These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: I-hub and system upgrades

First post First post
Author
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#201 - 2012-08-31 14:30:09 UTC
regarding the LP payout changes based on warzone control

thats a great change overall, but please leave the LP payout for pvp unchanged. You cant buff it above the ships value (for obvious reasons) and you shouldn't nerf it since it is very low already compared to pve.

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

Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#202 - 2012-08-31 14:31:28 UTC
Fozzie, will you be taking measures to remove the plexing imbalance?

Dolce et decorum est pro Imperium mori

EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#203 - 2012-08-31 14:32:15 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
corestwo wrote:

Anyway, I'm going to have to say I'm cautiously optimistic here as well. If Fozzie would confirm for us that he's working on it instead of merely being the front man, I could probably strike the "cautiously" from the record, too... Blink


FW is the biggest focus for Team Game of Drones this expansion, which counts both Ytterbium and myself among its members

when does 0.0 even get a team :(
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#204 - 2012-08-31 14:33:02 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
regarding the LP payout changes based on warzone control

thats a great change overall, but please leave the LP payout for pvp unchanged. You cant buff it above the ships value (for obvious reasons) and you shouldn't nerf it since it is very low already compared to pve.


Me and Fozzie already talked about this, I'm of the opinion that PvP payout should be the maximum value for all factions, all the time. No sense in penalizing the underdog for recruiting dedicated PvPers to help them recover!

Decision hasn't made, but we had this conversation yesterday, so hold on, we're not done with changes yet Big smile

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#205 - 2012-08-31 14:34:33 UTC
Sorry in advance, going off topic for a spell.
CCP Fozzie wrote:
That tag change is something we've heard from others as well, I definitely think is has merit but we can't commit to tag changes at this time.

Want it taken to the extreme?

- Tags replaced by increased ISK cost or some exotic material/item in store.
- Offensive plexes do not give LP but tags dropped from defending NPCs can be exchanged for LP at a militia station, total value about the same as current.
- Defensive plexes spawn a container with tags where timer was upon completion. Tags can be redeemed at a station or delivered directly to iHub thus bypassing the bureaucracy and minimizing possible maintenance fees (NB: iHub is slow to process tags so expect to be stationary while is completes the transaction Lol)

Nuke farmers and steal their stuff!
Nuke defender on iHub trying to save a dime and steal their stuff!
Hell, Nuke everyone everywhere .. they probably got STUFF!


EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#206 - 2012-08-31 14:34:44 UTC
when you nerf highsec stations please make 0.0 outposts not useless pieces of crap tia
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#207 - 2012-08-31 14:37:14 UTC
Rodj Blake wrote:
Fozzie, will you be taking measures to remove the plexing imbalance?


Assuming you're talking about the imbalances with the strength of NPCs between factions (missile use being a big part of it), that will be covered in the next set of posts which will appear in the NPC balance sticky once it's done.

But yes one of the planks of the FW NPC rebalance is to ensure that they are balanced between factions. CCP Affinity is on the case.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#208 - 2012-08-31 14:40:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Kuehnelt
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
I'm cautiously optimistic. There's workable income for a losing faction.


Yeah, same. 2 plexes for a Slicer instead of 4 at tier 1, so it's an outright buff to T1 income, but more importantly the isk multiplier is going away. What a world, I can buy my own ammo and implants with LP again.

The change does remove the possibility of LP, once gained, ever being worth more than it is when you get it. And defensive LP seems like it'd only mean instant stagnation and people giving up on ever taking systems and the concentration of non-farming FW activity even more to small parts of the warzone and huge blobs and aliens with tentacles hanging from their faces. Seriously.

Quote:
* Defensive plexing gives LP: as title says, but with a twist. LP amount is based on contested system % to avoid farming. Thus, a system that is 50% contested would only give 50% of the total LP amount available. Maximum cap would be set to 75% to encourage players to still be in the offensive.


OK, 50% at 50%, but does it go up or down from there? Is it the more contested, the higher pay for decontesting? Also, 50% of what LP? The LP your tier 4 faction would get from an offensive plex, or the LP that the enemy's teir 1 faction would get, or the base tier 2 LP?

Let's say it's the enemy's tier of LP that you get 50% of. If the enemy's in a minor plex in a 50% contested system, expecting to earn 5000 LP, can you hide in a major stronghold and make 50% (tier 1) * 50% (system contested) * 30000 LP = 7500 LP? Getting paid better than your enemy to hide in a plex that's too tough for him instead of chasing him out of the minor?

EDIT:

Aliens with tentacles hanging from their faces:

* completely unfitted T1 frigates, whichever one is the cheapest to mass produce, flown almost completely AFK on multiboxed alts with 0 SP trained ever, who enter a system, warp to the largest plex on scan, orbit the button, and make income competitive with people with pvp fits who take on size-appropriate plexes and lose T2 fit ships on occasion because they want to fight.

* the above, only with bots.
Abominare
The Hatchery
#209 - 2012-08-31 14:45:43 UTC
@Foz

People who aren't terrible at at eve are generating about enough LP to fully upgrade a system nearly by themselves in an evening based on your planned LP upgrade numbers. As long as upgraded systems are so easily replaced like that, you'll continue to have people not care to fight over upgraded systems. Add two or three zeroes to each level and it'll actually be a commitment. It'll also encourage the pve'ers and pvp'ers to actually communicate whereas right now its a separated community where the two rarely talk or coordinate actions.
Lord BryanII
#210 - 2012-08-31 14:49:45 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
corestwo wrote:

Anyway, I'm going to have to say I'm cautiously optimistic here as well. If Fozzie would confirm for us that he's working on it instead of merely being the front man, I could probably strike the "cautiously" from the record, too... Blink


FW is the biggest focus for Team Game of Drones this expansion, which counts both Ytterbium and myself among its members


FW is the best way for us little guys, newer players to make isk, and it gets taken away in just a few months. Yet tech still doesn't get any serious work done to it so the divide will continue to get bigger. I hope there is some news on that front coming out soon
Hidden Snake
Inglorious-Basterds
#211 - 2012-08-31 14:55:38 UTC
ok ... finaly some better news ... Amar are still ****** up, but why not ....

cynojammer .... hmmm .... I like it, but it will be funny .... please make them cheap so even small corps can fight without being hotdroped on everyoccasion .... and make it tough
Nex apparatu5
Blackwood Co.
#212 - 2012-08-31 15:16:22 UTC
So currently isk costs of trade-ins are modified, along with LP costs depending on tier. With the shift away from warzone control modifying the LP cost, will isk cost be modified? If it isn't, what will the isk costs be set as? Will they be roughly equivalent to tier 3 today? tier 5? tier 1?
iulixxi
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#213 - 2012-08-31 15:20:43 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • CYNO JAMMER

  • As you can see above, the Cyno Jammer is back with a vengeance. However we took into consideration the feedback we received during Fanfest and various community channels, and it would work as mentioned below.


    This will impact ‘some’ alliances ability to do logistics from Empire to 0.0 … have you considered this?

    E
    Hans Jagerblitzen
    Ice Fire Warriors
    #214 - 2012-08-31 15:22:06 UTC
    Nex apparatu5 wrote:
    So currently isk costs of trade-ins are modified, along with LP costs depending on tier. With the shift away from warzone control modifying the LP cost, will isk cost be modified? If it isn't, what will the isk costs be set as? Will they be roughly equivalent to tier 3 today? tier 5? tier 1?


    Tier 3...in otherwords, pre-inferno levels.

    CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

    Lev Arturis
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #215 - 2012-08-31 15:26:44 UTC
    iulixxi wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • CYNO JAMMER

  • As you can see above, the Cyno Jammer is back with a vengeance. However we took into consideration the feedback we received during Fanfest and various community channels, and it would work as mentioned below.


    This will impact ‘some’ alliances ability to do logistics from Empire to 0.0 … have you considered this?

    E



    No it will not. I suggest you read Ytterbiums post again.
    Nex apparatu5
    Blackwood Co.
    #216 - 2012-08-31 15:27:17 UTC
    Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
    Nex apparatu5 wrote:
    So currently isk costs of trade-ins are modified, along with LP costs depending on tier. With the shift away from warzone control modifying the LP cost, will isk cost be modified? If it isn't, what will the isk costs be set as? Will they be roughly equivalent to tier 3 today? tier 5? tier 1?


    Tier 3...in otherwords, pre-inferno levels.


    That's awesome, thanks
    Yogsoloth
    Percussive Diplomacy
    PERCUSSIVE PIZZA TIME DIPLOMACY
    #217 - 2012-08-31 15:30:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Yogsoloth
    As I read the proposed changes and winter iterations I can't help but to think that all incentive to join or help the losing side will be removed.

    With lp returns tied to WZ control there will be less lp/isk coming in for the losing side. Add the increased costs to upgrade systems and why would anyone help or support the losing side? Expect to see more exodus to the winning sides; plexing alts and corps moving laterally to their sister faction(s).

    Also, expect to see hordes of plexing alts in t1 frigs (maybe in noob ships) spinning defensive plexes. Even with the proposed decreased returns for defensive plexing they can spin those buttons risk free all day long and make fortunes. In fact they will even have npc protection from unwanted intruders. The winning faction(s) will have an effective stranglehold on FW.

    On the flip side, I see some FW zone tech moons changing hands with the cyno jammers goin in. \o/
    Rashmika Clavain
    Revelation Space
    #218 - 2012-08-31 15:42:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Rashmika Clavain
    I love the propsoed changes!

    I'd like to add:

    When you flip a system, obviosuly the enemy can no longer dock. However if you flip a system in "traditional" Caldari space, any State Protectorate station agents are obviously inherently Caldari.

    The change:

    When you capture a system with a State Protectorate station, it will provide a FDU agent relative to the level of the iHub. If hte iHub is level 1, you get a level 1 FDU agent. If the iHub is level 4, you get a level 1, 2, 3 and 4 agent. If adding these "temporary" agents to the list of agents in teh station is too much hassle, please provide them as "agents in space" at the iHub (for example).

    This naturally applies to the Squiddies and the Amarr/Minnies.

    Plus, some FW stations have no manufacturing/research/copying/invention slots. This kinda makes the bulk of the lower system upgrades erroneous. Can this also be reviewed?

    Ta.
    Zarnak Wulf
    Amarrian Vengeance
    Team Amarrica
    #219 - 2012-08-31 15:43:58 UTC
    The losing faction has quite a few things going for it. Tier one will essentially become today's tier 2. The high end tier is getting nerfed too. It will be very expensive to maintain tier 5. The winners will be on defense alot more as they will be forced to do security sweeps in their rear systems. Alot of the farmers will quit as the profits will not be the same.
    Elise Randolph
    Habitual Euthanasia
    Pandemic Legion
    #220 - 2012-08-31 15:48:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Elise Randolph
    Lev Arturis wrote:
    iulixxi wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • CYNO JAMMER

  • As you can see above, the Cyno Jammer is back with a vengeance. However we took into consideration the feedback we received during Fanfest and various community channels, and it would work as mentioned below.


    This will impact ‘some’ alliances ability to do logistics from Empire to 0.0 … have you considered this?

    E



    No it will not. I suggest you read Ytterbiums post again.


    It won't affect logistics, but alliances will want to give themselves an LP cache so that they can control jammers through affected low-sec. It would be interesting if the alliances had to farm LP through putting alts into FW and running plexes, but they can just as easily farm LP by blowing up alts with Tech inside. It's a pretty neat tool for alliances, really, it means they can buy a pretty serious advantage for a pretty cheap sum. I'm skeptical on FW's usage of these things, I strongly suspect it'll just dissuade people from meaningful fighting outside of plexes in L5 systems under fear of the defenders fielding caps and jamming the system, but who knows.

    ~