Bonuses for service modules seems solid. Other than that, possibly allowing them to use service modules typically restricted for SovNull (should any be anticipated) might be an interesting incentive for FW pilots.

One idea would be to introduce a Service Module that increases the chance of NPC Patrols (or their strength) visiting the system. Have the percentage increase based on the system's upgrade level. Call it a militia resupply point or whatever, have it take an office away or something. Could lead to interesting gameplay where FW militias drop defensive Citadels with these things to make casual plexing in their homes more difficult - or anchor them in enemy space to harass defensive plexers.


Ive spent years telling cerain to go to homesystems if he really wants a fight. Now you want homesystems to be the hub of pve with increased NPC patrols making it harder to find pvp without simulated intervention. Homsystems dont need npc by virtue of people living there. Everywhere else doesnt need NPC patrols because its a bad mechanic shoehorned into fw for experimental purposes which has no beneficial impact that is worth the negative impact on pvp.

One viable change to NPC strength based on a bonus system would be their tank. Level 5 (or whatever) gives the plex rat 2x the tank. This does not impact on those seeking pvp. Many single frigs can still complete a novice. But it would encourage more micro gang content if you actually want to take a larger plex.

So there's a few different things here that I think we need to unpack.

First, I think that home systems ought to be tough nuts to crack, given the impact of losing them on their occupants. Think of what would happen if (god forbid) Fortress Eha or Vlillirier should fall. That's a huge deal. You're right though, that it should be primarily due to player defense rather than NPCs, but I'll get to that in a second.

Second, a lot of the angst in FW discussions is the lack of impact of Tier on things, as well as plexing mechanics. A lot of folks don't like the requirement to actively deplex against folks that have no intention to fight. You know my stance on this, since I think that if you want to keep a system its on you to defend it, but we ought to acknowledge that there's a widespread complaint.

IMO, players should be able to invest in things that make their lives easier. Citadels are that kind of thing, in that if you invest in it (and defend it) you can have a home wherever you choose. We in GalMil do similar things by manipulating Tier levels to ensure there's enough deplexers on our side, which reduces the overall burden on our PvPers to do maintenance deplexing.

This kind of thing would have a similar impact, and yet there's potential for it to go even further - and I don't think folks have considered the impact that hostile NPC patrols will have on deplexing, in addition to their impact on offensive plexing. If we're having random hostile NPCs bouncing in on defensive plexers, essentially what you'll be seeing once NPC patrols are introduced is an environment where there's a lot more pseudo-PvP happening all over the place.

If that's going to be the case, and I think it will be, then we'll have an even harder time keeping our homes safe. Especially when assaults become easier with Citadels.

So, IMO there's opportunity to be had here in terms of introducing service modules that will help FW corporations keep their homes, without being overwhelmed by hostile NPC patrols they hadn't previously had to deal with. It would also satisfy a long-standing complaint by FW pilots that there's no incentives to upgrade their homes, and that there's no greater or lesser importance to any particular system.

If a service module like this is introduced, then there should be different ones for each size Citadel, with increasing effects. The final impact of these modules should be capped at the largest active module size and the system upgrade level (should that mechanic still be in place). So a Medium Citadel would have less of an impact than a Large Citadel, and having multiple Citadels of the same size wouldn't stack.

Oh - and there's no reason this same thing couldn't be used offensively. For example, I drop a Large Citadel in Hasmijaala with one of these modules in it. This would mean that there will be more Gallente patrols spawned in a Caldari system, making it more difficult to deplex and defend. That to me gives even more player control of the shape of the warzone - being able to truly decide how easy or difficult it is to take or hold a system.

And as always, there's ways to counter it. Dropping 700mil+ Citadels all over the place isn't going to be THAT common, and since they can be destroyed (and the service modules offlined at some point during that process) there's always a counter.

I dunno. Seems like there's some interesting space to play with here, something we've not seen before.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."

Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
Villore Accords
#19 - 2015-11-04 15:36:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Thanatos Marathon
I like the idea of bonuses for controlling faction, and negatives for all others (opposing faction & non-FW entities). You can even tier them based on system upgrade level. As an aside, please decouple system upgrades from Warzone Control Tier level. Bear

With that in mind here's a few suggestions (numbers aren't thought through well at this point):

Fuel consumption : Base 2% reduction to owning faction, and 2% penalty to all others. +2% per system upgrade.
Vulnerability Window: Base 4% reduction to owning faction, and 4% penalty to all other. +4% per system upgrade.
Anchoring Time: Base 5% reduction to owning faction, and 5% penalty to all others. +5% per system upgrade.
NPC defender cost: Base 10% reduction to owning faction, and 5% penalty to all others. +5% per system upgrade.
Resistance bonus: Base 2% increase in resistance to owning faction, and 2% penalty to all others. +2% per system upgrade.
Repair costs: Base 5% reduction in repair costs to owning faction, and 5% penalty to all others. +5% per system upgrade.

All I've got at the moment :)

-

Veskrashen wrote:
Dropping 700mil+ Citadels all over the place isn't going to be THAT common


Sorry Vesk, gotta disagree on this one. 700 mil for staging with no fuel consumption is cheaper than a large deathstar. We'll be putting these things all over the place.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2015-11-04 16:58:02 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Veskrashen wrote:
Dropping 700mil+ Citadels all over the place isn't going to be THAT common

Sorry Vesk, gotta disagree on this one. 700 mil for staging with no fuel consumption is cheaper than a large deathstar. We'll be putting these things all over the place.

Maybe.

Another thought - require fuel for anchoring in areas you don't control?

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."

123Next page