These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

More FW changes on SiSi

First post
Author
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#61 - 2012-05-03 13:51:55 UTC
Hidden Snake wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Mutnin wrote:

...I had a second thought on the plex war front and even with the Gallentte blobs, I think Caldari can actually control the fight at this point due to how fast systems can be flipped under the current plex mechanics....


They made it take much longer to flip systems.



how much longer? Any idea?


A factor of 5:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1237047#post1237047

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

Meditril
Lummerland GmbH
#62 - 2012-05-03 13:52:22 UTC
At the end it will be all a question of balance. So basically what CCP has to set up is that a station in an almost empty system which is nearly no population is fast to conquer... e.g. by 3 to 6 hours of continuose attack. However, a station in core systems like Auga for example should take much more time to conquer if no defence arrives. At least 48 or more hours.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#63 - 2012-05-03 14:13:01 UTC
Meditril wrote:
At the end it will be all a question of balance. So basically what CCP has to set up is that a station in an almost empty system which is nearly no population is fast to conquer... e.g. by 3 to 6 hours of continuose attack. However, a station in core systems like Auga for example should take much more time to conquer if no defence arrives. At least 48 or more hours.

I think the minimum feasible time to take a system is now 8*5 = 40 hours. Only the extremely dedicated will be able to capture a system.
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2012-05-03 14:26:55 UTC
Ok - 40 hours changes everything. That is going to make a big difference. Sounds promising.

I wish I had time to load and play on the test server.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2012-05-03 14:28:22 UTC
Quoting Sync Vir:

Quote:
Datacores are 1000LP + 1m isk for 5

Amarr LP Store has

Amarrian Starship Engineering, Graviton Physics, Lazor Phyics, Nanite Engineering, High Energy Phyics

Also I got 25K lp from a Major solo. Ihub grade status unknown but likely empty.

125K LP + 125m = 625 Datacores.

High Energy Phyics = 298k each x 625 = 186.215m - 125 = 61m profit
Nanite Engineering = 334k each x 625 = 208.75 = 125 = 83m profit.
Amarrian Starship Engineering = 299k x 625 = 186.8 =125 = 61.8m Profit
Lazor Phyics = 224k x 625 = 140m - 125 = 15m Profit
Graviton Physics = 198k x 625 = 123 - 125 = -1.25m loss.

Not sure thats a super good return for your LP. So either no ones gonna use it or Datacores are about to become alot more expensive.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#66 - 2012-05-03 14:35:36 UTC
OK so now that we know it will take 40 hours to cap a system instead of the 8 there should be no problem now with station lockout. It gives every TZ an opportunity "to do their duty" of protecting the system.

Again what I like the most about these changes is the concentration of forces in a "home based" system.

I dont think these changes, change FW into 0.0 I think they force FW to be FW . LIke I said its feast together or die together, just as it should. A marine in one division and a marine in another division are still in the same marines.

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation

Degnar Oskold
Moira.
Villore Accords
#67 - 2012-05-03 14:53:25 UTC
These changes finally create a use for the Augoror.

My alt can fly most of the ships that my main can, but can't use the mods. So getting a ship out to fight in a contested system means.

1) Main goes to safespot in capsule, contracts ship to neutral alt
2) Alt flies the ship to the safespot, main gets in it
3) Alt comes back in an augoror to feed cap to the main while all offline modules are onlined.

The only downside is losing insurance coverage, but that doens't really matter on T2 ships.
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2012-05-03 15:00:03 UTC
It also seems faction ships now cost MORE LP. So although the rewards go up, so do the costs.

It seems to need tweaking right now though. A geddon navy issue costs more than an Mac apparantly.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

Meditril
Lummerland GmbH
#69 - 2012-05-03 15:10:03 UTC
Can anyone tell me if LP and Tag prices for faction modules are changed too? Currently it is simply not worth to create most of the faction modules because they are much more expensive than their dead space counterparts. Is this fixed?
Kade Jeekin
Masuat'aa Matari
Ushra'Khan
#70 - 2012-05-03 15:27:20 UTC
I have always supported the concept of a lock-out feature and am interested to see that it may be implemented. However, I consider that the currently proposed mechanism is flawed, effectively penalising players for joining a militia corp. Consider that pirates in Amamake would have free access to all stations whereas TLF pilots would be completely excluded should the system ever become occupied by the Amarrian forces (extreme unlikely example I know but you get the point)

My vision of the feature has always been linked to personal/corporation standings to the station's corporation or faction.

Implementing it by standings would affect all players across all NPC space.

Hisec would operate on a NRDS basis:
STANDING: EFFECT
Excellent/Good: Free Access
Neutral: Free Access
Bad/Terrible: Lock Out

And losec on a NBSI basis:
STANDING: EFFECT
Excellent/Good: Free Access
Neutral: Lock Out
Bad/Terrible: Lock Out

NB: If you are at war with a faction, by joining an opposing militia, then you should be treated as having Bad/Terrible standings until you leave the opposing militia. Similar to the mechanism for the Faction Navies in NPC hisec.

This would prepare players for nullsec station mechanics without being too restrictive, as getting standings with NPC corporations is relatively simple.

I reiterate that this feature should be on a station by station basis, not on a system by system basis. So an Amarrian crusader (spit!) could still dock in Amarrian stations in Minmatar losec, or even hisec, that they have good standings with.

Taking this a step further would see the expulsion of faction aligned stations from an opposing faction's hisec, perhaps extending this to losec too.

Finally, militia stations would become conquerable stations, like exist in NPC nullsec but only conquerable by the opposing faction and only when the system is vulnerable or occupied by the opposing faction.

Fleet Warpsujarento
Doomheim
#71 - 2012-05-03 15:32:43 UTC

Increasing the time to take a system could actually make the changes even worse than they were before because it limits the effect that a single person can have on the warzone, or their little part of it. Punishing and rewarding the militia as a whole for their successes and failures is already going to make any individual's actions feel futile, and the time increase will only make that feeling worse.

Even now, when it takes half a day to conquer a system, there is a feeling among some of the most dedicated plexers that much of what they're doing is futile. What's the point of pushing a system for four hours during EU primetime when you know that the US primetime of your own militia won't be there to finish the job? Now you have to rely on other (mostly apathetic) people for several days.

Got my ships locked in a station? Now it'll take five times as long to get them back. Maybe won't bother spending a a week grinding. I'll just quit FW and go on as before.
BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#72 - 2012-05-03 15:34:56 UTC
Kade Jeekin wrote:
I have always supported the concept of a lock-out feature and am interested to see that it may be implemented. However, I consider that the currently proposed mechanism is flawed, effectively penalising players for joining a militia corp. Consider that pirates in Amamake would have free access to all stations whereas TLF pilots would be completely excluded should the system ever become occupied by the Amarrian forces (extreme unlikely example I know but you get the point)

My vision of the feature has always been linked to personal/corporation standings to the station's corporation or faction.

Implementing it by standings would affect all players across all NPC space.

Hisec would operate on a NRDS basis:
STANDING: EFFECT
Excellent/Good: Free Access
Neutral: Free Access
Bad/Terrible: Lock Out

And losec on a NBSI basis:
STANDING: EFFECT
Excellent/Good: Free Access
Neutral: Lock Out
Bad/Terrible: Lock Out

NB: If you are at war with a faction, by joining an opposing militia, then you should be treated as having Bad/Terrible standings until you leave the opposing militia. Similar to the mechanism for the Faction Navies in NPC hisec.

This would prepare players for nullsec station mechanics without being too restrictive, as getting standings with NPC corporations is relatively simple.

I reiterate that this feature should be on a station by station basis, not on a system by system basis. So an Amarrian crusader (spit!) could still dock in Amarrian stations in Minmatar losec, or even hisec, that they have good standings with.

Taking this a step further would see the expulsion of faction aligned stations from an opposing faction's hisec, perhaps extending this to losec too.

Finally, militia stations would become conquerable stations, like exist in NPC nullsec but only conquerable by the opposing faction and only when the system is vulnerable or occupied by the opposing faction.



FW/LS does nto have to be a training ground for 00. I simply like the station mechanics for it making FW pilots to work closer together. FW does have the small splinter groups (a lot actually) but being able to come together to achieve a certain goal at a certain time is much much better then being ruled by some money hungry alliance leaders

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#73 - 2012-05-03 15:40:50 UTC
Fleet Warpsujarento wrote:

Increasing the time to take a system could actually make the changes even worse than they were before because it limits the effect that a single person can have on the warzone, or their little part of it. Punishing and rewarding the militia as a whole for their successes and failures is already going to make any individual's actions feel futile, and the time increase will only make that feeling worse.

Even now, when it takes half a day to conquer a system, there is a feeling among some of the most dedicated plexers that much of what they're doing is futile. What's the point of pushing a system for four hours during EU primetime when you know that the US primetime of your own militia won't be there to finish the job? Now you have to rely on other (mostly apathetic) people for several days.

Got my ships locked in a station? Now it'll take five times as long to get them back. Maybe won't bother spending a a week grinding. I'll just quit FW and go on as before.



I couldn't agree more.

What ccp is doing is called piling error on top of error.

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 - 2012-05-03 15:42:53 UTC
BolsterBomb wrote:
OK so now that we know it will take 40 hours to cap a system instead of the 8 there should be no problem now with station lockout. It gives every TZ an opportunity "to do their duty" of protecting the system.

Again what I like the most about these changes is the concentration of forces in a "home based" system.

I dont think these changes, change FW into 0.0 I think they force FW to be FW . LIke I said its feast together or die together, just as it should. A marine in one division and a marine in another division are still in the same marines.

LOL, problem solved. Nobody but an extremely few number of diehards is going to spend that amount of time to flip a system. We're back to pre-December plex warfare.

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#75 - 2012-05-03 16:06:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Veshta Yoshida
Raw Lock-out remains a **** poor idea even with the slower occupancy flips. The removal of all services in hostile station accomplishes the same but cuts down on the drop/join corp and alt juggling that will ensue.

Now if they wanted to really make it fancy, then access would be determined by VP in pool so that system tug-o-war scenarios could play themselves out .. at ~50/50 both sides have access to everything but as pool starts tilting towards one the opposition gradually loses access with docking being the last to go.
That way an offensive into 'virgin' territory requires a minimum of say 15% VP for docking to be enabled, reinfrocing the offensive and driving casualties skywards.

But they probably don't have a data-base tick box that says "fancy solution" so guess it will remain a wet dream Smile
Fleet Warpsujarento wrote:
Got my ships locked in a station? Now it'll take five times as long to get them back. Maybe won't bother spending a a week grinding. I'll just quit FW and go on as before.

Why quit when we can probably still ninja-cap plexes at will thus making tons of money at zero risk .. less risk than bomber missions even! Sure, they claim to want to sort out the NPCs but I'll believe that when I see it so free ISK and farmers in stabbed frigs galore!

By the by (Q. for you SiSi'es), what have they multiplied the LP-for-Kills with? How exploitable is it going to be?
BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#76 - 2012-05-03 16:08:51 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
BolsterBomb wrote:
OK so now that we know it will take 40 hours to cap a system instead of the 8 there should be no problem now with station lockout. It gives every TZ an opportunity "to do their duty" of protecting the system.

Again what I like the most about these changes is the concentration of forces in a "home based" system.

I dont think these changes, change FW into 0.0 I think they force FW to be FW . LIke I said its feast together or die together, just as it should. A marine in one division and a marine in another division are still in the same marines.

LOL, problem solved. Nobody but an extremely few number of diehards is going to spend that amount of time to flip a system. We're back to pre-December plex warfare.




Wait let me get this right

1) CCP gives LP now for plexing
2) CCP give LP for faction kills
3)CCP gives bonuses for conquering systems
4) CCP rewards you for putting effort into something

And this is pre-december again? I udnerstand some may not like the changes but lets get real

CCP did this you participate = you get rewarded

you plex= you get rewarded

plex fights = kills = lp = winning plex = more lp

plex fights = more kills = more lp = winning plex = flipping system = more rewards

I fail to see the problem here?

They have incentivized people to plex from the very new (minors) to the veteran (majors) creating a reason to fiight and then giving you a cookie to do it.

Sounds good to me.

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation

Deen Wispa
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2012-05-03 16:20:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Deen Wispa
Fleet Warpsujarento wrote:

Increasing the time to take a system could actually make the changes even worse than they were before because it limits the effect that a single person can have on the warzone, or their little part of it. Punishing and rewarding the militia as a whole for their successes and failures is already going to make any individual's actions feel futile, and the time increase will only make that feeling worse.

Even now, when it takes half a day to conquer a system, there is a feeling among some of the most dedicated plexers that much of what they're doing is futile. What's the point of pushing a system for four hours during EU primetime when you know that the US primetime of your own militia won't be there to finish the job? Now you have to rely on other (mostly apathetic) people for several days.

Got my ships locked in a station? Now it'll take five times as long to get them back. Maybe won't bother spending a a week grinding. I'll just quit FW and go on as before.


Agreed. For some people, it will take a few days to move all their ships to a new system. Not everyone can do it in one night. So instead of fighting, we spend more time on logistics for a few days. Not the ideal way to spend your gaming time.

And to people who say train an alt. Alot of us don't want to spend months training an alt to fly all the various ships our main can fly. I feel sorry for people who can fly practically every ship. FW should be an area of the sandbox that is accessible to as many players as possible. For CCP to ask people to go buy another account just to train an alt is ridiculous. This assumes people don't want to stop the training time on their main for a few months.

It's all fine and dandy to tell people to HTFU but if half the people don't want to or end up leaving, you won't have a militia to fight along with. So it's a lose-lose situation for everybody. PVP is only as fun as the people you fight along with and against with.

High Five. Yeah! C'est La Eve .

Fleet Warpsujarento
Doomheim
#78 - 2012-05-03 16:24:48 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:


Fleet Warpsujarento wrote:
Got my ships locked in a station? Now it'll take five times as long to get them back. Maybe won't bother spending a a week grinding. I'll just quit FW and go on as before.

Why quit when we can probably still ninja-cap plexes at will thus making tons of money at zero risk .. less risk than bomber missions even! Sure, they claim to want to sort out the NPCs but I'll believe that when I see it so free ISK and farmers in stabbed frigs galore!


Alts m'dear. Alts.
Ahazu Sagam
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#79 - 2012-05-03 16:36:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Ahazu Sagam
Quote:
3. Militia store LP prices are affected by faction wide performance (discounts in increments of 10%)


anyone knows if this is based on the number of systems hold (a) or if it is percentage based (b)?

edit:

- amarr hold 30 systems by default and LP modifier is 1.0
- amarr capures 15 system:
a) LP modifier is now 1.0+"some number" x 15
b) LP modifier is now 1.5
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#80 - 2012-05-03 16:38:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Thanks Hrett, for pointing me over here. This is a much better place for ongoing discussion if its going to wander away from what should be strict SiSi feedback in the CCP-posted thread.

Since I've just discovered it here, I'll read through and get back to some of your questions to the best of my ability, thanks for your patience everyone..

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary