These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Flip times in faction war
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Machiavelli's Nemesis
Angry Mustellid
#21 - 2012-05-07 00:05:29 UTC
Basically what other people have said.

Station lockouts and LP upgrades are justifications for system occupancy we've all wanted for years but if people know that their home system can be flipped in an 8 (or less) hour stretch during their off-TZ when the numbers aren't there for a meaningful defence then there's no real incentive to spend any LP upgrading the system.

On the other hand, month long campaigns fighting over a single system are draining for both sides and eventually cease to be fun. Increasing the frequency of spawns and removing the dependance on DT for plexing was a good idea overall but IMO it's now *too* short. Tweaking it so that no matter what it'll be more than 24 hours is good, that way if you want to rob a system out from under its residents they will actually have a say in the matter, rather than sneakily flipping it in the night while they're asleep to avoid fighting them.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#22 - 2012-05-07 14:27:53 UTC
Machiavelli's Nemesis wrote:
Basically what other people have said.

Station lockouts and LP upgrades are justifications for system occupancy we've all wanted for years but if people know that their home system can be flipped in an 8 (or less) hour stretch during their off-TZ when the numbers aren't there for a meaningful defence then there's no real incentive to spend any LP upgrading the system..


I am not sure if you are reading the forums but its controversial, to say the least, to claim "we all wanted" station lockouts.

As far as whether it is worth it to spend lp to upgrade a system even though you *might* lose it in one hour or 8 hours or 24 hours or 48 hours will depend on the advantages offered for the upgrades, and the cost of the upgrades. We don't really know this information so its hard to say.


Machiavelli's Nemesis wrote:

On the other hand, month long campaigns fighting over a single system are draining for both sides and eventually cease to be fun. Increasing the frequency of spawns and removing the dependance on DT for plexing was a good idea overall but IMO it's now *too* short. Tweaking it so that no matter what it'll be more than 24 hours is good, that way if you want to rob a system out from under its residents they will actually have a say in the matter, rather than sneakily flipping it in the night while they're asleep to avoid fighting them.



Are you assuming everyone signs in every 24 hours in order to defend their space? Perhaps you think everyone should sign in every 24 hours to defend their space and if they don't then tough luck for them?

Basing the flip times on when people should or could sign on is sort of an undlerlying assumption in allot of this discussion. I think a 24 hour sign on is the sort of assumption you can make for null sec but not for more casual faction war players. I might not sign in for a week in order to defend space. But I don't want the flip times to be based on how often I sign on to fight for occupancy at all. I think that should be irrelevant.

What you say here is sort of the underlying assumption I want to ask the community to think through.

1)Should the time to flip a system be based on how often we think we will (or should) sign in to defend space (if so what is that time?) I certainly don't sign on every 24hours in order to defend space. If I did I would be in null sec.

OR

2) Should the time to flip a system be based on how long it takes to form and mobilize a blob through different systems - that way small gangs can still accomplish something in this system. (this would be in the hour - 2 hour range)

OR

3) Should they use some other measure of time?

What are the likely effects of using longer or shorter times?

I think these are very important questions because it will dictate what sort of combat we have and how frequently we get it. Knee jerk reaction that extend these times do to bad lock out mechanics just piles error on top of error and makes the game much worse.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Joran Dravius
Doomheim
#23 - 2012-05-07 15:02:04 UTC
qDoctor Strangelove wrote:
time zone war counter.
deal with it.

flipping a system / station in 48 hours sounds to short imo.
Null sec is more or less a week I believe.

And look how many systems flip in 0.0.
Dirk Smacker
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#24 - 2012-05-07 15:59:10 UTC
I don't think you should be able to flip a system in one shot. I think there should be multiple phases where the bunkerfrastucture goes into reenforce after a handful of hours of "perfect plexing", each stage taking more time. The defenders would only be able to decontest to the next safest phase, plus decay.

Much more of a push-pull, much less ninja capture.

I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#25 - 2012-05-11 14:55:22 UTC
I call this the "flip time" but really its more "reaction time". If there is some reaction from the other side then the system won't flip in that time. It will only actually flip if there is no response.

Here is another proposal that I think would be worth considering:

You can't dock and access the station in an enemy system that is not contested. Once a system is contested though the docking and station services would be open to both sides.

So by doing a single plex side on the offensive would unlock their ships and docking rights and services in that system. Thus allowing them to continue an ongoing fight. The defending side would be urged to quickly react and decontest the system so the offensive side would be locked out again.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Vordak Kallager
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#26 - 2012-05-11 15:02:49 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Here is another proposal that I think would be worth considering:

You can't dock and access the station in an enemy system that is not contested. Once a system is contested though the docking and station services would be open to both sides.

So by doing a single plex side on the offensive would unlock their ships and docking rights and services in that system. Thus allowing them to continue an ongoing fight. The defending side would be urged to quickly react and decontest the system so the offensive side would be locked out again.


This. Mother of god, this, please CCP.

Sa souvraya niende misain ye.
K8 Solo
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2012-05-11 15:52:15 UTC
Vordak Kallager wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Here is another proposal that I think would be worth considering:

You can't dock and access the station in an enemy system that is not contested. Once a system is contested though the docking and station services would be open to both sides.

So by doing a single plex side on the offensive would unlock their ships and docking rights and services in that system. Thus allowing them to continue an ongoing fight. The defending side would be urged to quickly react and decontest the system so the offensive side would be locked out again.


This. Mother of god, this, please CCP.


Yes indeed. An inability to fast-reship will make assaulting a system with roughly even numbers on each side far less attractive to the offensive parties, since attrition will favor the defenders who can reship much faster. Make it possible to reship in system as long as it's contested and everyone will get more fights.
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#28 - 2012-05-11 16:30:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Mutnin
Machiavelli's Nemesis wrote:
Basically what other people have said.

Station lockouts and LP upgrades are justifications for system occupancy we've all wanted for years but if people know that their home system can be flipped in an 8 (or less) hour stretch during their off-TZ when the numbers aren't there for a meaningful defence then there's no real incentive to spend any LP upgrading the system.

On the other hand, month long campaigns fighting over a single system are draining for both sides and eventually cease to be fun. Increasing the frequency of spawns and removing the dependance on DT for plexing was a good idea overall but IMO it's now *too* short. Tweaking it so that no matter what it'll be more than 24 hours is good, that way if you want to rob a system out from under its residents they will actually have a say in the matter, rather than sneakily flipping it in the night while they're asleep to avoid fighting them.



Who is this "we" you speak of? For every one person that is for the station lock outs you can just about point to 2 or 3 that are against it. Of those few that are in favor of it, "most" are from the sides that currently have the most active blobs so have little to risk or aren't even in FW.

I bet these posts would look much different if this station lock out was happening say a year or two ago with both Gallente & Minmatar were on the fail side. How many Minmatar including Hans would still be in favor of this if Amarr were still out blobbing you everyday with BS supported guardian gangs?

How many of the Gals would be in support of station lock outs if it came at the time when Caldari were getting their medals for capturing every Gallente system?

The difference in the past when a Militia was in the stages of fail.. They could always come back given enough time the FW war zones despite all the game mechanic problems were always able to re-balance themselves naturally. What CCP is doing is just creating a bar that will be next to impossible to overcome once one side or the other falls too far.

It's rather ironic that after all the years of ignoring FW and everyone saying it was dead, but the players kept it going, that CCP by actually putting focus & developing it on it will likely finally kill FW.

When the bulk of the active pilots are all saying this will be bad for FW.. You would think they might know what they are talking about.
Dare Knight
Bandwagoners
#29 - 2012-05-11 16:51:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Dare Knight
Just throwing my half-read-thread 0.02 ISK into this.

I personally think the longer flip times are great. I get what the OP is saying in regards to small gang or solo flipping, as your actions won't be immediately beneficial to your faction alone. However, couple that with the other additions which make FW more null-sov-like, such as system upgrades and station lock-outs, and I think the argument by itself stands to state that the longer flip times are only beneficial.

While they haven't done it yet, from what I can tell anyway, later on down the road as the new FW mechanic fleshes out, they may include different selectable upgrades besides the ones they're giving now (NPC's at gates, cheaper clone costs, etc), such as grav site spawn upgrades, wh spawn upgrades, among many other things that you only find in null that would boost industry and REALLY give you a good reason to fight in FW. If I personally, as a corp, put in LP to upgrade a system with such upgrades so my miners can mine better gravs, build more ships, and improve our commerce as a corporation, you can bet your arse I want to fight to protect that system/systems. A 1 hour, 5-7 hour, or even a 12 hour flip time is of no use to me, as all that hard work to flip the system in the first place and then upgrade it goes to waste.

Now granted my argument is on a very small scale and only really encompasses my corp personally, but the point is still there. Any upgrades to any systems benefits everyone in the faction. It would even benefit non-FW corps. That being said, I would rather the work to upgrade system be safeguarded from fast flips and instead be drawn out over time. I think 40 hours is acceptable. EDIT: Actually, in all reality I would want more time to defend such an investment. I agree with an above post that null takes days, even weeks, yet systems flip all the darn time.

Again, I apologize if I'm restating someone elses point. I got excited at the bottom of page 1 and felt the need to throw my coins in.

_It's very simple, really. If you see Tengus on scan, they are ratting. If you see a shitload of Tengus, the Russians are blobbing. If you see Proteuses on scan, they will be on top of you in about a second. If you see a shitload of Proteuses, the big boys are having a goodfight. _
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#30 - 2012-05-11 16:56:06 UTC
Dare Knight wrote:
Just throwing my half-read-thread 0.02 ISK into this.

I personally think the longer flip times are great. I get what the OP is saying in regards to small gang or solo flipping, as your actions won't be immediately beneficial to your faction alone. However, couple that with the other additions which make FW more null-sov-like, such as system upgrades and station lock-outs, and I think the argument by itself stands to state that the longer flip times are only beneficial.

While they haven't done it yet, from what I can tell anyway, later on down the road as the new FW mechanic fleshes out, they may include different selectable upgrades besides the ones they're giving now (NPC's at gates, cheaper clone costs, etc), such as grav site spawn upgrades, wh spawn upgrades, among many other things that you only find in null that would boost industry and REALLY give you a good reason to fight in FW. If I personally, as a corp, put in LP to upgrade a system with such upgrades so my miners can mine better gravs, build more ships, and improve our commerce as a corporation, you can bet your arse I want to fight to protect that system/systems. A 1 hour, 5-7 hour, or even a 12 hour flip time is of no use to me, as all that hard work to flip the system in the first place and then upgrade it goes to waste.

Now granted my argument is on a very small scale and only really encompasses my corp personally, but the point is still there. Any upgrades to any systems benefits everyone in the faction. It would even benefit non-FW corps. That being said, I would rather the work to upgrade system be safeguarded from fast flips and instead be drawn out over time. I think 40 hours is acceptable.

Again, I apologize if I'm restating someone elses point. I got excited at the bottom of page 1 and felt the need to throw my coins in.


I'm pretty sure mining upgrades are the last thing the average guy in FW is interested in. The bulk of us just want easy access to PVP & a reliable way to pay for our losses.. Keep the system upgrades in null sec.. TBH.
Dare Knight
Bandwagoners
#31 - 2012-05-11 16:59:23 UTC
Mutnin wrote:

I'm pretty sure mining upgrades are the last thing the average guy in FW is interested in. The bulk of us just want easy access to PVP & a reliable way to pay for our losses.. Keep the system upgrades in null sec.. TBH.


I definitely don't disagree, at least initially. I also agree that something like that is the last thing that needs to be on CCPs mind, let alone any FW'ers minds. I'm thinking more along the lines of what I believe was either said at the FW roundtable and/or in another forum post somewhere that FW's influence could and should also affect other elements of EVE besides casual PvP. Casual PvP will always be there, but giving it more influence and purpose than just PvP is only beneficial. It would give your militia, and I don't mean just FW folks, more of a reason to support your efforts.

Again, not initially, and definitely not anytime soon. Make FW work and work well, first. THEN worry about the icing.

_It's very simple, really. If you see Tengus on scan, they are ratting. If you see a shitload of Tengus, the Russians are blobbing. If you see Proteuses on scan, they will be on top of you in about a second. If you see a shitload of Proteuses, the big boys are having a goodfight. _
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#32 - 2012-05-11 17:10:33 UTC
K8 Solo wrote:
Vordak Kallager wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Here is another proposal that I think would be worth considering:

You can't dock and access the station in an enemy system that is not contested. Once a system is contested though the docking and station services would be open to both sides.

So by doing a single plex side on the offensive would unlock their ships and docking rights and services in that system. Thus allowing them to continue an ongoing fight. The defending side would be urged to quickly react and decontest the system so the offensive side would be locked out again.


This. Mother of god, this, please CCP.


Yes indeed. An inability to fast-reship will make assaulting a system with roughly even numbers on each side far less attractive to the offensive parties, since attrition will favor the defenders who can reship much faster. Make it possible to reship in system as long as it's contested and everyone will get more fights.




This is something I can live with and might even be great. Since it really doesn't have anything to do with flip times I will post it in a new thread.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Previous page12