These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Low Sec FW Meetings

First post First post
Author
Samwise Everquest
Plus 10 NV
#161 - 2014-08-27 23:40:07 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I will say that defensive plexing is not very good at padding your wallet because you only get a fraction of the lp. That is really why I would agree that that the d-plexers are not really "farmers." They are not in it for the isk they are doing this for the warzone control.
My deplexing alt is at 1.3 million LP over the past two weeks because we're at Tier 4 and it goes to highly contested, unpopulated systems. So, yeah, it's great for padding the wallet.

Key isn't plexing mechanics, it's rewards at higher Tier levels. Farmers/rabbits come out when the rewards are high. Tier rewards also provide incentive for players to push the warzone. Pushing the warzone has proven to be the best conflict driver in the game this summer. So it's a Yin/Yang issue.




fw

Pras Phil.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#162 - 2014-08-28 09:21:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


In the past most fights were never taken in plexes at all. My post very clearly stated that the reason these larger hulls were not used had nothing to do with any FW mechanics. Are you really so desperate to be contrarian that you cant even read?

If you are going to concern troll then at least try to be good at it rather than a sperg lord.

Now, in your own mind im sure you are maintaining a coherent and consistent argument. But are you at all aware that everyone else thinks you are mental?





Your coherence is dropping.

You say the draw back to having timer rollbacks is that neutral pvpers might come in. I'm not sure why you thought this is a downside, but that's what you said. You thought having pvpers come in would "grief" faction war plexxers. I pointed out that it sounds like you want high sec since concord will protect your fellow militia plexers from being "griefed" by neutral pvpers.

You also claim a problem with neutral pvpers with better equipment. You complained about the fact that in low sec, if you take out large ships some neutral pvpers might come and blob you. Again your problem is solved by high sec.

Fairly simple really.

Crosi Wesdo wrote:

If i was mad i would claim that i wasnt


I think that explains it.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#163 - 2014-08-28 09:44:25 UTC
So before this thread is locked away in the depths of the **** posting vaults. I'd like to reiterate that no FW standings hit for attacking fleet members (concord, sec hits, etc still apply) should be a thing.
Utsukushi Shi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#164 - 2014-08-28 10:07:03 UTC
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
I agree that timer rollbacks need to be added.

However,

I think that they will be considered a "catalyst for warzone stagnation" and so they probably want to implement something that enhances warzone movement before or at the same time.


Right now


I think the penalties / bonus's given for Tiers 1, 3, 4 and 5 are too wide.

There should be the means to "contract to Militia". (massive aid for supply/resupply to open Militia fleets, fitted ships in particular)

The most desirable LP store items are not spread equally over the 4 factions.

The spawn rates on NPC's in plex's should be capped (to 5 max) with a longer window for respawn rate.

NPC spawns in FW plex's should aggress all parties other than the defending faction.

The suspect flag for aggression within a FW plex should be removed, for all parties. Warzone, neutral zone, "no mans land". Describe it how you want. It is a poor mechanic for defending your already War Dec'd role and is a PvP suppressant.


Then when there is time...

Ranks should be reworked so they can be achieved by either LP accumulated or FW kill scores.

Rewards PvP kills in a different way to LP for all participants on the km - could be tied in with both the Rank system, the LP store, the system level bonus system and more.

LP store should be cleaned up and rebalanced so that modules are a more common and worthwhile choice.

Faction Tech II ammo in LP stores (charges were done, now do other consumables). Give the crystals high burn out rates and make the Faction Tech II ammo for other types larger (less per reload).

Set the system level upgrades as destroyable modules built onto the ihub (same as null-sec station services). Levels are then downgraded by combat at the I-hub or by system flip only.

Introduce a rare faction ship reward, obtainable from the LP store only with the medal for full Warzone control and whilst holding the highest rank.

Introduce a new highest level rank that is obtainable only by FW kills not LP accumulation. Elite rank should be an extremely accomplished combat position.


Mmm... so a few to start with.


I think that these are good ideas. Along with the ability of corporations to tax LP. In general I am pro things that reduce the average amount of LP gained by pretty much any activity thus increasing the relative value.
Arla Sarain
#165 - 2014-08-28 10:20:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
Utsukushi Shi wrote:


reduce the average amount of LP gained by pretty much any activity thus increasing the relative value.

This is not absolute.

There are few unique items in the militia LP stores. A majority of those items are shared with other LP stores. The consequence is that the market power that our stores have is a lot smaller than most imagine.

If our LP income drops even 2 times it doesn't mean that the ISK/LP will double. It will rise a bit but it will be nowhere near enough to compensate for the drop, because the supply of items is coming from other stores as well. The lack of supply from our side isn't enough to warrant people with demand offering higher buy prices because the other stores are picking up the slack in supply. Essentially whenever our LP income suffers the other stores gain.
Utsukushi Shi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#166 - 2014-08-28 11:04:55 UTC
I think I see what you are saying but that doesn't change the fact that if overall LP rewards are reduced it is worth more. The amounts gained at tier 4 through mission running are just insane.

Also more and varied rewards from the store would be nice, really game wide in fact as there are many corporations that offer virtually the same things.
Arla Sarain
#167 - 2014-08-28 11:13:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
Utsukushi Shi wrote:
but that doesn't change the fact that if overall LP rewards are reduced it is worth more

You are right.
But it's not a binary outcome.

We don't just care that the ISK/LP goes up, we care by how much.

And that's the common misconception - it won't go up by much. People are largely overbloating the value of "LP is going to be worth more because we get less of it" phenomenon.

Galls are at T4 and their LP hasn't sunk 4 or 5 times. It decreased to a low amount (1200-1600?), but the isk/h is still higher than if their LP supply was reduced.
They did screw over all other gallente LP stores though. Because they share the same items, the ISK/LP for those items is smaller due to the large supply coming from GalMIl, but unlike FW LP stores, the generic stores don't get increased LP income.

*MrBeanMagic.mp3*
Takanuro
Eve Faction Trade Exchange
#168 - 2014-08-28 11:38:16 UTC
Lots of suggestions have been given in the various threads that go back years.

I posted the below in March 2013 on the main discussion thread that was running at that time, which is almost same as I posted in 2012. FW pilots have been suggesting stuff forever, we just never ever got any ccp replies on those threads.

Quote:
There are lots of changes that could be done, many have been suggest last year when it was a hot topic on several occassions. One of the things I still can't understand though is why they still give FW so much damn LP.

I mean why does Tier 4 have to give 450% more LP then T1??????????? Who needs 1-2mil LP a day to fund PVP?????????

Back before Retribution I suggested the following (IIRC)

T1 = -5%
T2 = Base
T3 = +5%
T4= +10%
T5= +15%

Same applied to missions, I mean why do L4 missions at T4 need to give something like 85K LP?????????

It's totally insane. Have more subtle bonuses would at least help create a little bit of Faction loyalty and less motive for PVE gangs to keep changing side, because as it stands now losing factions start to bleed players rapidly as pilots go where the LP is, not great for creating a good PVP machine, it makes recruitment very hard and all of this detracts from the purpose of FW, which CCP says is PVP.

I too would like to see some action taken on 'Plexville Eve Edition'. The more we PVP should not mean the faster we lose the war!

Yes, we're going to die, but you're coming with us!

Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#169 - 2014-08-28 12:34:46 UTC
The topic of plexes had been beaten to death. I mean a two to three years beaten to death. I have no problem with them in their current iteration. O-plexing madness was an acid for militias. I rather like that it takes a concerted effort to push a system now. Nullbears hotdropping? That will hopefully be fixed by making Null more viable or addressing power projection. A null fix would also reduce null alt farmers ideally.

The system will never be perfect. The isk generation is not a profit from holding a system as much as it is a process of taking them. That will always be unsatisfactory at some level. On the other side of the coin though there is nothing that could be offered in low sec for owning a system that would appeal to us blood thirsty types. Better mining or PVE for a higher tier? Insert hysterical laughing here.

The items that need discussion are:
FW missions
Cross militia plexing
Tier system in general - why is it even needed? It would be better to balance around LP store scarcity. Such a concept is undermined by loltier 4 vs 1.

The new low-sec sites are great. More low sec income generators like these would be appreciated. More then anything else the losing militias need to be able to attract new blood. Expecting something different out of the same bitter vets is silly.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#170 - 2014-08-28 12:55:02 UTC
you make it sound like null alt farmers are bad, while militia mains having farming alts in fw is not bad.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#171 - 2014-08-28 13:31:12 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
you make it sound like null alt farmers are bad, while militia mains having farming alts in fw is not bad.


Only inasmuch as Null should really be good enough to be taking care of their needs. As tha was really a secondary point to my above post. The best system is one that follow K.I.S.S. If money is my sole concern then I am best served creating a Minmatar or Gallente alt right now. Eliminate the tier system and things follow supply and demand much more closely. Amarr losing? You'll see their faction ships rise in price. You will see Minmatar ships plummet in price. New people will join Amarr. This is a much more important point then who owns the farmers.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#172 - 2014-08-28 13:38:25 UTC
Super Chair wrote:
So before this thread is locked away in the depths of the **** posting vaults. I'd like to reiterate that no FW standings hit for attacking fleet members (concord, sec hits, etc still apply) should be a thing.


This (also add people in your alliance).

In addition I think you should get a standings bump any time you are promoted (I believe currently it is just the first time you achieve a rank. Please correct me if I am wrong).
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#173 - 2014-08-28 15:18:48 UTC
Back on topic: Militia level contracts will solve every problem with FW! (ok, not every problem, but most of them for me personally :) )
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#174 - 2014-08-28 16:19:10 UTC
The age old way of showing that a game mechanic is broken, is to abuse it. I say if Gallente can easily hold total warzone control for over a certain time period (maybe a month?), then CCP will have to concede that the current system is broken.

If you really want to exacerbate the fact, we could take warzone control from Amarr and hold that as well.


Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#175 - 2014-08-28 16:43:38 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Back on topic: Militia level contracts will solve every problem with FW! (ok, not every problem, but most of them for me personally :) )

Oh my dear sweet Gallente Jesus yes! That would solve so, so many logistical issues for us and make coordinating reships a WHOLE lot faster.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."

Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#176 - 2014-08-28 17:05:38 UTC
Estella Osoka wrote:
The age old way of showing that a game mechanic is broken, is to abuse it. I say if Gallente can easily hold total warzone control for over a certain time period (maybe a month?), then CCP will have to concede that the current system is broken.

If you really want to exacerbate the fact, we could take warzone control from Amarr and hold that as well.




Another reason for us to let the Caldari back in.
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#177 - 2014-08-28 17:41:14 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Estella Osoka wrote:
The age old way of showing that a game mechanic is broken, is to abuse it. I say if Gallente can easily hold total warzone control for over a certain time period (maybe a month?), then CCP will have to concede that the current system is broken.

If you really want to exacerbate the fact, we could take warzone control from Amarr and hold that as well.




Another reason for us to let the Caldari back in.


We could let them have Kinakka.
Shad owLord
VOLTAGE REGULATORS
#178 - 2014-08-28 17:52:55 UTC
Veskrashen wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Back on topic: Militia level contracts will solve every problem with FW! (ok, not every problem, but most of them for me personally :) )

Oh my dear sweet Gallente Jesus yes! That would solve so, so many logistical issues for us and make coordinating reships a WHOLE lot faster.



Yes -because that's what we need atm - Easier life for the Galls Lol
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#179 - 2014-08-28 18:02:38 UTC
Shad owLord wrote:
Veskrashen wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Back on topic: Militia level contracts will solve every problem with FW! (ok, not every problem, but most of them for me personally :) )

Oh my dear sweet Gallente Jesus yes! That would solve so, so many logistical issues for us and make coordinating reships a WHOLE lot faster.



Yes -because that's what we need atm - Easier life for the Galls Lol


Medal first please...Then the easy life.
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#180 - 2014-08-28 23:07:24 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Super Chair wrote:
So before this thread is locked away in the depths of the **** posting vaults. I'd like to reiterate that no FW standings hit for attacking fleet members (concord, sec hits, etc still apply) should be a thing.


This (also add people in your alliance).

In addition I think you should get a standings bump any time you are promoted (I believe currently it is just the first time you achieve a rank. Please correct me if I am wrong).


Yeah I really want to use smartbombs more. I dislike taking massive standings hits every fight I do use them.