These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

FW: rebalancing NPCs and you

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Madbuster73
State War Academy
Caldari State
#121 - 2012-06-20 15:43:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Madbuster73
How hard is it to make the game check if you killed all npc's in the plex when timer is at 0??
I can not Imagine that it is a lot of work.
This simple line of programming will keep people satisfied until Winter-Expansion.
Just make it so you HAVE to kill all NPC in the plexes and all speedtanking is over.

If CCP cant do it I am happy to fly over to Iceland and do it myself over the weekend.
STOP GIVING LAME EXCUSES AND FIX IT PLEASE!

At this moment Caldari are taking all systems and by the time the winter expansion comes out, Caldari will own all systems and all Gallente Militia will have quit game or left FW because there is no fighting against it.


Cheers.
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#122 - 2012-06-20 16:24:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Please DON'T make plexing about PvE:

  • Please DON'T buff the NPC AI.
  • Please DON'T force us to kill the NPCs.


Please DO make plexing about PvP:

  • Please DO remove ALL NPC E-war.
  • Please DO decrease the amount of NPCs.
  • Please DO decrease the defencive plexing time (E.G. four times as fast).
  • Please DO despawn plexes when successfully defencive plexed.
  • Please DO give a reward for defencive plexing. Either LP or standing!


Please DO this BECAUSE:

  • It would encourage war targets to defencive plex (only five minutes for a major + reward).
  • It would force people to fight for their plex if they don't want it to despawn.
  • It would discourage farming.
  • It would encourage (but not force) people to do plexes designed for their ship class to avoid a war target in a much bigger ship despawning their plex.
  • It would encourage (but not force) people to kill the NPCs to remove the PvE disadvantage.


TL;DR: I want faction warfare to be about PvP, not PvE!

Edit: I would like to make it clear that I want reduced defencive plexing time, not reduced offencive plexing time (it should take 20 minutes for a Minmatar to offencive plex in Amarr space, and 5 minutes for an Amarrian to defencive plex in Amarr space).
Madbuster73
State War Academy
Caldari State
#123 - 2012-06-21 15:07:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Madbuster73
Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote:
Please DON'T make plexing about PvE:

  • Please DON'T buff the NPC AI.
  • Please DON'T force us to kill the NPCs.


Please DO make plexing about PvP:

  • Please DO remove ALL NPC E-war.
  • Please DO decrease the amount of NPCs.
  • Please DO decrease the defencive plexing time (E.G. four times as fast).
  • Please DO despawn plexes when successfully defencive plexed.
  • Please DO give a reward for defencive plexing. Either LP or standing!


Please DO this BECAUSE:

  • It would encourage war targets to defencive plex (only five minutes for a major + reward).
  • It would force people to fight for their plex if they don't want it to despawn.
  • It would discourage farming.
  • It would encourage (but not force) people to do plexes designed for their ship class to avoid a war target in a much bigger ship despawning their plex.
  • It would encourage (but not force) people to kill the NPCs to remove the PvE disadvantage.


TL;DR: I want faction warfare to be about PvP, not PvE!



Are you nuts?? what you are saying WILL bring even MORE farmers to FW. LOL
You obviously have no clue...
Oh wait, you are a farmer yourself probably.



Also Caldari have now stopped shooting ihubs because they found out you can still farm it when vulnerable.
So what they do is they keep farming a system for days before they shoot the ihub.
Isnt it possible to change that once a System is vulnerable to not give any LP anymore for running more plexes??
Its a bit ridicilous that they still get LP when a system is already vulnerable. (it encourages farming even more)
Axl Borlara
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#124 - 2012-06-21 16:54:54 UTC
Shooting the NPC's really shouldn't take much effort even now.
I mean, given a reasonable amount and type of PVP fitted ships for the plex size, it's not exactly difficult to kill them.

Solo killing all major plex NPC's in a thrasher is, and should be, quite difficult and/or time consuming.

The whole point of NPC's existing is to prevent speed tanking farmers. And right now they aren't doing it.
Ares Lee
The 10th Crusade
#125 - 2012-06-21 19:58:49 UTC
I think CCP should fix the npc's tracking disruptors via the next patch if they want to fix the EWAR issue. NPC does not lower players' falloff range while CCP buffed the tracking enhancer and tracking computer to additionally increase ridiculous % of falloff range. Then, Minmatar became the biggest winner after CCP increased the difficulty by increasing the NPC's EWAR ability. I don't know whether it is intended or simply a overlooked bug.
Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#126 - 2012-06-22 10:05:21 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Har Harrison wrote:
Hans, if they DON'T do something soon, you might see a total collapse of the Amarr Militia. There is no way we can compete when the minmitar can make the LP they are, cash in it and then return in SFIs which is the best faction cruiser going around pretty much... It costs them nothing to fly one. We have to spend a fortune to get the equivalent ship from our store and SFIs are still expensive for us when we have no isk.
Even if you remove the ISK side of things and go with the approach that Fweddit has of many numbers in cheap ships, it still doesn't remove the fact your side can capture a plex with 1 guy while we need a fleet. It might be turd polishing, but it MUST be done in Inferno 1.1 or soon after as the winter expansion is too long to fix something we all knew was an issue BEFORE Inferno
Don't give us a rolls royce in 3-4 months time. Give us a fix now (must kill NPCs) and THEN go away and work out a better long term fix... If they can do it for the UI, they can do it for this!!!


The problems with the UI affected everyone in the entire game without question, Faction Warfare is only small subset of players, and besides no one's been able to successfully convince CCP yet that there is a "crisis" here where one faction is stuck purely based on the mechanics alone. So I think the sense of urgency you'd like them to have on this issue probably isn't the same sense of urgency they're going to have.

I've already spoke with them about this though, and discussed the exact solutions proposed in this thread by you all. I'm just not sure they're going to devote the time to it or not. Like I said, that's something only Ytterbium can clarify or give reasons as to why that's not possible.

Regarding the sleeper AI - whatever they end up using, the design goal is to tailor fit them to be fought against using PvP fits. The NPC's may not be copycats of incursion rats or sleeper rates, CCP has the capability at least to custom make new NPC's and adjust their strengths and firepower to fit. If it were me coding them, I'd make them fewer in number, smart enough that they mitigate speed tanking and force a ship-up for each plex size but are still straightforward enough to kill that they don't serve as a persistent deterrent to PvP. They shouldn't force pilots into *tank-the-room* PvE fits that focus on DPS-soaking, but they should have enough webbing frigates and such that you put yourself at much higher risk going into a larger plex in a small ship. All that to say, I've heard enough of their intentions here to not worry too much about this pushing FW back into PvE-land. We already have incursions, there is no need to duplicate that here,

Is CCP convinced NOW Hans??? They rushed out a fix for the goon manufacturing LP to convert into ISK and your militia has been carried along with a free hand up. You are already down to 50% and tier 3, so you haven't been "winning", you have been propped up.
How many ships and how much ISK has your militia accrued as a by product of this design flaw/bug on top of the LP they get from farming plexes due to the unbalanced NPCs in the plexes???

BTW - I AM mad. I supported Hans for CSM and I WANT TO SEE SOME REPRESENTATION FOR ALL MILITIAS HERE!!!!
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#127 - 2012-06-22 16:09:00 UTC
Har Harrison wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Har Harrison wrote:
Hans, if they DON'T do something soon, you might see a total collapse of the Amarr Militia. There is no way we can compete when the minmitar can make the LP they are, cash in it and then return in SFIs which is the best faction cruiser going around pretty much... It costs them nothing to fly one. We have to spend a fortune to get the equivalent ship from our store and SFIs are still expensive for us when we have no isk.
Even if you remove the ISK side of things and go with the approach that Fweddit has of many numbers in cheap ships, it still doesn't remove the fact your side can capture a plex with 1 guy while we need a fleet. It might be turd polishing, but it MUST be done in Inferno 1.1 or soon after as the winter expansion is too long to fix something we all knew was an issue BEFORE Inferno
Don't give us a rolls royce in 3-4 months time. Give us a fix now (must kill NPCs) and THEN go away and work out a better long term fix... If they can do it for the UI, they can do it for this!!!


The problems with the UI affected everyone in the entire game without question, Faction Warfare is only small subset of players, and besides no one's been able to successfully convince CCP yet that there is a "crisis" here where one faction is stuck purely based on the mechanics alone. So I think the sense of urgency you'd like them to have on this issue probably isn't the same sense of urgency they're going to have.

I've already spoke with them about this though, and discussed the exact solutions proposed in this thread by you all. I'm just not sure they're going to devote the time to it or not. Like I said, that's something only Ytterbium can clarify or give reasons as to why that's not possible.

Regarding the sleeper AI - whatever they end up using, the design goal is to tailor fit them to be fought against using PvP fits. The NPC's may not be copycats of incursion rats or sleeper rates, CCP has the capability at least to custom make new NPC's and adjust their strengths and firepower to fit. If it were me coding them, I'd make them fewer in number, smart enough that they mitigate speed tanking and force a ship-up for each plex size but are still straightforward enough to kill that they don't serve as a persistent deterrent to PvP. They shouldn't force pilots into *tank-the-room* PvE fits that focus on DPS-soaking, but they should have enough webbing frigates and such that you put yourself at much higher risk going into a larger plex in a small ship. All that to say, I've heard enough of their intentions here to not worry too much about this pushing FW back into PvE-land. We already have incursions, there is no need to duplicate that here,

Is CCP convinced NOW Hans??? They rushed out a fix for the goon manufacturing LP to convert into ISK and your militia has been carried along with a free hand up. You are already down to 50% and tier 3, so you haven't been "winning", you have been propped up.
How many ships and how much ISK has your militia accrued as a by product of this design flaw/bug on top of the LP they get from farming plexes due to the unbalanced NPCs in the plexes???

BTW - I AM mad. I supported Hans for CSM and I WANT TO SEE SOME REPRESENTATION FOR ALL MILITIAS HERE!!!!



We shouldn't blame hans for the design flaw.

However I would be very interested in knowing how much isk in items has come out of the minmatar faction war store from may 22nd to june 22nd? How much isk in items has gone out of the 24th crusade lp store from may 22nd until june 22nd?

I don't want to know this to necessarilly make any sort of argument about change (at least I can't think of one yet) I just want to know for lulz.



Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2012-06-22 16:12:41 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Har Harrison wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Har Harrison wrote:
Hans, if they DON'T do something soon, you might see a total collapse of the Amarr Militia. There is no way we can compete when the minmitar can make the LP they are, cash in it and then return in SFIs which is the best faction cruiser going around pretty much... It costs them nothing to fly one. We have to spend a fortune to get the equivalent ship from our store and SFIs are still expensive for us when we have no isk.
Even if you remove the ISK side of things and go with the approach that Fweddit has of many numbers in cheap ships, it still doesn't remove the fact your side can capture a plex with 1 guy while we need a fleet. It might be turd polishing, but it MUST be done in Inferno 1.1 or soon after as the winter expansion is too long to fix something we all knew was an issue BEFORE Inferno
Don't give us a rolls royce in 3-4 months time. Give us a fix now (must kill NPCs) and THEN go away and work out a better long term fix... If they can do it for the UI, they can do it for this!!!


The problems with the UI affected everyone in the entire game without question, Faction Warfare is only small subset of players, and besides no one's been able to successfully convince CCP yet that there is a "crisis" here where one faction is stuck purely based on the mechanics alone. So I think the sense of urgency you'd like them to have on this issue probably isn't the same sense of urgency they're going to have.

I've already spoke with them about this though, and discussed the exact solutions proposed in this thread by you all. I'm just not sure they're going to devote the time to it or not. Like I said, that's something only Ytterbium can clarify or give reasons as to why that's not possible.

Regarding the sleeper AI - whatever they end up using, the design goal is to tailor fit them to be fought against using PvP fits. The NPC's may not be copycats of incursion rats or sleeper rates, CCP has the capability at least to custom make new NPC's and adjust their strengths and firepower to fit. If it were me coding them, I'd make them fewer in number, smart enough that they mitigate speed tanking and force a ship-up for each plex size but are still straightforward enough to kill that they don't serve as a persistent deterrent to PvP. They shouldn't force pilots into *tank-the-room* PvE fits that focus on DPS-soaking, but they should have enough webbing frigates and such that you put yourself at much higher risk going into a larger plex in a small ship. All that to say, I've heard enough of their intentions here to not worry too much about this pushing FW back into PvE-land. We already have incursions, there is no need to duplicate that here,

Is CCP convinced NOW Hans??? They rushed out a fix for the goon manufacturing LP to convert into ISK and your militia has been carried along with a free hand up. You are already down to 50% and tier 3, so you haven't been "winning", you have been propped up.
How many ships and how much ISK has your militia accrued as a by product of this design flaw/bug on top of the LP they get from farming plexes due to the unbalanced NPCs in the plexes???

BTW - I AM mad. I supported Hans for CSM and I WANT TO SEE SOME REPRESENTATION FOR ALL MILITIAS HERE!!!!



We shouldn't blame hans for the design flaw.

However I would be very interested in knowing how much isk in items has come out of the minmatar faction war store from may 22nd to june 22nd? How much isk in items has gone out of the 24th crusade lp store from may 22nd until june 22nd?

I don't want to know this to necessarilly make any sort of argument about change (at least I can't think of one yet) I just want to know for lulz.




I am not blaming him for the design flaw.

My issue is that he still isn't saying "There is absolutely an issue here and CCP needs to fix it". Instead we are getting comments about how Amarr need to step up etc... It is just insulting. We highlighted issues before the patch and now we want the CSM member who has the FW background to raise hell on our behalf!!!
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#129 - 2012-06-22 16:43:00 UTC
Yes I agree. Everytime I see the title to this thread "rebalancing" NPCS, I wonder what he means by "rebalancing." They were never balanced to begin with.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#130 - 2012-06-22 17:58:24 UTC
Madbuster73 wrote:
Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote:
stuff


Are you nuts?? what you are saying WILL bring even MORE farmers to FW. LOL
You obviously have no clue...
Oh wait, you are a farmer yourself probably.



Also Caldari have now stopped shooting ihubs because they found out you can still farm it when vulnerable.
So what they do is they keep farming a system for days before they shoot the ihub.
Isnt it possible to change that once a System is vulnerable to not give any LP anymore for running more plexes??
Its a bit ridicilous that they still get LP when a system is already vulnerable. (it encourages farming even more)


How will this possibly bring more farmers? I am trying to come up with ideas that would increase defencive plexing and thus force plexers to PvP.

I am not a farmer and I hate farmers with all my heart (they usually try to whore my plexes (often ends with them in a pod)).
Thaddeus Rees
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#131 - 2012-06-22 18:45:09 UTC
What annoys me most about Npc's in offensive factional warfare complexes, is that to tank them in a frigate I need to swap out for a PvE fitted ship.
Which inevitably means when anyone warps in looking for a fight I warp out, having had to use a fit that is completely unusable in PvP...

The same applies in reverse, and when I am hunting for people who are running offensive plexes they immediately warp off because they are using PvE fitted ships.


Since the point of factional warfare is that everything is designed to provoke a fight, let me say that I Really want that fight, but not if the game mechanics have forced me to use a PvE fitted ship...


I'm not sure what the solution is for this, but I imagine it lies in greatly nerfing (or even removing) those Npc's.
Seperate system control from PvE... Aka, to PvE people should go and run factional warfare missions...
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#132 - 2012-06-23 09:31:01 UTC
Thaddeus Rees wrote:
.....

And that is the wet dream for all of us .. to have a PvP centric mechanic in plexes. Problem is that FW has more alts per capita than even the most alt heavy null alliances, so designing such a system is nigh impossible.

The pragmatic/rational approach is to accept that some measure of PvE is part of plexing and making sure that it is moved to the background when/if PvP occurs .. all the while brainstorming for a way to make the wet dream come true.
Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#133 - 2012-06-23 11:06:43 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Thaddeus Rees wrote:
.....

And that is the wet dream for all of us .. to have a PvP centric mechanic in plexes. Problem is that FW has more alts per capita than even the most alt heavy null alliances, so designing such a system is nigh impossible.

The pragmatic/rational approach is to accept that some measure of PvE is part of plexing and making sure that it is moved to the background when/if PvP occurs .. all the while brainstorming for a way to make the wet dream come true.

One must also remember that we fight for the militias of the empirs. That by itself implies an interaction with the NPCs of the empire navys...
Removing them is not the option. Finding a way to use them that gives good pvp and meaningful content is what needs to occur (just don't ask me HOW).
Coco Caine
Black Rise Combat Logistics
#134 - 2012-06-23 16:01:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Coco Caine
Plexing has no consistent story, and even if you could make a story up, plexing is no fun.
What the hell is the game lore behind noob alt vigils orbiting around a space button in order to make a bunker vulnerable? Rats shouldn't play any significant role in faction warfare, which, for me, is about lore-based PVP.

Screw tedious plexing, conquest should happen through destruction of rat POS spawns
Randomly spawn ungated military complexes ("POSes") that have to be destroyed (or repped up) in order to switch (maintain) system sov. They should have rats and guns that can defend the military plex from solo players. No more afk bot alt army conquest. Have the rats warp away if more than three players are on grid, so no more interfering with Pvp with "unfair" jams etc.

FW missions more generic
Now to the FW missions. I personally enjoy running those. I'd like them to be more generic though, and with much less to no rats. Something like "Destroy small/medium/large communication node". Because of significant rat dps I can't do them with a pvp ship, that sucks, so when someone wants some pewpew, I have to warp out, so remove the rats. Running missions should count towards sov switch, too, that way allowing solo and small gang players to contribute to the war.

Easy missions for noobies
For noob players I'd introduce level 1,2 defensive "distribution"-style missions, where they can stay within the factions own systems. Missions like 'deliver a data core to a covert data center' or 'deploy/refuel a small/medium/large communication node'. That way, the fewer systems a faction has left, the more interesting it gets for newer players to run those easy missions.

No go implement the above changes :).
Madbuster73
State War Academy
Caldari State
#135 - 2012-06-24 19:18:30 UTC
I have another Idea: you have to shoot the ihub and then it gets reinforced (always random time 24-48 hours)
Then when it comes out the Militia that reinforced it can shoot it. and if it goes down people will get LP for it. for example 1 Million LP divided by everyone one the Killmail of the Ihub. (takes about 25-50 people to shoot a ihub so thats about 20.000/40.000 LP wich is not much. But that can be iterated on. AND you will have fights on the Ihubs :)

Ofcourse this is just another idea, feel free to improve it.
Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#136 - 2012-06-25 02:10:14 UTC
Madbuster73 wrote:
I have another Idea: you have to shoot the ihub and then it gets reinforced (always random time 24-48 hours)
Then when it comes out the Militia that reinforced it can shoot it. and if it goes down people will get LP for it. for example 1 Million LP divided by everyone one the Killmail of the Ihub. (takes about 25-50 people to shoot a ihub so thats about 20.000/40.000 LP wich is not much. But that can be iterated on. AND you will have fights on the Ihubs :)

Ofcourse this is just another idea, feel free to improve it.

This idea does have some merit I guess. The people who reinforced it should also get some reward though since they might not make the second event due to TZ differences etc...

There needs to be a mechanic of some kind to force a defensive outcome as well as an offensive one. The offensive one is already defined - system flips and is not contested if the iHub is blown up.

One idea that could be exlored is if the defensive IHub comes out of reinforced and is not blown up after XYZ time (e.g. 4-6 hours perhaps) reverts the system to 50% contestion. This means the defending militia has the following choice
1) defensive plex to stop it going vulnerable
2) gamble on the second chance of being able to keep the IHub alive for long enough for it to reset and the system to drop to 50% contestion. Failure to do this would of course mean you lost that system...

Variations on this could be a timer that starts running once armor damage is repaired and the shields are above a certain amount (e.g. 80%). If the timer gets to 0, it is defended and a "defender reset" occurs. If the attackers get it below this threashold, the timer stops (maybe even resets).
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#137 - 2012-06-25 04:10:23 UTC
The static EHP grind should only be offered as a solution when all other possibilities have been exhausted .. it is mind-numbingly dull, has been since CCP introduced it with null sovereignty and the associated towers .. still is with iHubs and SBUs.

Drama/Backstabbery/More interesting option:
Replace bunker-bust with a NPC taskforce consisting of a couple of RR carriers, a supercarrier and an assortment of sub-capital ships .. EHP of S.Carrier roughly 2/3rds current bunker/iHub.

S.Carrier drops an encryption control module that has to be plugged into the iHub to flip system. While Navy is useless in a fight, they do have the bureaucracy down pat so validity of encryption protocol expires after four to six hours .. were an enemy (or ally Smile) to ninja-loot said module to prevent it from being installed into iHub, HQ sends another taskforce with a 'fresh' control module after the allotted time.
NB: Control Module ALWAYS drops, only way to destroy it is to jettison and nuke can or trash in station, so get that ninja!
Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#138 - 2012-06-25 04:16:17 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
The static EHP grind should only be offered as a solution when all other possibilities have been exhausted .. it is mind-numbingly dull, has been since CCP introduced it with null sovereignty and the associated towers .. still is with iHubs and SBUs.

Drama/Backstabbery/More interesting option:
Replace bunker-bust with a NPC taskforce consisting of a couple of RR carriers, a supercarrier and an assortment of sub-capital ships .. EHP of S.Carrier roughly 2/3rds current bunker/iHub.

S.Carrier drops an encryption control module that has to be plugged into the iHub to flip system. While Navy is useless in a fight, they do have the bureaucracy down pat so validity of encryption protocol expires after four to six hours .. were an enemy (or ally Smile) to ninja-loot said module to prevent it from being installed into iHub, HQ sends another taskforce with a 'fresh' control module after the allotted time.
NB: Control Module ALWAYS drops, only way to destroy it is to jettison and nuke can or trash in station, so get that ninja!

If that is what is required. The point is that the event should be significant and give both sides a decent outcome.

If the defender wins, and then has to repeat the same exercise again 10 minute later as the system went back to 99.999999% contested and someone completes a minor, the event is somewhat pointless. The defender needs a significant reward for winning the engagement and good fights in and of itself is not enough.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#139 - 2012-06-25 04:41:57 UTC
Har Harrison wrote:
If that is what is required. The point is that the event should be significant and give both sides a decent outcome.

If the defender wins, and then has to repeat the same exercise again 10 minute later as the system went back to 99.999999% contested and someone completes a minor, the event is somewhat pointless. The defender needs a significant reward for winning the engagement and good fights in and of itself is not enough.

One could combine it with the previously (and elsewhere) mentioned idea of having "Background NPC Battles" for flavour.

When system defences drop (Vulnerable), attackers HQ send a taskforce which is met by its equal from defenders HQ .. they'll go at it forever with neither side being able to break the other (ie. backdrop) .. militia's then get to duke it out for the right to nuke the opposing taskforce.
If attacker wins, grinds the dynamic EHP, gets the drop and inserts it in iHub = LP reward and system flip.
If defender wins grinds the dynamic EHP, gets the drop and inserts it in iHub = System contested status reset to 50%.

NB: This is on top of securing plexes. If system is taken down to say 95% by defender then the taskforce suddenly starts doing damage and wipes the attacking taskfoce (no module drop in that case) and goes home.

PS: I will entertain the most outrageous ideas and concepts if it means I don't have to shoot a damn brink in space ever again, hate that mechanic like the plague. Blink
Ashriban Kador
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#140 - 2012-06-25 12:08:54 UTC

For a start ALL Facion Navy NPCs wether in FW or hanging around gates and stations in Empire should do Omni Damage with turrets and missles together. Just with racial flavour such as Amarr being slow large armour EHP with long range turrets and missiles, Caldari being the same but Shields instead of armour, Minmatar and Gallente being faster more spread EHP (both shields and armour, but not as much as Cal/Amarr) using short ranged turrets and rockets.

It would be nice to have Complexes renamed "Engagements" and have groups of both Factions NPCs inside duking it out between each other (and anyone entering the 'Engagement') but that would need a massive NPC AI rewrite and fiddling about with Standings. But if it can be done, it'll make defensive plexing more interesting since there will be something to kill.
No timer. Just after all one sides waves are dead, a larger ship spawns. Possibly 1 grade up... IE a cruiser for Minor Plexes, although that might be a bit much for new players to solo. But then again, if that new player had his NPC faction navy spawns to help...

And the engagements scale up of course to Yoshida's Capital Ship Duke Out for the system flip...

Your goals may align with some ... and with others, collide with the force of suns.