These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

FW : *Insert "I see what you did there" or "when you see it" meme*

Author
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#1 - 2011-12-02 15:41:54 UTC
Straight from the latest Eve Chronicle.....a fascinating development? Pure story fluff?

Welcome Party

Quote:
Gister continued, "And speaking of alliances, I've heard that those ragtag things will now be allowed to join the empire wars en masse. Which is wonderful! That's all they're good for, fighting and war. Best to put their focus on something like that, and not have them getting in the way of people trying to do proper business."

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Xtover
Cold Moon Destruction.
#2 - 2011-12-02 15:47:02 UTC
I was just about to post this.

ha.
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#3 - 2011-12-02 16:15:08 UTC
Would be the death of FW as we know it if true .. would become Null-lite complete with hot-drops and blobs being the norm.

But given the plexing fix which has already given all power to the alt armies, I don't really see why CCP shouldn't go all the way and kill off FW entirely by allowing null monkeys in 'en masse'.

Perhaps piracy will be the new black now that FW has faded to a dull off-white.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#4 - 2011-12-02 16:22:51 UTC
The Faction Warfare community has been debating this change for years now, its pretty well-tread territory (but still pretty divisive).

For the record, past CSM's have passed a resolution to change this, CCP promised it would happen, than never got around to it. So as far as CCP is concerned, it was approved to go ahead and implement and is in their backlog. I say this only to prevent a wave of ZOMG-HOW COULD U?? posts from newer folk that may not understand the history behind this.

There are many pro's and cons regarding this change, all I hope is that CCP treads carefully and actually digs deep into the player feedback. This could be a big FW boost, but it could also be catastrophic depending on how it is implemented and whether some safeguards are put in place to protect what FW is all about in the first place. (Most importantly, FW is not about encouraging war for the sake of war, its about encouraging a certain style and size of fleet work. )

Simply put, this would be a horrible change to be viewed simply as a "quick fix", especially in the wake of huge amounts of controversy amongst the dedicated existing militia communities. I'm hoping CCP treads with caution - this is akin to "remove all NPC's from highsec" in that it could hurt as much as help. There are far more commonly-agreed upon issues to address first.


One thing I am very curious about - How do Alliance leaders feel about this?? I'd love to hear from Alliances that would be willing to enlist, and why they would enlist, and what they hope to see and experience as a result.
The recent feedback has been really one-dimensional and only coming from militia members, not from prospective Alliance members. Both are needed to make a fair assessment of whether this is would be progress, or a setback.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

KrakizBad
Section 8.
#5 - 2011-12-02 16:23:45 UTC
We are all certainly chomping at the bit to go play in losec. Roll
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#6 - 2011-12-02 16:31:57 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Would be the death of FW as we know it if true .. would become Null-lite complete with hot-drops and blobs being the norm.

But given the plexing fix which has already given all power to the alt armies, I don't really see why CCP shouldn't go all the way and kill off FW entirely by allowing null monkeys in 'en masse'.

Perhaps piracy will be the new black now that FW has faded to a dull off-white.


I think its fair here to point out a few things:

1) The FW warzone is already null-lite complete with hot-drops and blobs. Historically, fleets of all sizes, fielded by the militias of all sizes, roamed the warzone. The reality is, the "golden age" of Faction Warfare, where there were awesome fights in multiple places around the clock, involved a lot of blobbing. We can't simply call "blobbing" an Alliance-exclusive trait.

2) The plexing update is more or less a squashed bug, not a new feature or development. It also has been FW fix-list issue #1 amongst the FW community for years now. If its going to ruin FW, blame the militia pilots. We've all asked for it. Personally, I've been in the militia for 2 years since I started playing EvE, and maybe run a dozen plexes. Ever. One of the core mechanics pretty much meant nothing to me because of the time zone I logged in to. There simply wasn't a fair distribution of plex spawning to give all players a chance to participate.

3) Read posts from 3 years ago. They pretty much declared FW dead on arrival. Doomsday predictions are more or less irrelevant and inaccurate, because "Faction Warfare is dead" has almost reached meme-status in the EvE community, and all one has to do is open a killboard to see that nothing could be further from the truth. Blogs such as Sov Wars document the fact that the FW scene has been alive the entire time, and continues to be, even if its arguably on life-support by the players themselves in the absence of CCP attention.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#7 - 2011-12-02 17:02:55 UTC
Xtover wrote:
I was just about to post this.

ha.


This.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#8 - 2011-12-02 17:10:47 UTC
There are a good number of RP alliances (such as Ushra'Khan, CVA, and the whole shebang of horrible people on IGS) who may be very interested in this. However, since some have null-sec space to maintain too, it is unlikely they will be constantly present in large numbers.

Participating in FW, hisec harrassment/wars, or other such business distracts members from securing 0.0 holdings, which can leave the alliance vulnerable. Because of this, the most likely occurrence is short "campaigns" of a week or two in which we are involved, followed by then pulling out of FW.

Keep in mind this is my own opinion/prediction/vision of this, and not Ushra'Khan alliance policy, as I am not the one who makes the decisions.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2011-12-02 17:14:28 UTC
It makes perfect sense for empires to hire alliances who actually have non-negligible military capabilities.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us

Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#10 - 2011-12-02 17:17:56 UTC
Too long, can't understand.

What happened with FW? Please in simple terms, explain what is stated there. I can't understand fiction.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#11 - 2011-12-02 17:35:10 UTC
Opertone wrote:
Too long, can't understand.

What happened with FW? Please in simple terms, explain what is stated there. I can't understand fiction.


From the Chronicle:
Quote:
And speaking of alliances, I've heard that those ragtag things will now be allowed to join the empire wars en masse.


Currently, Alliances cannot join Faction Warfare or "officially" fight Empire Wars. The characters saying this is coming implies a possible change in game mechanics where Alliances could enlist in the militia battles.

Or it could be just a cool story, bro. Time will tell.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Shalee Lianne
Banana-Republic.
HERO Coalition.
#12 - 2011-12-02 19:38:38 UTC
I sincerely hope that it is just a story and not foreshadowing some horrible 'new feature' for Faction Warfare.

The way I see it, if alliances are allowed in, it's going to be a cluster f^&* .

Imagine...

You have one huge null sec alliance that gets bored, sends their pilots to FW for lols for a few weeks or however long it suits them. Why? Simply because they can. So now you have one very unbalanced side. One faction has hundreds of new null-secers with their shiny new ships hotdropping, station camping, and whatever.

This leaves the other side with three options basically:

1. Quit FW. The point of FW was to offer small scaled pvp without all the null sec political drama, a place where a pilot in a rifter could go out and have some fun.

2. Or they can just stay docked while the null-secers are loling it up. Which will lead to pilots getting bored, not logging on eventually, unsubbing.

3. OR. They can join an alliance to have some backup to fight these new invaders. But now you've just turned low sec into a useless mirror of null sec.

I cannot see any benefit to adding Alliances to FW. It's just going unbalance things so much more than they are now.

What I would LOVE to see from CCP is someone taking responsibility for FW. I would love to see that we are represented by someone who knows whats going on and who can fix the broken mechanics. Who will show FW the attention that it deserves.
http://amarrian.blogspot.com/  ~ Roleplay blog. http://sovereigntywars.wordpress.com/ ~ Faction War blog.
Lil Nippy
State War Academy
Caldari State
#13 - 2011-12-02 19:45:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Lil Nippy
Any and all changes to FW, regardless of their technicalities, are pointless until there are legitimate objectives in the warzone (plexes as they are now do not count) and beneficial reasons for flipping system occupation.

Allowing in alliances is no different. There is no large well established alliance in this game who would step foot in FW as it stands right now anyways.
Lil Nippy
State War Academy
Caldari State
#14 - 2011-12-02 19:46:40 UTC
.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#15 - 2011-12-02 19:52:32 UTC
Lil Nippy wrote:
Any and all changes to FW, regardless of their technicalities, are pointless until there are legitimate objectives in the warzone (plexes as they are now do not count) and beneficial reasons for flipping system occupation.

Allowing in alliances is no different. There is no large well established alliance in this game who would step foot in FW as it stands right now anyways.


I wholeheartedly agree. Much like the "remove higsec NPC patrols" suggestion by Soundwave, the idea has its merits, but there is far more work to be done on the core system first.

I strongly oppose all efforts to arbitrarily increase participation levels or the size of the war-zone if there isn't work being done on the core mechanics, giving the players a reason to fight in the first place. This could be given consideration, but should only be done after plexing is given meaning and value. Otherwise all that is accomplished is tripling the number of players that are asking, "why are we doing this again??"

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Lil Nippy
State War Academy
Caldari State
#16 - 2011-12-02 19:54:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Lil Nippy
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Lil Nippy wrote:
Any and all changes to FW, regardless of their technicalities, are pointless until there are legitimate objectives in the warzone (plexes as they are now do not count) and beneficial reasons for flipping system occupation.

Allowing in alliances is no different. There is no large well established alliance in this game who would step foot in FW as it stands right now anyways.


I wholeheartedly agree. Much like the "remove higsec NPC patrols" suggestion by Soundwave, the idea has its merits, but there is far more work to be done on the core system first.

I strongly oppose all efforts to arbitrarily increase participation levels or the size of the war-zone if there isn't work being done on the core mechanics, giving the players a reason to fight in the first place. This could be given consideration, but should only be done after plexing is given meaning and value. Otherwise all that is accomplished is tripling the number of players that are asking, "why are we doing this again??"


Exactly, well said.

In my humble opinion the solutions are pretty simple. Reward LP for capturing/defending plexes (nothing crazy, maybe just 50 LP per capture or something especially now that plexes spawn so often) and removing all available agents from occupied systems.

For example, if the Minmatar capture Huola the Amarr no longer have access to their mission agents in that system. This kills two birds with one stone, because now it does not only affect the actual FW PvPers, but the mission farmers as well.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#17 - 2011-12-02 20:20:54 UTC
Lil Nippy wrote:

In my humble opinion the solutions are pretty simple. Reward LP for capturing/defending plexes (nothing crazy, maybe just 50 LP per capture or something especially now that plexes spawn so often) and removing all available agents from occupied systems.

For example, if the Minmatar capture Huola the Amarr no longer have access to their mission agents in that system. This kills two birds with one stone, because now it does not only affect the actual FW PvPers, but the mission farmers as well.


To make it even more fun, add something like an anchorable "lock" on a station that the owners of a system can anchor outside any station, which prevents anyone from opposing factions to even dock there.

Stuff like this adds an actual reason to fight over space: for ISK advantage, tactical advantage, etc. If implemented correctly, this can also encourage small gang warfare.

However...

Lil Nippy wrote:
Allowing in alliances is no different. There is no large well established alliance in this game who would step foot in FW as it stands right now anyways.


I disagree. Lowsec provides a much lower-stress environment than 0.0, and I can see a few large non-RP alliances being interested in it for the sole purpose of hotdropping dozens of supercaps on small FW gangs, or for flying hundreds-of-Rifters fleets.

I have a RL friend who is in TEST, and he positively jumped at the news of this possibly happening. I fear for the integrity of FW space if thousands of CFC pilots suddenly decide to participate for a week or two.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#18 - 2011-12-02 20:56:32 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
The Faction Warfare community has been debating this change for years now, its pretty well-tread territory (but still pretty divisive).

For the record, past CSM's have passed a resolution to change this, CCP promised it would happen, than never got around to it.....

Yes .. but all the discussions concerning such a move pretty much all agreed on some sort of limiting factor. Most supported was one of CCPs own ideas, the one aying that alliances are free to join provided they hold no sovereignty .. other suggestions revolved around standings and another around scope of involvement/targets.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
...about blobs...

Yes we have had both blobs and drops .. but what we are talking about is on an entirely different scale. Where our blobs usually peak at 50-60 (Weekend/POS-Bash around 100) null blobs easily add a digit to that or even a whole zero .. I have seen null AHAC gangs with more Guardians than the average FW blob has total for Goddess sake.
Tell me that FW will remain the relaxing abattoir that we all know and love when fleets (or even gangs) start numbering more than 100 on a regular basis and I'll let it rest .. about as loaded as I can make it without calling you naive Big smile

Here is my take on what is happening:
CCP just adding POCO's which are available through FW store by way of BPC's. Null knows full well that more and more Eve game play will be assigned to PI system as Dust draws closer, hell their precious moons may well be shifted to PI eventually, so they have probably screamed at their buddies in Iceland to help them get BPC's.
Result: CCP start making plans to allow alliances to join FW, without considering what it will do to that particular area. Not only will it give null "something for nothing" but it will depress faction prices even further (thus undermine OUR INCOME) and eliminate what remains of the small-gang/solo action in FW.

Allowing them without severe, nay draconian, restrictions will be like opening a primarily pedestrian park to motorized vehicles, skaters and bicycles.

NO I say, NO!. It will not stand!
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#19 - 2011-12-02 21:26:48 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:

Here is my take on what is happening:


I read all that as "the 1% wealthiest pilots have a disproportionate amount of power over the 99% of the rest of us". Maybe I need to play more Eve and care about the real world less.

The "not space-holding" requirement to join a FW side for an alliance sounds reasonable, and solved the problem for -EM- and other such entities, but it would exclude U'K and CVA, which would be sad. There has to be some other kind of restriction. Maybe it could cost progressively more as time goes on, similar to a wardec? Maybe scaled by number of members?

The reason that FW would not be able to bear the load is twofold. The first part of it you touched upon: the current plexing/missioning system would utterly break, and Firetails would turn into slightly more expensive Rifters (with similar effects for all other faction items, too). However, CCP has said that a big FW revamp is on the way, and hopefully "big revamp" does not solely mean "open the gates to giant alliances".

The second problem can't be simply fixed with mechanics: there is not enough space. Lowsec space would need to contain the old lowsec dwellers and FW members, new FW members attracted by the changes, plus all the alliances jumping into the fray. I can't tell whether this will just mean there will be a constant charlie foxtrot going on because of FW's disorganized nature, or massive blobs will develop. And then, of course, there's the danger of one side being overpowered by a large alliance putting sheer force of numbers to work.

Anyway, alliances in FW is a fun and welcome idea for me, but it needs to be done carefully. Very. Carefully.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#20 - 2011-12-02 21:32:30 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
However, CCP has said that a big FW revamp is on the way,



Do you have a source for this?

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

12Next page