These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Amarr: Least Populated Militia

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#101 - 2013-04-02 15:12:01 UTC
Juan Rayo wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Oh I see you let enemy come and take the plexes but then after the enemy leaves you have your alts spin buttons to keep it. That does sound like a good strategy with these mechanics.


Guess you missed the part where I mentioned how we kill them or chase them off.


You are either there 24/7 to do this or you are not.

You claimed you did not have to be. And pointed out that you can just run defensive plexes to account for it. I actually agree that is a good way to do it. And I posted the lossmails of alts in stabbed ships who do this defensive plexing for you. So like I said if you can't beat the rabbits join them.

Juan Rayo wrote:

In any case, you are changing the subject: you made a bullshit, patently false assertion (yet again) about FW, and I am telling you it's false, and why it is false: no ammount of plex farmers can take a system from pvpers that want to hold it, and no those pvpers don't have to be there 24/7, and can actually go roam and have fun.

FW is great at the moment man. You should try it sometimes, maybe then you'll stop with your hyperbolic **** about it.


I have done faction war in these mechanics. The sov game is still broken and rabbit pve is still the most effective way to fight for sov.

But if you don't believe me look at the top vp gainers for a day and then look at their killboard for that day.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2013-04-02 17:06:29 UTC
Cearain sometimes you just confuse me. Obviously if there is no one to defend your system, you will have to do something else to repair the damage afterwards instead. In this case, you dplex. Would you prefer if we had to rep a structure, shoot another structure, mine roids or shoot red crosses?
Dan Carter Murray
#103 - 2013-04-02 18:11:43 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Cearain sometimes you just confuse me. Obviously if there is no one to defend your system, you will have to do something else to repair the damage afterwards instead. In this case, you dplex. Would you prefer if we had to rep a structure, shoot another structure, mine roids or shoot red crosses?


he prefers a notification system and a warlock summoning stone

http://mfi.re/?j7ldoco 50GB free space @ MediaFire.com
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#104 - 2013-04-02 18:34:10 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Dan Carter Murray wrote:
he prefers a notification system and a warlock summoning stone
We call this a Titan Bridge in Eve. All of our pilots have been instructed to place a warlock summonning stone, err.. cyno, on every one of their ships.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#105 - 2013-04-02 19:09:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Takseen wrote:
Cearain sometimes you just confuse me. Obviously if there is no one to defend your system, you will have to do something else to repair the damage afterwards instead. In this case, you dplex. Would you prefer if we had to rep a structure, shoot another structure, mine roids or shoot red crosses?



No I wish we could actually defend our systems by fighting the people trying to take the plex in the first place. You know, pvp.


But the current mechanics do not provide the tools necessary to effectively do that. So we are left with sending our own rabbits out to defensive plex after the enemy leaves.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#106 - 2013-04-02 19:26:57 UTC
Cearain wrote:


No I wish we could actually defend our systems by fighting the people trying to take the plex in the first place. You know, pvp.
But the current mechanics do not provide the tools necessary to effectively do that. So we are left with sending our own rabbits out to defensive plex after the enemy leaves.


If you're online, you can chase them out by warping into their plex. If you're NOT online, which is possible for a pvp group with a limited operational timezone, you unfortunately might need to do some dplexing.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#107 - 2013-04-02 22:00:29 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Cearain wrote:


No I wish we could actually defend our systems by fighting the people trying to take the plex in the first place. You know, pvp.
But the current mechanics do not provide the tools necessary to effectively do that. So we are left with sending our own rabbits out to defensive plex after the enemy leaves.


If you're online, you can chase them out by warping into their plex. If you're NOT online, which is possible for a pvp group with a limited operational timezone, you unfortunately might need to do some dplexing.




Right but if we were notified when our miltiary complexes were being attacked, then we would only need about 10 people to cover the warzone. And those 10 or more people would see constant pvp action.

Instead the rabbits can hide and plex, forcing the pvpers to either choose to endlessly "roam" around looking for them or turning rabbit themselves and d-plexing.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#108 - 2013-04-02 22:08:56 UTC
I just had an idea : what if the timer always goes forward, whatever the faction of the ship in it and give LP only to the winning side when a faction manage to be alone around the beacon ? Timer may stop when more than one faction is in the room, but the idea is to not have to deplex the time of the plex on top of the time the plexer already plexed.

That would stress the need to defend the plex and fight for it, because you would lose more than a little time doing this (pvper seem to value their time more than plexers, as strange as that can seem).

Downside of the idea is that this would favor blob when real fights for systems happen.
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#109 - 2013-04-03 01:34:04 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Cearain sometimes you just confuse me. Obviously if there is no one to defend your system, you will have to do something else to repair the damage afterwards instead. In this case, you dplex. Would you prefer if we had to rep a structure, shoot another structure, mine roids or shoot red crosses?


Actually... you may be on to something there! Why not try these things? Idea

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#110 - 2013-04-03 04:09:58 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
I just had an idea : what if the timer always goes forward, whatever the faction of the ship in it and give LP only to the winning side when a faction manage to be alone around the beacon ? Timer may stop when more than one faction is in the room, but the idea is to not have to deplex the time of the plex on top of the time the plexer already plexed.

That would stress the need to defend the plex and fight for it, because you would lose more than a little time doing this (pvper seem to value their time more than plexers, as strange as that can seem).

Downside of the idea is that this would favor blob when real fights for systems happen.


thats basically what we are asking for since inferno, just not as harsh as your variant.
variant a) timers could run backwards if the offender leaves the plex till the plex is back at default state
variant b) plex could reset to default state if the offender leaves
variant c) timer could count only in one direction, last ship determines who wins (quite drastic)

i personally don't care... any of those three variants would create a incentive to stay and fight. Variant C favors the defender maybe a bit too much (blob risk), B could be a nice compromise... even A would be great.

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
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#111 - 2013-04-03 08:46:05 UTC
Regardless of solutions offered, it is nice to see the disparate FW crowd agreeing that something is amiss and in need of fixing.

Now I only hope the farm lobby doesn't frequent the forums or they'll threadnaught CCP into believing that the solution is even more LP like they did when they co-opted the "Fix FW" campaign and got us into the mess we are in now Smile
Horak Thor
Angry Mustellid
#112 - 2013-04-03 09:15:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Horak Thor
Faction war is as yet still broken. The fact is its a permanent war, every few months without fail war zone control shifts and the farmers with it.
Why does it shift? Because 1 side burns out, stops playing loses loads of systems, starts playing, the other side burns out loses systems etc etc

If ccp wanted a feature basing the victor on who is currently less bored burnt out with game mechanics. Mission success

.....