Warfare & Tactics

There's quite a few systems in Gallente/Caldari that no one goes to... ever... unless they're farming. I wouldn't see a reason to keep these systems from "falling out of the influence of faction war" or something like that to make them non-fw systems.

Could make the war zone very interesting.

I fully agree, it makes no sense to have so many systems with no "front" or area of concentrated conflict.

Systems should only be capture-able if they are adjacent to a system your faction controls.

No. I don't want a smaller warzone, blobs are bad mmkay?

Btw, before you call me a FW plex farmer, do look at my kb.

If the gallente militia decided to go 70% solo and spread out to plex, we could easily control T4.

You plex farmer.

Opposing militia should not be able to dock in other sides' low and high sec systems! /troll

Pretty much.

Adding a multiplier to the LP payout mechanic so systems with a lot of FW kills and a lot of FW traffic would give more LP than systems just being plexed with no one fighting over them might be an interesting thing.

It would be hilarious, the mass slaughter of unskilled spy alts being used to exploit the mechanic (or leet pvp as the amarr call it) would cause me no end of giggles

You're saying the warzone is twice as big as it needs to be while I say the warzone is just half full.

Not sure if I agree about strictly the size of the warzone, except perhaps where 'size' is referring to system weight without regard to activity.

I think I like the idea about control only swaying if it's connected to another contested/taken/active system. That sounds pretty good on the face but likely a mechanic that would need further exploration. (maybe not connected? maybe within 2 jumps of?)

There should be an allowance in the system if a group wants to put up stake in a previous 'backwater' area and lay claim and create a new 'front line'. I don't want to see the front line to be too restrictive and end up tied to just, say, Kamela/Kourm. As the one poster said, blob is bad and we don't want to bottleneck everything. Def needs to be a middle ground.

I think a sentiment worth a quote is this:



This is huge and goes back to what many of us would see as a missing mechanic to recognize system weight with system activity.

The "this is Eve" responses are just generic. I'm not attacking that poster because he's my FW enemy, but that the ol' "this is the sandbox" line gets touted whenever someone simply likes the status quo and can't elaborate as to why.

There is much more improvement that can be made to FW. I don't want a system that restricts activity but at the same time we can't deny the plex farmimg just to plex farm and hiding from conflict is contrary to the intention of the warzone.

This can give the perception that the warzone is simply too big? Back to what gallentius said, what it really does is equally reward those pushing what might be an important system and those avoiding partaking in FW entirely and just want to sit a button without being bothered.

I don't think size is the issue persay (god I hate that word) but then again Lucius does elaborate past that sentiment. I think the still too-generic mechanics underlying FW is the root problem.

I have hope this will improve, FW used to be the bastard child of eve but CCP has recognized it offers a form of PVP many subs love and is worth cultivating. I hope they read this and add it to their list of things to chew on and mull over. Good topic, worth discussing more.

We did launch an offensive a few months back in the hinterland systems. It was an interesting option but it never generated the level of conflict we were hoping for. People didn't want to move to counter us and it turned into a boring 'you plex, we plex' of opposing time zones. Limiting systems that can be contested to only adjacent ones is not something I would favor though.

I personally believe that changes such as those in the OP address the symptoms rather then the root cause. Why do we like low sec? I can answer for myself :

Implants
No bubbles or bombs
Diversity in fits - not as much mandatory fits/ fleet doctrines
Easy access to action
Flexible Hours

Rather then appreciate different play styles though CCP has steadfastly viewed low sec as merely a training ground for null. This can be seen in the final version of FW that we now have. Do you want to use BC or BS? Go to Null. Do you want to upgrade your systems in any kind of reasonable manner? Go to Null. Do you want a possible game changer such as a temporary cyno jammer? Tough. And so it goes.

The tier pay structure has been beat to death. We all know the arguments. Getting paid to push warzone control is more then enough reward - why have a scaling system?. Lastly - as it stands right now we have WWI trench warfare with primary systems having a wonderful plethora of OGB sitting in POS. People sit in their home systems and try to harvest kills. (Don't go over there though, they do the same.) I don't see cutting down the number of systems improving that situation.

war zones are fine, just split your forces and things stat to roll better.