These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Let's talk about Suitonia's suggestions to improve FW
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hamish Nuwen
Escuadron Federal de Asalto
#201 - 2017-03-08 14:02:17 UTC
What about this: make it about spending time in the plex (obviously) but not about an explicit timer. Other activities have been improved by being replaced by minigames that rewarded an active attitude, so let's make the conquer of an offensive plex some sort of "minigame" where you have to spend time by actively doing something instead of waiting bored a timer to expire.

For example: something based on deployables (something similar to mobile depots but cheaper and without reinforcement state). Let's say that an offensive plexer have to sequentially deploy five of these ministructures in the plex and every of these structures have a 60 sec deploy time, then you have to move to the beacon to "activate it " (another 60 sec timer) and then you can start to deploy the next ministructure. You can also force to spread these structures by imposing limits to where they can be deployed (for example 20km each other and the beacon but no more than 100km from it). The ministructures are very vulnerable when deploying, but when activated they have enough HPs to resist an average ship of the size of the complex for 2 minutes. If the attackers succeed in deploying 5 of these structures, the complex is conquered and every player that deployed one of these gains and amount of LPs (for example 2000 LPs each for a novice complex). For bigger complex, the ministructures must be bigger and also slower to deploy (and more expensive).

The defenders simply have to destroy these structures. The more DPS or the more ships, the faster they can destroy them. They also gains LPs from destroying them like they already do from destroying enemy ships. So the defense of a system is more patrol-and-destroy than wait-here-spinning-bored.

Opinions?
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#202 - 2017-03-08 15:34:04 UTC
Hamish

I appreciate the attempt but wouldn't you agree that sounds like busy work and shooting structures is not much better than than not shooting structures (if its better at all).

It seems to me we have already figured out how to make fighting for sov fun and ccp promised to do it. We just need to get them to keep their promises.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#203 - 2017-03-08 15:47:35 UTC
Aves Asio wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
You can't have a pvp element if one side decides to not show up. Then what?


You are assuming something that i have never suggested.

I dont have the answers, my theorycrafting skill is too low to solve all the problems in fw. I can only point out the broken parts and ask for improvements, just like you.

Just pointing out the fundamental flaw of "pvp-only" solutions for FW, in fact the entire pvp aspect of Eve Online.

There is no requirement either side shows up, and when they don't the game is really boring.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#204 - 2017-03-08 15:58:04 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Aves Asio wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
You can't have a pvp element if one side decides to not show up. Then what?


You are assuming something that i have never suggested.

I dont have the answers, my theorycrafting skill is too low to solve all the problems in fw. I can only point out the broken parts and ask for improvements, just like you.

Just pointing out the fundamental flaw of "pvp-only" solutions for FW, in fact the entire pvp aspect of Eve Online.

There is no requirement either side shows up, and when they don't the game is really boring.



It never hurts to let them know where they should show up. Just saying.

I know you think no one wants to show up and defend plexes throughout the warzone but I can tell you there are allot of players who would. Its just not feasible to ask them to randomly wander around looking for them.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Hamish Nuwen
Escuadron Federal de Asalto
#205 - 2017-03-08 17:40:45 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Hamish

I appreciate the attempt but wouldn't you agree that sounds like busy work and shooting structures is not much better than than not shooting structures (if its better at all).


The mechanic should also provide a motive for the defenders to stay in the complex for a bit, or it would be unbalanced. The main difference would be that you can exchange time for damage. So if you need 2 mins for an average ship to destroy the ministructure, 5 pilots would do that in 24 sec. That's the time to kill a current rat. So this mechanic encourages collaboration between pilots (something that was penalized with the new LP system*) and also avoids situations where numbers are clearly in favor of one side, but anywaythey have to sit here and wait.


* I played FW in 2008-2010 and then you invited other people to the plex so everybody could get the standing. And that was neat.
Boozbaz
Securitech Industries
#206 - 2017-03-08 17:47:07 UTC
One of the things that I want changed with FW is the way you deplex. Deplexing can be one of the most boring, uninteresting and disengaging things in EVE. You just sit there, for 10-39 minutes, babysitting an NPC.

Yes, sometimes there are fights. But for the most part, many players that I talk to, have no enthusiasm for deplexing. They just want to get out there and blow **** up. At least with oplexing you "get" to blow up an NPC ship once in awhile. But I find it hard to motivate my corp mates to deplex. When we need to deplex a system, it sounds like a chore to them and that's definitely not what playing a game is about. However, if we don't deplex, we'll lose our system and our assets will get locked inside the station. So it's one of those grinds that just becomes part of your due diligence if you are running a corp in FW.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#207 - 2017-03-08 18:20:06 UTC
It's been enough pages that I think the list is due for a repost:

Here's a little things list that has been cleaned up and passed around for a couple years that you might want to send his way. The original is linked in the newfw tweetfleet channel.

Remove FW standings hits in null sec.
Remove purple icon for allied militia - or allied militia should take standings hit if they attack you (or just get rid of allied militia) (4 way war confirmed as desired by CCP Affinity).
FW standings eligibility should be applied on individual basis, not on corp basis.
Remove faction standings hits for AoE effects (or other weapons) when in same fleet. (or remove standings hits for all AoE weapons everywhere in lowsec)
FW overview for newbro’s in militia MOTD and FW panel.
MILITIA FILTER. Militia-only contracts. “Militia” filter for POS access, Citadels, etc… Ability for militia members to post future events such as future fleets to entire militia on Calendar
Strengthen Faction Navy to make it harder to camp opposing highsec to farm newbs.
Have plexes persist through DT and redo spawn mechanics of non-outposts (keep them semi-random though)
Randomize plex respawn rate by using a respawn window.
Useful system upgrades
Decouple System Upgrades from Tier Level
Smooth out Tier system and fix payouts for PVP at existing level 5 payouts.
Remove aggression from plex rats (affects afk oplexers without hurting pvp’ers).
Citadel problem.

JUSTK is recruiting
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#208 - 2017-03-08 18:21:18 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Cearain wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Aves Asio wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
You can't have a pvp element if one side decides to not show up. Then what?


You are assuming something that i have never suggested.

I dont have the answers, my theorycrafting skill is too low to solve all the problems in fw. I can only point out the broken parts and ask for improvements, just like you.

Just pointing out the fundamental flaw of "pvp-only" solutions for FW, in fact the entire pvp aspect of Eve Online.

There is no requirement either side shows up, and when they don't the game is really boring.



It never hurts to let them know where they should show up. Just saying.

I know you think no one wants to show up and defend plexes throughout the warzone but I can tell you there are allot of players who would. Its just not feasible to ask them to randomly wander around looking for them.
Please stop. Your filter tells everybody where people who won't engage are located. Big freaking deal. You're not going to get fights out of them.

And please, somebody on these forums, commit to chasing rabbit plexers so that Cearain can be proven right that at least ONE player will chase rabbits in the warzone.

We all know where to go to get fights. And we don't need a filter to do it.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#209 - 2017-03-08 19:14:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
X Gallentius wrote:
Please stop. Your filter tells everybody where people who won't engage are located. Big freaking deal. You're not going to get fights out of them.

And please, somebody on these forums, commit to chasing rabbit plexers so that Cearain can be proven right that at least ONE player will chase rabbits in the warzone.

We all know where to go to get fights. And we don't need a filter to do it.


The intel tool would tell you where people are running plexes. The fact that you interpret that as "Your filter tells everybody where people who won't engage are located" speaks volumes about how you really think fw sov works.

Plenty of people have posted about chasing rabbits. CCP even designed a new ship with an extra point for people who chase fw rabbits!

Are you trying to say no one ever chases them? When you go into a plex and see an enemy 40k away do you not chase them to get in point range? Or do you think well its a rabbit so I won't chase it? Its difficult to understand what you are even saying here.

The intel tool is not just to get fights. The intel tool is so that you can defend complexes and protect and gain sov more efficiently through pvp.
Thanatos Marathon wrote:

FW standings eligibility should be applied on individual basis, not on corp basis.



How would the standing work? If you didn't have the standing would you just be kicked from or unable to join the corp? If everyone in the corp took a standings hit below acceptable levels would the corp then be kicked from militia?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#210 - 2017-03-08 20:12:01 UTC
Cearain wrote:


Thanatos Marathon wrote:

FW standings eligibility should be applied on individual basis, not on corp basis.



How would the standing work? If you didn't have the standing would you just be kicked from or unable to join the corp? If everyone in the corp took a standings hit below acceptable levels would the corp then be kicked from militia?


That is really an implementation question. One thing that was brought up long ago was the potential that individuals would enroll in FW instead of entire corps (or perhaps both could enroll and it would have different effects).

Idealy individual standings would affect individual pilots. If someone is below required standings - kicked from FW one way or the other makes sense. However, we would need a lot to be done around standings before you would be able to implement this because currently repairing standings is an unholy nightmare.

JUSTK is recruiting
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#211 - 2017-03-08 20:18:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Cearain wrote:

Edit: Crosi just because I have a rudimentary understanding of null sec and therefore can see how fw can offer something other than null sec lite, that does not mean I want fw to be the same as null sec. Its the opposite.


Um, you cant just swap sides in an argument. You were the one calling similarities between null and FW. I was the one saying there were fundemental design differences which prevent FW from adopting a purely PvP mechanic.

The only way FW would be able to run a purely PvP occupancy mechanic without unacceptable abuse is if there was no ISK reward or the rewards were so small that most players would have to go outside FW to PvE to support their PvP like they do most everywhere else, including null.

Cearain wrote:
Most of the changes you support makes fw similar to null. You want a more binary system where people fight over only a few systems. Find out who can get the most firepower in a system or 2 and then the rest is mop up. That is null sec lite.


I never said i want a system where people fight over only a few systems. I observed correctly that people fight over things that matter to them on one level or another.

Your proposed free intel in no way extends peoples interests into previously uninteresting systems. It offers no incentive for people to go chase farmers, and most pvpers are already aware where farmers are anyway.

Unlike my suggestion, which does incentivise PvPers to attack farmers by removing WCS from plexes and as such rebalance the farmer/pvper equation to make it more likely that a pvper can disrupt a farmers efficiency.

Cearain wrote:
And in faction war the main isk gains happen after you gain sov and therefore gain tiers. What you describe where people actually would make isk by winning sov was the cash out system. Once the occupancy was established you were paid immediately with items from the lp store. (if you didn't help with the push you won't have any lp to cash out) Now after you gain the sov people join the winning side so they get more lp from their pve. Just like you describe happens in null sec.


I think you must be talking about someone elses idea because this doesnt resemble a response to anything i have ever posted. Farmers make ISK at every stage of the FW pendulum swing. My farming alts made their most isk Oplexing in tier 2 basing out of a POS in Uuna, in an area where caldari wanted to keep low contested rates. Therefore whatever damage i did the previous session, was undone while i was away so it was a perpetual LP faucet.

And all the people interested in those systems were aware of my presence, they didnt require any intel tools. Got lots of kills while protecting my alts those months.

Cearain wrote:
The fact that you interpret that as "Your filter tells everybody where people who won't engage are located" speaks volumes about how you really think fw sov works.


So some peripheral guy with a solo perspective and some bad ideas that in no obvious way solve the issues he sees, is questioning the understanding of one of the most active participants in FW occupancy since its very first iteration long before there was any ISK to be made, and pretty much every stage since?

Classic cerain.
Hamish Nuwen
Escuadron Federal de Asalto
#212 - 2017-03-08 21:05:33 UTC
Boozbaz wrote:
One of the things that I want changed with FW is the way you deplex. Deplexing can be one of the most boring, uninteresting and disengaging things in EVE. You just sit there, for 10-39 minutes, babysitting an NPC...


I can't agree more.

My proposal doesn't have deplexing at all. The only way to prevent an offensive plexing attempt is to actively engage with the plexer/plexers. If nobody is attacking nobody has to defend it, so no more time wasted deplexing. This also means the end of AFK plexing, or plexing with alts with unfitted frigates or with stabs. It has no sense mechanically or economical gain.

In offensive plexing the incentive preventing them to run freely is the money (or better: LPs) the ministrutures cost. You can't avoid for them to run, but you can punish them (at least a bit) for doing so, That prevent tactics like rabbit plexing (unless you want to risk to lose more money/LPs that you can earn).
Hamish Nuwen
Escuadron Federal de Asalto
#213 - 2017-03-08 21:13:30 UTC
Cearain wrote:
The intel tool would tell you where people are running plexes.


The tool you want already exists. It's called "your fellow capsuleers". Ask around you and they give you the war targets you want.

I can tell you that CCP is not going to waste time fixing problems that are not their problems but players problems.
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
Sleep Reapers
#214 - 2017-03-08 21:40:02 UTC
Hamish Nuwen wrote:
Boozbaz wrote:
One of the things that I want changed with FW is the way you deplex. Deplexing can be one of the most boring, uninteresting and disengaging things in EVE. You just sit there, for 10-39 minutes, babysitting an NPC...


I can't agree more.

My proposal doesn't have deplexing at all. The only way to prevent an offensive plexing attempt is to actively engage with the plexer/plexers. If nobody is attacking nobody has to defend it, so no more time wasted deplexing. This also means the end of AFK plexing, or plexing with alts with unfitted frigates or with stabs. It has no sense mechanically or economical gain.

In offensive plexing the incentive preventing them to run freely is the money (or better: LPs) the ministrutures cost. You can't avoid for them to run, but you can punish them (at least a bit) for doing so, That prevent tactics like rabbit plexing (unless you want to risk to lose more money/LPs that you can earn).



Doesn't there have to be some kind of way to roll back the contention level of a system.

If the opposition offensive plexes a system my militia is defending by 10%... how do I get that back to where it was? Or can the defenders in a system only possibly hold the level where it is and never reverse it (until it flips)?

Seems like that wouldn't quite work.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#215 - 2017-03-08 22:29:03 UTC
Scialt wrote:


Doesn't there have to be some kind of way to roll back the contention level of a system.

If the opposition offensive plexes a system my militia is defending by 10%... how do I get that back to where it was? Or can the defenders in a system only possibly hold the level where it is and never reverse it (until it flips)?

Seems like that wouldn't quite work.

You could do something with the "dual timers" approach.
1. Every plex is an enemy plex (Serpentis rats, for example).
2. Winner is the side that reaches a time value first.
3. The solar system will yield control to whichever faction does the best job of stopping the pirates in system (the ones who close the most plexes). (Same sov type system as now).
4. A system falls into a "lawless" state if not enough plexes are captured by either side over the course of a week. (Optional)

Then you'd have warp-core stabbed/afk offensive plexers going around capturing plexes in backwater systems instead of guys in unfit frigs.

In reality, players will use the minimum amount of ship required to capture plexes, and they'll use alts in locations where it's boring (there's no chance of pvp).
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#216 - 2017-03-08 23:11:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Crosi Wesdo wrote:

Um, you cant just swap sides in an argument. You were the one calling similarities between null and FW. I was the one saying there were fundemental design differences which prevent FW from adopting a purely PvP mechanic..


Its not like they either are completely the same or completely different. There can be similarities. And anyway you have not at all indicated how making fw sov more pvp oriented by rollbacks and/or real time intel would be abused. So your whole vague claim is irrelevant to the proposals under discussion.

Cearain wrote:
Most of the changes you support makes fw similar to null. You want a more binary system where people fight over only a few systems. Find out who can get the most firepower in a system or 2 and then the rest is mop up. That is null sec lite.


I never said i want a system where people fight over only a few systems. I observed correctly that people fight over things that matter to them on one level or another.[/quote]

And with station lockouts combined with the terrible sov system we have (both of which you like) groups tend to lump together so that the dplexing task can be spread out. As boozbaz and many many others have said in the past, having to dplex after the rabbits come is a big negative. This leads to large areas of empty space and just a few systems fought over. It would be better if ccp made it easier to actually fight over larger areas. That is what beter intel tools would do.
Crosi Wesdo wrote:

Your proposed free intel in no way extends peoples interests into previously uninteresting systems. It offers no incentive for people to go chase farmers, and most pvpers are already aware where farmers are anyway.

Unlike my suggestion, which does incentivise PvPers to attack farmers by removing WCS from plexes and as such rebalance the farmer/pvper equation to make it more likely that a pvper can disrupt a farmers efficiency.


We don't need to incentivize it any more than it is already. People already do it. It will just make it more efficient. I’m not against disallowing wcs in plexes but I doubt it will really change much. They will still just wap off which they do already.



Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Cearain wrote:
The fact that you interpret that as "Your filter tells everybody where people who won't engage are located" speaks volumes about how you really think fw sov works.


So some peripheral guy with a solo perspective and some bad ideas that in no obvious way solve the issues he sees, is questioning the understanding of one of the most active participants in FW occupancy since its very first iteration long before there was any ISK to be made, and pretty much every stage since?

Classic cerain.


I’m all for believing him except he is contradicting himself.
He is now saying any tool that tells us where plexes are being captured will just "tell everybody where people who won't engage are located." This logically implies that everyone in plexes are "people who won't engage." Yet earlier he was pointing at his corps high vp and kills to prove those who capture plexes also pvp.

He should at least be honest and admit some of the people in plexes will pvp. And this tool will help them get more pvp faster.

And yes I fly mostly solo as do many other players now and who have left. Obviously your implicit view that CCP should ignore solo players and only try to keep people who have the time to maintain friendships in a computer game is one I reject. If I had the time to foster friendships online I would likely be in null sec, not using the horrible null sec lite mechanic.

Hamish
You say other players have this intel but they obviously don’t. Right now let's say I’m in frerstorn. How many plexes are being run in all the systems withing 2 jumps of me? You would need to have about 7 alts in different systems to know this information. And no one does this. Someone might say yeah someone was plexing in ___ about 10 minutes ago. But that doesn’t mean they are there now nor does it tell you about the other systems. If ccp delivered what they promised I could cover all those systems and have plex timers rolling back in a few minutes.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Hamish Nuwen
Escuadron Federal de Asalto
#217 - 2017-03-08 23:32:40 UTC
Scialt wrote:
Doesn't there have to be some kind of way to roll back the contention level of a system.


Oh, yes I forgot this, it would decay automatically with time. The upper the tier of the system, the faster it will decay. So the defenders would have a good incentive to improve the system tier and help with some "passive defense", and attackers would try to degrade it to facilitate the conquest.

(A more hardcore approach would be that in systems with no tier it will not decay at all).
Hamish Nuwen
Escuadron Federal de Asalto
#218 - 2017-03-08 23:45:38 UTC
Cearain wrote:

Hamish
You say other players have this intel but they obviously don’t. Right now let's say I’m in frerstorn. How many plexes are being run in all the systems withing 2 jumps of me?


First requeriment of any type of army: reconnaissance. If your militia don't have that, then you guys have a more serious problem that some plexers.

Cearain wrote:
You would need to have about 7 alts in different systems to know this information.


No, you don't. You let other people play this game too. It's called factional (factions=groups) warfare for a reason.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#219 - 2017-03-09 00:15:39 UTC
Hamish Nuwen wrote:
Cearain wrote:

Hamish
You say other players have this intel but they obviously don’t. Right now let's say I’m in frerstorn. How many plexes are being run in all the systems withing 2 jumps of me?


First requeriment of any type of army: reconnaissance. If your militia don't have that, then you guys have a more serious problem that some plexers.

Cearain wrote:
You would need to have about 7 alts in different systems to know this information.


No, you don't. You let other people play this game too. It's called factional (factions=groups) warfare for a reason.



Yes and we can see how well that has been working out. Go ahead and look at the top vp gainers. Its been almost a decade. CCP should not blame the players. The players need better tools.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#220 - 2017-03-09 13:37:31 UTC
Cearain wrote:

Yes and we can see how well that has been working out. Go ahead and look at the top vp gainers. Its been almost a decade. CCP should not blame the players. The players need better tools.

There's not enough pvp in FW low sec - especially compared to other areas of the game?