These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Fanfest 2014] Factional Warfare, round table.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#121 - 2014-05-06 01:07:57 UTC
Yun Kuai wrote:
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.



"Plenty" of fights in plexes huh? What do you think is a good ratio of fights in a plex before its taken?

I think there should be about 2 or 3 fights in a plex before a plex is taken. How many fights on average do you think happen in each plex that is captured such that you claim there is "plenty of pvp in plexes"?

there is lucky enough to be even 1 fight for a plex these days. t1 logi has pretty much ruined FW plex pvp as you knew it. the new meta is having t1 logi alts cheap as hell and super effective with links. Ships do not die anymore in fights. these days its 'o reps arnt holding, bail'

having 2 or 3 brawl fights without logi isnt happening anymore in a plex which makes me sad.

The small plex is the only exception where the dps values on destroyers are so high your hull dies in 3 seconds. and destroyer fights are my favorite cuz logi is almost meaningless in them.



This guy clearly doesn't know what a JUSTK dragoon/Algos fleet with logi frig support is capable of. I employ you sir to come over to Eha and try it sometime Pirate


I don't think its a matter of not knowing as much as not really caring to see a big logi fleet.

Why do you want the enemy to come to systems that only you can dock in? Why don't you go fight the Amarr if you have something to prove?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Yun Kuai
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#122 - 2014-05-06 01:12:42 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Hrett wrote:
[quote=Cearain][quote=Thanatos Marathon][quote=Cearain]stuff



I think that should be the goal. I agree it won't happen with the current mechanics. There are plenty of people who would love it if eve offered better mechanics that yielded more quality small scale pvp. But it doesn't. Most of the changes ccp delivers are from a carebear perspective of "isk per hour" or "risk versus isk" gain.

I would hope I missed huge numbers of fights I was gone for 8 months and really don't see much point in going back. Eve pvp takes up too much time for too few good fights.



That has nothing to do really with CCP. A lot of that has to do with inflation on ship prices and not actually having the means to make ISK in accordance with the inflation. Yes, some people are beyond rich and it's not a matter for them. For others, it makes most people risk averse and not as willing to go out true solo'ing or willing to take a fight they might lose.

For example, 4 years ago when a Dominix was only 45mil for the hull and about 65mil fully fit (no rigs back then as triple trimarks cost the same as the hull) I could run a few havens in nullsec, i.e. about 40mins of work, and that would pay for my Dominix and a few cruiser/battle cruiser hulls. Now I have to spend 3x/4x more time to make the same ISK to do the same thing. So I don't go roaming around solo in Domis anymore and I will often not take a fight I'm not sure I'll win if I'm in something expensive. That's the real reason you don't see people out roaming as often. Hitting that tier 3 gate camp with 4x guardians in your Dominix in today's EvE means spending a few hours grinding to make the ISK back as opposed to 30mins like in the past. Fix that and you'll see people more inclined to do stupid things with their ships again

--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
Yun Kuai
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#123 - 2014-05-06 01:18:54 UTC
Cearain wrote:


I don't think its a matter of not knowing as much as not really caring to see a big logi fleet.

Why do you want the enemy to come to systems that only you can dock in? Why don't you go fight the Amarr if you have something to prove?


Well considering our "GE" fleet usually only has 2-3 logi frigs at most when we get up to 10+ destroyers it's not that hard to counter. We also take on cruiser gangs and sometimes small BC fleets with that same fleet comp so it's already been proven. As for coming to Amarr, I tend to try and avoid bible banging country (or whatever you Amarians are preaching over there Blink)

--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#124 - 2014-05-06 01:28:50 UTC
Yun Kuai wrote:
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.



"Plenty" of fights in plexes huh? What do you think is a good ratio of fights in a plex before its taken?

I think there should be about 2 or 3 fights in a plex before a plex is taken. How many fights on average do you think happen in each plex that is captured such that you claim there is "plenty of pvp in plexes"?

there is lucky enough to be even 1 fight for a plex these days. t1 logi has pretty much ruined FW plex pvp as you knew it. the new meta is having t1 logi alts cheap as hell and super effective with links. Ships do not die anymore in fights. these days its 'o reps arnt holding, bail'

having 2 or 3 brawl fights without logi isnt happening anymore in a plex which makes me sad.

The small plex is the only exception where the dps values on destroyers are so high your hull dies in 3 seconds. and destroyer fights are my favorite cuz logi is almost meaningless in them.



This guy clearly doesn't know what a JUSTK dragoon/Algos fleet with logi frig support is capable of. I employ you sir to come over to Eha and try it sometime Pirate


yeah? you think any destroyer is gonna stand up to 20 destroyers all switch targets fast? i dont think so. We are the masters of RR and we earned this, but at a certain dps threshold your logi wont matter in a destroyer fight.

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Samuel Reaper
Conspiracy Theory.
#125 - 2014-05-06 10:38:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Samuel Reaper
Deerin wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:

Running the timer isn't a punishment, it's the mechanism for warzone control. If you think that winning the engagement is all that should be involved why apply this principle only to the defender?


Why do you think it only applies to defender? It equally applies to attacker too.



No it does not (XGallentius is missing this point as well). Maintaining the status quo by simply driving someone out of a plex is a victory for the defenders in a way that it is not for the attackers. The defender needs only maintain the status quo to succeed in his defense while the attacker cannot achieve anything without actually taking plexes. Timer rollbacks provide a huge force multiplier but only to the defender. X was arguing that running a timer is a punishment and that it is not fair to expect the defender to run a timer when they have already won the engagement. My question is why should this principle not also apply to the attackers - win engagement, take plex. It is obvious why this should not happen with attackers but the fact that the proposed mechanism will be fundamentally imbalanced in providing a massive advantage to the defender only tells you all you need to know about why it is inherently flawed.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#126 - 2014-05-06 11:51:43 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Maintaining the status quo by simply driving someone out of a plex is a victory for the defenders in a way that it is not for the attackers. The defender needs only maintain the status quo to succeed in his defense while the attacker cannot achieve anything without actually taking plexes. Timer rollbacks provide a huge force multiplier but only to the defender. X was arguing that running a timer is a punishment and that it is not fair to expect the defender to run a timer when they have already won the engagement. My question is why should this principle not also apply to the attackers - win engagement, take plex. It is obvious why this should not happen with attackers but the fact that the proposed mechanism will be fundamentally imbalanced in providing a massive advantage to the defender only tells you all you need to know about why it is inherently flawed.

It's hard to find a mechanic that works both in heavily defended systems and backwater systems as well. In the former, you're trying to take the system - so LP/hour is irrelevant, and if the defender can simply maintain the status quo he loses. In that case, timer rollbacks are an advantage for the defender, and a big one at that.

In backwater systems, the objective is different. You're trying to get gudfites, or disrupt the income of farmers. That's where the huge disparity in effort required - and opportunity cost - tilt things far in the favor of the attacker / farmer, since he can just keep bouncing around until the other guy gets bored then pick up where he left off. If the defender wants to stop the attacker from taking one plex, he has to cede at least another, and generally loses out on the opportunity to find other fights.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#127 - 2014-05-06 14:19:46 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Timer rollbacks provide a huge force multiplier but only to the defender.
... to the side trying to maintain the status quo, or the guy trying to grief the other side. Yes, most of the time the status quo is trying to be maintained by the defender, but there's cases where the attacker wants to do it as well. The attacker is also the guy who is most likely trying to grief the other side. Griefing is an honorable profession and deserves more tools! :)
Doctor Knuckles
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#128 - 2014-05-06 14:50:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Doctor Knuckles
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
Iudicium Vastus wrote:
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
after having some time to think about this last night. Rats will respawn so you'll need a DPS ship to plex.

unless these dual boxing farmers are being srsly strained trying to fight these rats because they dont have the srs ship to actually kill the rat, it wont be enough and nothing will change.

in the small there needs to be an actual destroyer rat capabale of killing a player destroyer full t2 fit.
same for medium, needs to be an actual cruiser capable of killing cruisers and actualy in some cases kills them.

and they need to respawn. other wise its simply not enough having a simple respawn for rats that get afk killed by 900k sp alts.



Then several things will then happen in regards to the real pvp..

this super-rat will inflict serious damage to you, allowing an enemy coming in to merely finishing you off at low risk since you're already at 50% armor by the time you've killed this super-rat. Or even if you're active rep, your capacitor is already partially empty by the time a hostile comes in with not only full shield & armor, but a topped off capacitor as well.

Also, when warping to fight a cruiser you scanned in a medium in an offensive system, you'll effectively always be fighting 2vs1 since this super-rat is apparently capable of inflicting serious harm and even destroying T2 fit player ships. Imagine what it can do with a player alongside it.

The warzone is for PvP right? Then lets leave the rats out of the equation in our fights, like they are now.
One of those 'be careful what you wish for' scenarios.


i basically did this every day until inferno came out. and it effected very little outcome in the form of pvp.

big deal. if you want to take that plex and there are hostiles around take the plex in force. with the new meta t1 logi fits i doubt anybody is gonna be at low armor or shields for long.



Unless you like to solo, and by solo i mean true solo, not dual boxing to bring in logi or ecm when thing's aren't going well.

Tough NPC ships would just pretty much murder the solo scene in FW space.

Even respawning could be pretty tough, if you're webbed and scrammed in a frig in a medium plex, you're gonna feel those cruiser guns while you're slowboating, even in their current form. I know i'm gonna rage if i lose a 1v1 for that 15% damage inflicted by a rat that spawned mid fight lol.


With regards to farming. They obviously annoy me, but i don't understand all the need to do something about them if in turns it will hinder nother legit playstyle (read: soloing). It's not like by making farming impossible pvp pilots are gonna get more fights, farmers aren't gonna turn into fighters, the number of people willing to fight will just be the same if we get rid of the farmer swarms, might actually get some people away, ones who undock pretty much only in farmer hunting fits to score easy kills.
Samuel Reaper
Conspiracy Theory.
#129 - 2014-05-06 17:15:39 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Timer rollbacks provide a huge force multiplier but only to the defender.
... to the side trying to maintain the status quo, or the guy trying to grief the other side. Yes, most of the time the status quo is trying to be maintained by the defender, but there's cases where the attacker wants to do it as well. The attacker is also the guy who is most likely trying to grief the other side. Griefing is an honorable profession and deserves more tools! :)




Offensive plexing is griefing and running timers down in a plex is a punishment?

I think we're through the looking glass here people Shocked
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#130 - 2014-05-06 17:18:02 UTC
Doctor Knuckles wrote:

Unless you like to solo, and by solo i mean true solo, not dual boxing to bring in logi or ecm when thing's aren't going well.

Tough NPC ships would just pretty much murder the solo scene in FW space.

Even respawning could be pretty tough, if you're webbed and scrammed in a frig in a medium plex, you're gonna feel those cruiser guns while you're slowboating, even in their current form. I know i'm gonna rage if i lose a 1v1 for that 15% damage inflicted by a rat that spawned mid fight lol.


With regards to farming. They obviously annoy me, but i don't understand all the need to do something about them if in turns it will hinder nother legit playstyle (read: soloing). It's not like by making farming impossible pvp pilots are gonna get more fights, farmers aren't gonna turn into fighters, the number of people willing to fight will just be the same if we get rid of the farmer swarms, might actually get some people away, ones who undock pretty much only in farmer hunting fits to score easy kills.

contrary to popular belief i started out with true solo in the old school plexs and i was ******* great at it. if you wanted to go 'solo' it was so easy the rats were very easily killable and inflicted very little damage(because they all started at range and moved in). but if you had subpar dps for your ship class the rats would spawn (overtime) and because you had subpar dps you would get overwhelmed so it was anti farmy.

i only got more accounts because i kept getting ganged up on to improve my sustainability in one area(a plex)

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#131 - 2014-05-06 17:56:40 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Offensive plexing is griefing and running timers down in a plex is a punishment?

Griefing is keeping the other guy from achieving his goal. Could be defensive or offensive plexing.

And yes, running down timers when the other guy will not fight is a punishment. I don't see why it is so difficult for you to understand. If the guy running down the timer decides to run, then the plex should move back towards zero if nothing else happens.

Doing so would encourage the players running the timer to defend the plex by providing a consequence to bailing.
Julius Foederatus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#132 - 2014-05-06 18:09:18 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Timer rollbacks provide a huge force multiplier but only to the defender.
... to the side trying to maintain the status quo, or the guy trying to grief the other side. Yes, most of the time the status quo is trying to be maintained by the defender, but there's cases where the attacker wants to do it as well. The attacker is also the guy who is most likely trying to grief the other side. Griefing is an honorable profession and deserves more tools! :)




Offensive plexing is griefing and running timers down in a plex is a punishment?

I think we're through the looking glass here people Shocked


This is not difficult to understand. If you run a guy out of a plex that has 5min left on it, you have to then run it down 15min. You have won the engagement by forcing him to flee, and yet he can finish another (brand new) plex in the time it takes you to complete the one that you wrested from his control.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#133 - 2014-05-06 19:12:19 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Deerin wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:

Running the timer isn't a punishment, it's the mechanism for warzone control. If you think that winning the engagement is all that should be involved why apply this principle only to the defender?


Why do you think it only applies to defender? It equally applies to attacker too.



No it does not (XGallentius is missing this point as well). Maintaining the status quo by simply driving someone out of a plex is a victory for the defenders in a way that it is not for the attackers. The defender needs only maintain the status quo to succeed in his defense while the attacker cannot achieve anything without actually taking plexes. Timer rollbacks provide a huge force multiplier but only to the defender. X was arguing that running a timer is a punishment and that it is not fair to expect the defender to run a timer when they have already won the engagement. My question is why should this principle not also apply to the attackers - win engagement, take plex. It is obvious why this should not happen with attackers but the fact that the proposed mechanism will be fundamentally imbalanced in providing a massive advantage to the defender only tells you all you need to know about why it is inherently flawed.



First I am not really sure of your logic. If someone is running a defensive plex they are on the defense right? If so they do not really like the status quo because they are running a plex. Maybe they need to deplex now because if they don't they will lose the system when the next time zone hits.

Second even if your logic is sound and this favors the defender. So what? The defenders already have some things going for them. They have rats that fight for them, and they also have docking privileges. If this somehow makes it too hard to defend ccp can do some other things, like increase the lp for defensive plexing. But honestly I don't see the balance between offensive and defensive plexing as some super delicate line.

This change will increase the amount of pvp in faction war occupancy. That should be ccps main goal when it comes to fw and all other concerns should be secondary.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#134 - 2014-05-06 19:25:08 UTC
Yun Kuai wrote:
Cearain wrote:


I think that should be the goal. I agree it won't happen with the current mechanics. There are plenty of people who would love it if eve offered better mechanics that yielded more quality small scale pvp. But it doesn't. Most of the changes ccp delivers are from a carebear perspective of "isk per hour" or "risk versus isk" gain.

I would hope I missed huge numbers of fights I was gone for 8 months and really don't see much point in going back. Eve pvp takes up too much time for too few good fights.



That has nothing to do really with CCP. A lot of that has to do with inflation on ship prices and not actually having the means to make ISK in accordance with the inflation. Yes, some people are beyond rich and it's not a matter for them. For others, it makes most people risk averse and not as willing to go out true solo'ing or willing to take a fight they might lose.

For example, 4 years ago when a Dominix was only 45mil for the hull and about 65mil fully fit (no rigs back then as triple trimarks cost the same as the hull) I could run a few havens in nullsec, i.e. about 40mins of work, and that would pay for my Dominix and a few cruiser/battle cruiser hulls. Now I have to spend 3x/4x more time to make the same ISK to do the same thing. So I don't go roaming around solo in Domis anymore and I will often not take a fight I'm not sure I'll win if I'm in something expensive. That's the real reason you don't see people out roaming as often. Hitting that tier 3 gate camp with 4x guardians in your Dominix in today's EvE means spending a few hours grinding to make the ISK back as opposed to 30mins like in the past. Fix that and you'll see people more inclined to do stupid things with their ships again


Haven't FW incomes kept up with inflation? Aren't you making more isk than you are going through? LP value has tanked pretty hard, but still you should be able to get enough for a comet by sneezing.

I'm just surprised a faction war guy is saying he will back out of fights due to isk concerns. When you are starting out in this game it can be tough to pay for pvp, especially if you refuse to buy a plex or 2. But you are saying you were playing 4 years ago so you should know a bit about the market and how to make isk.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#135 - 2014-05-06 20:55:31 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Offensive plexing is griefing and running timers down in a plex is a punishment?

Griefing is keeping the other guy from achieving his goal. Could be defensive or offensive plexing.

And yes, running down timers when the other guy will not fight is a punishment. I don't see why it is so difficult for you to understand. If the guy running down the timer decides to run, then the plex should move back towards zero if nothing else happens.

Doing so would encourage the players running the timer to defend the plex by providing a consequence to bailing.


The contested level of systems should 'decay' over time if no plexes are being completed after a certain time. The contested level should decay faster if the system is upgraded. I'm not going to throw out random numbers for rates or timers. Someone wiser then me can do that. Active defensive plexing should be faster then any decay rate. (and should disable the decay rate as well)

We can all go out and find fights very quickly in FW. That is not an issue. The reason that farmers are so detested is the mandatory defensive plexing that goes along with them. Your home system might be strong in Euro and US TZ. If you're weak in Aussie time though - when people start logging back on you could be looking at 10% - 16% contested. That is five to eight hours of defensive plexing people have to do. Absolutely not fun. A decay rate and active patrolling would go along way in minimizing complaints about farmers.

The higher tier a militia is the more expensive it is to upgrade systems. The lower tier the easier. If you aggressively want a system and are actively pushing it - the contested % will move only depending on the militia's actions.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#136 - 2014-05-06 21:38:04 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Offensive plexing is griefing and running timers down in a plex is a punishment?

Griefing is keeping the other guy from achieving his goal. Could be defensive or offensive plexing.

And yes, running down timers when the other guy will not fight is a punishment. I don't see why it is so difficult for you to understand. If the guy running down the timer decides to run, then the plex should move back towards zero if nothing else happens.

Doing so would encourage the players running the timer to defend the plex by providing a consequence to bailing.


...
We can all go out and find fights very quickly in FW. That is not an issue. The reason that farmers are so detested is the mandatory defensive plexing that goes along with them. Your home system might be strong in Euro and US TZ. If you're weak in Aussie time though - when people start logging back on you could be looking at 10% - 16% contested. ....


I don't think we have the same idea of what "very quickly" means. But whatever.

My experience is that I would go into a system with several wartargets. I would then start running offensive plexes and they would just ignore me. After all they can just send an alt out to deplex after I leave. The next day the system would be deplexed.

I think your idea of "decay" just promotes this attitude that you can let people offensive plex your system and not worry about it. No need to risk any ships in actual combat.

So I take it you are not getting fights when you deplex? I think that is the problem.

But anyway I would much rather remove or nerf the docking restriction than make it even easier for militias to see someone plexing a system and just ignore it. Docking restrictions to some extent provide some reason to fight *if* you base there. But really that is a pretty rare system and even if you do base there, you have all kinds of time to put an alt in a plex.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#137 - 2014-05-07 08:44:41 UTC
A faction police rat solves many problema
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#138 - 2014-05-07 08:55:52 UTC
At the very least I think that a plex should count back to 0 at an exponential rate in order to encourage pilot to stay. For eg red gets a medium plex to +5 minutes of capture time with 10 remaining on the clock to capture. Blue comes in and after a scuffle forces the red off the plex radius. At this time the counter starts going down to 0 but at 1.5x the rate of normal. If red had pushed it to +10min then the deplex rate with a blue in radius could be ( for the sake of discussion) 1.75× the normal rate. And above +10 min the deplex rate would be 2x.

In this way territory becomes less of a chore as much as anything.
Rinai Vero
Blades of Liberty
#139 - 2014-05-07 12:59:24 UTC
Plex mechanics should not be modified with the intent of making FW plex easier to capture. That's what double timers and faster timer counts on rollback would do. Time to contest the plex should also give opportunities for pilots to reship and come back. I may bail from a fight that's a bad matchup, but intend to return for a more even fight.

On the other hand, if I run someone out of a plex I want them to be able to have that same chance. If I actually want to run the plex, I can stay there and deal with the time they've run up. With normal rollbacks, I might decide to pop another one in the system while the first plex rolls back to 0, then run it. These mechanics would be fair to both sides.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#140 - 2014-05-07 13:48:23 UTC
Rinai Vero wrote:
Plex mechanics should not be modified with the intent of making FW plex easier to capture. That's what double timers and faster timer counts on rollback would do. Time to contest the plex should also give opportunities for pilots to reship and come back. I may bail from a fight that's a bad matchup, but intend to return for a more even fight.

On the other hand, if I run someone out of a plex I want them to be able to have that same chance. If I actually want to run the plex, I can stay there and deal with the time they've run up. With normal rollbacks, I might decide to pop another one in the system while the first plex rolls back to 0, then run it. These mechanics would be fair to both sides.

Exact opposite. Timer rollbacks would make it more difficult to capture a plex.