These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

These suggestions might make FW better!
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Aves Asio
#21 - 2016-03-12 13:28:38 UTC
FW needs attention. The things you are arguing about in this thread wont do much to improve the life of FW players.
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#22 - 2016-03-12 13:44:13 UTC
dude, this has been discussed, among others things, in tweet slack FW channel, join that.

Just Add Water
Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
#23 - 2016-03-12 14:11:00 UTC
It's been discussed on many communications platforms. What is the difference with Slack?. Or can you prove that topics are not repeated there too?
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#24 - 2016-03-12 15:23:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Nat Silverguard
Oreb Wing wrote:
It's been discussed on many communications platforms. What is the difference with Slack?. Or can you prove that topics are not repeated there too?


yes darling, i can prove it. Cool

btw, CCP Affinity is involved there, you can even chat with her (?)

Just Add Water
Daemun Khanid
Corbeau de sang
#25 - 2016-03-12 15:37:22 UTC
The fact that you don't care or it doesn't effect you isn't a valid argument nor is just trying to make it sound like no one else has reason or right to care. Unless you're actually providing reason why NOT to make any of these changes then you're just trolling.
Move along.

Daemun of Khanid
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#26 - 2016-03-12 15:52:40 UTC
Daemun Khanid wrote:
The fact that you don't care or it doesn't effect you isn't a valid argument nor is just trying to make it sound like no one else has reason or right to care. Unless you're actually providing reason why NOT to make any of these changes then you're just trolling.
Move along.


does your comment addressed to me?

i care and i am involved, i am a GalMil FW pilot. that's why i suggest to you people to join the Slack discussion because these points you are raising are already being discussed there.

CCP Affinity is involved there, (s)he started that doc that i linked. did you even read it?

the incoming 4-way war came from that venue, same goes for the changes in FW missions. we are still pushing for neuts to be "suspect" flagged when entering plexes and LP militia tax rather than corp.

Just Add Water
Daemun Khanid
Corbeau de sang
#27 - 2016-03-12 16:13:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Daemun Khanid
No Nat, not you. Just frustrated with counter arguments that consist of little more than "no" but basically amount to "I don't give a frack, it doesn't effect me so no."

If there are valid arguments why something shouldn't be done or considered then by all means they should be presented and both sides should be open for debate. Nothing wrong with debate when good arguments are being presented. Comments that put nothing forth other than suck it up or who cares, are just annoying and I admittedly have a horrible habit for making trolls fat.

I understand that things concerning EvE are often discussed on 3rd party sites and in fact this thread probably belongs in features and idea's but I actually find it more innapropriate that devs seem to spend more time commenting on 3rd party sites instead of the EvE forums. The official forums are where these kind of discussions belong and players shouldn't be expected to go elsewhere to get information about EvE. Thus far I haven't seen any good reason for locations like slack and reddit being the place to find feedback from devs other than they don't have to do it at all, and that's not a very good one. IMO these discussions belong on these forums and ppl shouldn't be directed to 3rd party sites to have them.

Daemun of Khanid
Shoots MaGee
State War Academy
Caldari State
#28 - 2016-03-12 16:21:59 UTC
Ibutho Inkosi wrote:
It's always struck me as odd for people to want game mechanics to make up for lack of loyalty, or commitment from their own members. I guess people foolish enough to fall for the "corporation" organizing factor and treating their fellow players as employees doesn't bode well when it comes to sharing the wealth and TRUST.

SO...EVE should alter itself to accommodate those who treat their "members" like employees at the Mickey D's.
Now, I've heard everything! Go API! Go API!!



this mechanic i propose doesnt have anything to do with what you are talking about or suggesting. im sorry you have poor views of eve. it is a way that can already be done in game with isk. i do not want to have to go through an out of game application and riffle through everyones apis just to reward players that are putting in the most effort. I also propose that the leveling of a system can be taken care of by a corporation and not be reliant on individual players. thanks for your comment tho
Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
#29 - 2016-03-12 17:02:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Oreb Wing
Nat Silverguard wrote:
Oreb Wing wrote:
It's been discussed on many communications platforms. What is the difference with Slack?. Or can you prove that topics are not repeated there too?


yes darling, i can prove it. Cool

btw, CCP Affinity is involved there, you can even chat with her (?)



Thanks for the link. I can tell you now that half of the little things are nonsense. Making NPC's not shoot you doesn't solve the problems we have. Adding two opposite faction NPC's does (per Crosi) and completely resolves the dplexing problem. Sec hits by individual and not Corp it's not good. Let me just log in to my LP Thief Assassin Alt and clear this guy out! Dumb. Also the no sec hit for AEO. hello smart bombers with positive sec status. Some of these were not thought out. Also the Citadel as Ihub was my idea. Where's the love?

::edit:: My thoughts have evolved on this standings thing. Whether they are corporate wide or individual,I could care less. How they impact the war zone and penalize offenders is my concern. I still feel there should be a large penalty hit for killing allies and fellow militia. What I don't want to see is new people forced to grind faction standing so they could enter FW. Maybe they can make standings for factions unique, so you can join any side from the get go, but suffer high consequences as an awoxer. The drawback would be permanent ban, as there would be no way to get it back up.
Darth Terona
Horde Vanguard.
Pandemic Horde
#30 - 2016-03-12 19:13:25 UTC
Daemun Khanid wrote:
2016.03.04 02:42 0.4000% -1.08 Law Enforcement - Security Status Gain
2016.03.08 04:15 -1.0630% -1.18 Combat - Aggression
2016.03.08 06:49 -0.5591% -1.23 Combat - Aggression

Maybe if you fight once a week it's not that big a hit. If you fight 10+ on any given day it most certainly is noticeable. And those aren't pods. That's just engaging neuts that enter a plex. A neut that enters a plex is there for a fight, no one in militia running that plex should be taking a sec status hit for firing the first shot. The whole point of FW is to provide consensual pvp, getting a sec hit for defending yourself against someone who's looking for fights but unwilling to commit to the rules and vulnerabilities of FW is a load. IMO these neuts are just too big a bunch of coward's to accept being able to get shot at in highsec and want to be safe on gates when traveling lowsec.Of course they will just say it's because they can get more fights if they don't have to pick a team. Whatever makes them feel better at night. If they want to fight in FW sites fine, I'll gladly send them home in pods, but we shouldn't take hits for it.



Ouch

Firstly I was playing nice.
Secondly we take the same sec hit when we shoot first
Most of us cannot return to highsec or be safe on gates/stations

Well this went south fast
I retract my support for this idea

Nothing mentioned here will change much for the betterment of fw
Deal with it
Daemun Khanid
Corbeau de sang
#31 - 2016-03-12 19:28:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Daemun Khanid
You take a sec hit because you're a neutral shooting at a target you have no granted authority to shoot at in a complex that you have no business being in. It no different any where in lowsec, warzone or not. By attacking targets in that plex you are interferering with wz mechanics and should be treated no differently in regards to sec status than a war target doing the same thing. We dont take sec hits for shooting war targets that enter a plex to interupt its progress and should take none for shooting neuts. The same should apply to wt's in a plex. Every one in a plex should be fair game(except in regards to faction standings). In a plex wts shouldnt take hits and neither should neuts. A plex is or should be considered a consentual pvp space. FW zones and FW mechanics should encourage pvp engagements, not penalize them.

Daemun of Khanid
Shoots MaGee
State War Academy
Caldari State
#32 - 2016-03-13 03:07:39 UTC
.
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#33 - 2016-03-13 03:36:49 UTC
Shoots MaGee wrote:
.


ah, i see your point.

Just Add Water
Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
#34 - 2016-03-13 05:11:02 UTC
Got derailed. But back to bonuses and donations. You're right to say a Corp could manage points much better, but I don't think it should come from taxing LP. The system itself could be better to allow home systems with a higher integration at a corporate level. If CCP could allow Citadels in null and non-FW low sec as they've planned, but restrict citadel anchoring within the war zone to FW specific citadels that are tied to system upgrades as the ihub, I think that change would be great. It could make FW even more unique and different, rather than hurt it with them being introduced as they are and worrying about docking privileges.
Mishra San
#35 - 2016-03-13 14:56:57 UTC
remove defensive plexing.

sending virtual hug, virtual hug sent !
Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
#36 - 2016-03-13 16:00:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Oreb Wing
Mishra San wrote:
remove defensive plexing.



There's nothing wrong with defensive plexing if you make it to where pilots have to bring dps to run them defensively or offensively. To keep them from being a bore or encourage thoughts of suicide, we can make the little button destructible, which would begin s defensive tick backwards, whether anyone is present or not. This way you have more activity across a wider area, with pilots looking for objectives. It would give home field advantage, while not changing system siege's very much. It would make alts unnecessary, as one person can clear his home system of idle buttons and secure his donations for half an hour. Just give them high ehp, so a frigate can't be clearing larges.
Shoots MaGee
State War Academy
Caldari State
#37 - 2016-03-13 19:14:17 UTC
i think it would be horrible to have fw exclusive citidels in fw space as it will negate having to compete for a system to use its stations
Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
#38 - 2016-03-13 20:26:41 UTC
Shoots MaGee wrote:
i think it would be horrible to have fw exclusive citidels in fw space as it will negate having to compete for a system to use its stations


This will happen regardless of them being specialized or not. They are on the way and that has been the crowning argument against them in the war zone. On the other hand, if they work as the iHub then we can clearly define who controls system upgrades by who owns it. When they become vulnerable would be just the same as when a system becomes vulnerable now, a night and day difference between Windows of opportunity that conflict with militia prime times. With just a few adaptations we could get all the stuff we've been asking for.
Previous page12