These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Faction Warfare - Are the LP Rewards for Plexing Topsy-Turvy?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-07-12 07:51:37 UTC
from http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.ca/2012/07/faction-warfare-are-lp-rewards-for.html


When war looks to be lost, when there is little hope to be found anywhere, that is when government needs its people to step up the most. When those that do step up need to be rewarded for fighting on, for persevering in the face of overwhelming odds.

When war looks to be won, when government and population begin to turn their attention elsewhere, that's when those still fighting the good fight tend to have their heroism recognized the least. It is not fair, but often the case.

So, given that, are the loyalty point rewards for offensive plexing, are they backwards?

Shouldn't the highest rewards go to those still fighting under extreme odds? The lowest rewards go to those who's battle is almost over?

Currently, due to warzone control bonuses, the biggest rewards go to those with the highest warzone control. Perhaps CCP got that backwards. Perhaps LP bonuses for offensive plexing should be highest to those with T1 and T2 warzone control, lowest to those with T4 and T5 warzone control.
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#2 - 2012-07-12 07:59:26 UTC
They just need to remove the 1st and 5th tiers. Then all will work ok.

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#3 - 2012-07-12 08:20:51 UTC
I do agree that the structure is bass ackwards. It is completely counter-intuitive for a government that is losing the war to cut the pay of its all-volunteer militia.

The rewards for winning the war should come from having the space (and having upgrades to make it not suck). The rewards for soldiering on in the face of defeat should come from pushing back and hurting the enemy.

Also, the difference in warzone control multipliers need to be far less egregious.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#4 - 2012-07-12 08:34:31 UTC
There are lots of ideas out there. Make some system upgrades that translate directly into isk. With a second source of income in place you could take a look at flipping the LP store.

Or

Make a more dynamic LP store. Make certain items very cheap at tier one and very expensive at tier five.
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2012-07-12 10:13:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Muad 'dib
Soils to the victor: no one disagrees with this.

Punishing the losers... to below what a high sec mission runner gets FOR THE SAME MODULES, whos bright idea was that?

IMO the only change that needs to happen, is to have what is now tier 3 rewards changed to tier 1, leave tier 5 rewards as they are now and re-grade the tiers in between.

The current system would have worked - if the LP store was fully exclusive to FW. To force the price of the losers modules up, but while any carebear in high sec can get them, the prices will never raise up enough to warrant anyone in their right mind joining up with a losing factions side.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#6 - 2012-07-12 10:39:12 UTC
Muad 'dib wrote:
Soils to the victor: no one disagrees with this.

Punishing the losers... to below what a high sec mission runner gets FOR THE SAME MODULES, whos bright idea was that?

IMO the only change that needs to happen, is to have what is now tier 3 rewards changed to tier 1, leave tier 5 rewards as they are now and re-grade the tiers in between.

The current system would have worked - if the LP store was fully exclusive to FW. To force the price of the losers modules up, but while any carebear in high sec can get them, the prices will never raise up enough to warrant anyone in their right mind joining up with a losing factions side.


I do not disagree that FW LP store could NEVER get more expensive than High sec LP stores. But that is about all I would grant to a side that simply has not been trying even.

In fact I would love if ALL LP stores had its prices looked upon. THe stupid "need 700+ tags " offers are nearly useless. Because the time involved in draging a tag in or out of your cargo hodl 700 times is more than the value of the item.

As a rule of thumb LP stores int his game are as balanced as Greece economy
Yuri Intaki
Nasranite Watch
#7 - 2012-07-12 10:44:12 UTC
Seishi Maru wrote:
As a rule of thumb LP stores int his game are as balanced as Greece economy


Actually I am fairly sure every isk transaction in Eve gets marked down somewhere in some form. I highly doubt this is the case in Greece Lol
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-07-12 10:57:13 UTC
You can have players who try and players who dont, you cannot kick lazy people like a alliance can, but then again lazy people weather they are in the mitlita or not, does not effect the outcome. Its people who do stuff that matter.

Everyone is blaming the old players who played the old rules on not trying for the new rules, why?

Surly new system means new players, and there have been new players, but to 'winning' sides. Why is this? Because a new player does not want to be on a losing side with no income with 'lazy' people.

The general eve public can blame a side for not trying, but why should those old players try? They were playing on old rules not new rules, fact of the matter is that the new rules do not bring in new players to all sides.

FW players used to run missions for isk, which now plexing gives more LP for time spent makes them worthless and on top of that if you dont hold many station systems with the agents in, even worse since you cant get to them anyway.

Having a base LP/ISK equal with high sec missions for the same faction, should be the lower limit, or those players will go off to high sec and do them instead, or simply leave altogether. Not everyone has a billion alts for earning isk etc.

The current model ensures a land slide for one side once so much has been taken, as per my previous post there might be some light at the end of the tunnel if the losers ships went up in price attracting people, even though it takes alot of time to get the LP for a poor exchange its still worth it in some ways. - This cannot happen while the stores arethe same in high sec, safe, lvl 4 missions from any bear with standing.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#9 - 2012-07-12 14:44:36 UTC
Muad 'dib wrote:
You can have players who try and players who dont, you cannot kick lazy people like a alliance can, but then again lazy people weather they are in the mitlita or not, does not effect the outcome. Its people who do stuff that matter.

Everyone is blaming the old players who played the old rules on not trying for the new rules, why?

Surly new system means new players, and there have been new players, but to 'winning' sides. Why is this? Because a new player does not want to be on a losing side with no income with 'lazy' people.

The general eve public can blame a side for not trying, but why should those old players try? They were playing on old rules not new rules, fact of the matter is that the new rules do not bring in new players to all sides.

FW players used to run missions for isk, which now plexing gives more LP for time spent makes them worthless and on top of that if you dont hold many station systems with the agents in, even worse since you cant get to them anyway.

Having a base LP/ISK equal with high sec missions for the same faction, should be the lower limit, or those players will go off to high sec and do them instead, or simply leave altogether. Not everyone has a billion alts for earning isk etc.

The current model ensures a land slide for one side once so much has been taken, as per my previous post there might be some light at the end of the tunnel if the losers ships went up in price attracting people, even though it takes alot of time to get the LP for a poor exchange its still worth it in some ways. - This cannot happen while the stores arethe same in high sec, safe, lvl 4 missions from any bear with standing.



But your same logic can be applied to 0.0 alliances. No one want to enter an alliance that has no 0.0 holding and/or huge super capital fleet. Yet CCP does not wipe things from the alliances that got the 0.0 with their hard work.

The only thing that can be done is have secondary sources of income, like high sec carebearing that are feasible for both cases.

The proccess of trying to take 0.0 isa same as a militia trying to retake ground. At start it will be very hard to do any profit, most of time impossible. Usually takes months in 0.0 to recover what an aliance invested in time and losses to recover. Amar militia needs same mentality, its not a game where they can climb from near zero (and being near zero is entirely their fault as an entity) while not having to bank the proccess from their own pockets! That is eve in FW, in WH in 0.0 everywhere! You need ot bank it from your own reserves for THEN to have profit!


What can be discussed are stupidities like negative bonus on LP store prices when you are at ground level. But Amar cannto expect to be able to fund their militia with the FW itself before they invest enough to at least climb a little bit. Currently this climb needs to be to level 4 and that is what its possible to discuss adjustments.


Another much more interesting possiblity would be to add another type of bonification due to FW participation that is not tied to massive control of the war space. Something that pays less than controlling at level 4, but more than the current possibilities. Want an example? Make the side that is winning have Faction NPC flyign aroudn belts and sometiem gates etc. alone or in pairs like rats, NPCs who can be shot only by oposing militia without triggering gate guns response and a full 15 min blinky red state. make those NPCs drop a bit increased ammount of tags. Voilá.. being on the loosing side forces you into another economical activity , that is a bit less efficient but its there!
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#10 - 2012-07-12 15:10:41 UTC
Seishi, you haven't gotten a kill since May 2009. GTFO with your 'our hard work' rants or post with your main. I was with Minmatar when we made those final pushes. It was not a cakewalk. Every time I logged on the Amarr were pushing another system.

The Amarr were disorganized but the vast majority fought like hell and were simply beaten down.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#11 - 2012-07-12 16:03:07 UTC
Seishi Maru wrote:
Muad 'dib wrote:
Soils to the victor: no one disagrees with this.

Punishing the losers... to below what a high sec mission runner gets FOR THE SAME MODULES, whos bright idea was that?

IMO the only change that needs to happen, is to have what is now tier 3 rewards changed to tier 1, leave tier 5 rewards as they are now and re-grade the tiers in between.

The current system would have worked - if the LP store was fully exclusive to FW. To force the price of the losers modules up, but while any carebear in high sec can get them, the prices will never raise up enough to warrant anyone in their right mind joining up with a losing factions side.


I do not disagree that FW LP store could NEVER get more expensive than High sec LP stores. But that is about all I would grant to a side that simply has not been trying even.

In fact I would love if ALL LP stores had its prices looked upon. THe stupid "need 700+ tags " offers are nearly useless. Because the time involved in draging a tag in or out of your cargo hodl 700 times is more than the value of the item.

As a rule of thumb LP stores int his game are as balanced as Greece economy




The tags will be a real burden for minmatar because you all can speed tank plexes without killing anything. But for amarr we have to kill all the ships so we tend to collect the tags.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#12 - 2012-07-12 16:09:30 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Seishi Maru wrote:
Muad 'dib wrote:
Soils to the victor: no one disagrees with this.

Punishing the losers... to below what a high sec mission runner gets FOR THE SAME MODULES, whos bright idea was that?

IMO the only change that needs to happen, is to have what is now tier 3 rewards changed to tier 1, leave tier 5 rewards as they are now and re-grade the tiers in between.

The current system would have worked - if the LP store was fully exclusive to FW. To force the price of the losers modules up, but while any carebear in high sec can get them, the prices will never raise up enough to warrant anyone in their right mind joining up with a losing factions side.


I do not disagree that FW LP store could NEVER get more expensive than High sec LP stores. But that is about all I would grant to a side that simply has not been trying even.

In fact I would love if ALL LP stores had its prices looked upon. THe stupid "need 700+ tags " offers are nearly useless. Because the time involved in draging a tag in or out of your cargo hodl 700 times is more than the value of the item.

As a rule of thumb LP stores int his game are as balanced as Greece economy




The tags will be a real burden for minmatar because you all can speed tank plexes without killing anything. But for amarr we have to kill all the ships so we tend to collect the tags.


ccp irony set to maximum! lol

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#13 - 2012-07-12 16:52:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Seishi Maru
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Seishi, you haven't gotten a kill since May 2009. GTFO with your 'our hard work' rants or post with your main. I was with Minmatar when we made those final pushes. It was not a cakewalk. Every time I logged on the Amarr were pushing another system.

The Amarr were disorganized but the vast majority fought like hell and were simply beaten down.



A yes because people always post with their PVP or main character in forum. Shut up noob.I was on that same push and was even in fleets with you very likely! I jsut prefer to not post with my main due to attrition that usually happens with certain persons on the minmatar militia when you expose any idea that they do not share.

Truth is truth, regardles sif it comes from a 0.0 main of a FW alt or from the incursions isk making character.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#14 - 2012-07-12 16:53:24 UTC
missclicked quote instead of edit
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#15 - 2012-07-12 16:59:33 UTC
Seishi Maru wrote:
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Seishi, you haven't gotten a kill since May 2009. GTFO with your 'our hard work' rants or post with your main. I was with Minmatar when we made those final pushes. It was not a cakewalk. Every time I logged on the Amarr were pushing another system.

The Amarr were disorganized but the vast majority fought like hell and were simply beaten down.



A yes because people always post with their PVP or main character in forum. Shut up noob.I was on that same push and was even in fleets with you very likely! I jsut prefer to not post with my main due to attrition that usually happens with certain persons on the minmatar militia when you expose any idea that they do not share.

Truth is truth, regardles sif it comes from a 0.0 main of a FW alt or from the incursions isk making character.


I'd say, 'Come at me bro' but you seem to be lacking in the balls dept. P
Merdaneth
Angel Wing.
Khimi Harar
#16 - 2012-07-12 18:26:41 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:

When war looks to be lost, when there is little hope to be found anywhere, that is when government needs its people to step up the most. When those that do step up need to be rewarded for fighting on, for persevering in the face of overwhelming odds.

When war looks to be won, when government and population begin to turn their attention elsewhere, that's when those still fighting the good fight tend to have their heroism recognized the least. It is not fair, but often the case.


Oh, rewards might not be backwards, but there is simply lacking the logical response: a state which pours so much resources into a war that mercenaries from all walks of life flit to their militia's to partake in the bounty go bankrupt soon if the war isn't won.

Especially if the mercenaries in the militia conspire to not 'win' the war but attempt to have the war see-saw between almost winning and giving a little ground.

If you make the LP pool finite (or fixed per participant), then bigger rewards for progress would still be rewarded, but farming would at some point come up against a point of no return.