These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CSM Minutes on Faction Warfare
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#261 - 2012-01-25 07:31:44 UTC
Hrett wrote:
Doing level 4 missions with a bomber and inty is bullshit and needs to be nerfed. Those ships are essentially 0 risk for someone who isnt asleep at their keyboard. Cloaky T3s suck too, but its possible to catch them at least on occasion.

Bottom line, the lucrative part of FW should not be set up to favor non-fighting carebears, or if it does, they should have to fly real ships to do the missions. So there is some risk. The system needs to reward PVP - which is the reason for FW, and right now, it doesnt.


hah, the thing that you can not catch those does not mean that others fail too. Every day dies a lot of mission runners by different ways, some even die for rats.

Risk to die is there.

If i run FW mission fleets, as you want, i am sure you do not want to pvp against our fleet either so your idea about possibility to gank something is wrong.
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#262 - 2012-01-25 07:32:35 UTC
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:
Dosen't it Honestly feel like plexing and missioning should get switched? As in missioning is about spinning a buttion and staying in one place for a time and plexes are about a acopmlishing a set goal very fast.


Actually, thats a good idea. Make missions like plexes. Set the gates to only allow a certain ship class and UP for missions. Level 4s would require HACs, CS or BS. Then make them sit on a button for a few minutes. Tthey woul be at real risk for PVP. That would solve the carebear farmer issue.

Though I am ok with the curent combat plex mechanic.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#263 - 2012-01-25 10:16:27 UTC
Hrett wrote:
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:
Dosen't it Honestly feel like plexing and missioning should get switched? As in missioning is about spinning a buttion and staying in one place for a time and plexes are about a acopmlishing a set goal very fast.


Actually, thats a good idea. Make missions like plexes. Set the gates to only allow a certain ship class and UP for missions. Level 4s would require HACs, CS or BS. Then make them sit on a button for a few minutes. Tthey woul be at real risk for PVP. That would solve the carebear farmer issue.

Though I am ok with the curent combat plex mechanic.



Eh, it is just like that, those mission have restrictions and you have to stay in mission as long as you have completed the target.

zzz
Rel'k Bloodlor
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#264 - 2012-01-25 12:32:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Rel'k Bloodlor
Bad Messenger wrote:
Hrett wrote:
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:
Dosen't it Honestly feel like plexing and missioning should get switched? As in missioning is about spinning a buttion and staying in one place for a time and plexes are about a acopmlishing a set goal very fast.


Actually, thats a good idea. Make missions like plexes. Set the gates to only allow a certain ship class and UP for missions. Level 4s would require HACs, CS or BS. Then make them sit on a button for a few minutes. Tthey woul be at real risk for PVP. That would solve the carebear farmer issue.

Though I am ok with the curent combat plex mechanic.



Eh, it is just like that, those mission have restrictions and you have to stay in mission as long as you have completed the target.

zzz


I mean in idea.

1)So you active you scanner and find a vulnerable listing post/weakness in you defence line.
2)A commander gives you standing orders on the field to report to a location.

Witch idea seams like witch mechanic?

As they are now missions are to much like mob hits, I mean that's cool for one I'm doing Guristas missions cuz their a pirate group. But one a uniformed officer tells me to go to a location and kill one guy, that just seems like not my job in militia. That seems like you should use a assassin or somth'n.
And Plexing is too much like standing around on guard duty.
The more I think about it all seems like 'Blarg" the guy from Super Mario World, whys is it like that and what was it spo'sta be.
Dose this mean it will all get changed? Got no idea.
Dose this means CCP and the CSM will make missions like minnig and plexing like sov war?

I wanted to paint my space ship red, but I couldn't find enough goats. 
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#265 - 2012-01-25 13:50:27 UTC
Bad Messenger wrote:
..Risk to die is there...

Risk is just about everywhere, idea is that it should be counter-balanced by reward and when it comes to FW missions is skewed so far towards the latter that even talking about it containing risk is grasping at straws.

They were meant to be done in the appropriate ships, but took all of one week for people to figure out that assassinating a BS target behind enemy lines is most efficiently done in a bomber .. tweaking them so that they perform 'as intended' would go a long way to stabilizing the navy markets and flushing all the leeches out of the system.

They should all be doable solo, even in a bomber but if a person chooses the cloaky option ('safety' in transit) then his task on site should be very hard and/or time-consuming.

Solution:
- Include all of the commander/structure spawn in the designated targets for FW missions.
Nothing more needs be done I think as it adds 1-2 elite frigs and 2-3 elite cruisers, both NPC types are "easily" killed by most combat ships but bombers will struggle and thus be exposed for a prolonged period.
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#266 - 2012-01-25 13:51:15 UTC
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:
Bad Messenger wrote:
Hrett wrote:
Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:
Dosen't it Honestly feel like plexing and missioning should get switched? As in missioning is about spinning a buttion and staying in one place for a time and plexes are about a acopmlishing a set goal very fast.


Actually, thats a good idea. Make missions like plexes. Set the gates to only allow a certain ship class and UP for missions. Level 4s would require HACs, CS or BS. Then make them sit on a button for a few minutes. Tthey woul be at real risk for PVP. That would solve the carebear farmer issue.

Though I am ok with the curent combat plex mechanic.



Eh, it is just like that, those mission have restrictions and you have to stay in mission as long as you have completed the target.

zzz


I mean in idea.

1)So you active you scanner and find a vulnerable listing post/weakness in you defence line.
2)A commander gives you standing orders on the field to report to a location.

Witch idea seams like witch mechanic?

As they are now missions are to much like mob hits, I mean that's cool for one I'm doing Guristas missions cuz their a pirate group. But one a uniformed officer tells me to go to a location and kill one guy, that just seems like not my job in militia. That seems like you should use a assassin or somth'n.
And Plexing is too much like standing around on guard duty.
The more I think about it all seems like 'Blarg" the guy from Super Mario World, whys is it like that and what was it spo'sta be.
Dose this mean it will all get changed? Got no idea.
Dose this means CCP and the CSM will make missions like minnig and plexing like sov war?


No it does not mean that CCP and the CSM will make missions like mining and plexing like sov war , but it seems that players want to do so , at least in militia. It is just some kind of role play that all missions in EVE have, some story why you should do something that is called grinding.

Whole idea of FW missions is to get people in lowesec and make possibility to earn some isk by selling LP store items. now people are crying when people do so.

If you look at normal lvl4 missions and how many are doing those in lowsec , not many, and then you think that you want to change fw missions to similar or even harder, is this bringing more people to lowsec or do those farmers start to do something else.

So current systems brings lot of people to lowsec. Maybe they are not easiest targets to shoot but still they are in lowsec and still they are volunteer as targets of opposing militia.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#267 - 2012-01-25 15:11:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Frozen Fallout wrote:
BolsterBomb wrote:
but you must dual or triple box, if your willing to do that then you are really making that money over TWO characters not one.

When EVE starts gimping my isk because someone wants to dual or triple box and then say "that is the norm" is balogne.

What is the normal amount of isk you can generate with ONE account, and for the record the ishtar would die if FW was populated more.

I remember jumping through a gate in a gila....and it dieing in a blaze of fire due to a roam. Thats what happens when you do it solo, real risk.

Dual boxing and triple boxing is not solo


Solo if I was a squid I could make about the same as my Ishtar with warp while cloak which is better then the Ishtar with the mwd cloak trick. I could easly make a billion isk in one sitting completely solo no dual boxing. I would think the Caldari could do about the same with even less risk. It comes down to NPCs and ships that can do the missions. Even doing it with a friend I make about the same with a cepter and SB or 2. With a cepters and an SB we normally do a set or two of missions netting us a half billion+ worth of isk in under 3 to 5 hours of work. Its just to easy for the risk which is almost none if you are in warp while cloak ships and cepters. Even the Ishtar with mwd and cloak is almost impossible to catch with out a good cepter bumping ship with a gate camp.

And its not just about be able to solo or dual box them its about how damn easy they are for the risk involved. If you say had to actually bring a small fleet to actually do the mission you would have a chance for PvP but the way it is now I don't think I have seen any mission running fleets of SBs and cepters go after anything other then the very odd gank. Almost every time they cloak up and run and hide. Not even a chance at really catching one mission running fleet unless your lucky and they are stupid,

The point is they are just to damn easy as they are which is why there are 6000 people in Caldari militia and only 100 PvPers. Make them a fleet activity and you will have more PvPers and less PvEers IMHO.



I think there is an imbalance in the races. Running missions for Amarr you get painted by the rats and get hit with lots of missiles. If you want to solo the missions you need a drake and even then I have to do frequent warp outs. Everytime you warp out and back you are at greater risk of getting caught on the gate. I think the difficulty of amarr fw missions is really pretty well balanced.

IMO Make the other races similar to amarr, and tie the lp to vp or pvp and missions are fixed.

Edit and that drake is entirely pve fit.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#268 - 2012-01-25 15:27:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Bad Messenger
Cearain wrote:
Frozen Fallout wrote:
BolsterBomb wrote:
but you must dual or triple box, if your willing to do that then you are really making that money over TWO characters not one.

When EVE starts gimping my isk because someone wants to dual or triple box and then say "that is the norm" is balogne.

What is the normal amount of isk you can generate with ONE account, and for the record the ishtar would die if FW was populated more.

I remember jumping through a gate in a gila....and it dieing in a blaze of fire due to a roam. Thats what happens when you do it solo, real risk.

Dual boxing and triple boxing is not solo


Solo if I was a squid I could make about the same as my Ishtar with warp while cloak which is better then the Ishtar with the mwd cloak trick. I could easly make a billion isk in one sitting completely solo no dual boxing. I would think the Caldari could do about the same with even less risk. It comes down to NPCs and ships that can do the missions. Even doing it with a friend I make about the same with a cepter and SB or 2. With a cepters and an SB we normally do a set or two of missions netting us a half billion+ worth of isk in under 3 to 5 hours of work. Its just to easy for the risk which is almost none if you are in warp while cloak ships and cepters. Even the Ishtar with mwd and cloak is almost impossible to catch with out a good cepter bumping ship with a gate camp.

And its not just about be able to solo or dual box them its about how damn easy they are for the risk involved. If you say had to actually bring a small fleet to actually do the mission you would have a chance for PvP but the way it is now I don't think I have seen any mission running fleets of SBs and cepters go after anything other then the very odd gank. Almost every time they cloak up and run and hide. Not even a chance at really catching one mission running fleet unless your lucky and they are stupid,

The point is they are just to damn easy as they are which is why there are 6000 people in Caldari militia and only 100 PvPers. Make them a fleet activity and you will have more PvPers and less PvEers IMHO.



I think there is an imbalance in the races. Running missions for Amarr you get painted by the rats and get hit with lots of missiles. If you want to solo the missions you need a drake and even then I have to do frequent warp outs. Everytime you warp out and back you are at greater risk of getting caught on the gate. I think the difficulty of amarr fw missions is really pretty well balanced.

IMO Make the other races similar to amarr, and tie the lp to vp or pvp and missions are fixed.

Edit and that drake is entirely pve fit.


I use same tactic for all races and i do not have problems to do those. Speed tank and bomber does all fine.

Edit: also minmatar fw missions are easiest to do, still caldari has most people, so no, it is not rats that affects caldari numbers.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#269 - 2012-01-25 15:41:18 UTC
Bad messenger - your posts consistently defend the system as being perfectly fine, as you argue with every single person that offers up any idea to change it.

By basically telling all the Faction Warfare pilots to stop complaining about everything, the result is that you sound like someone who is quite happy to farm missions and wants the system to be left alone.

Do you actually think the system could use improvement, and if so, what do you suggest?

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#270 - 2012-01-25 15:42:18 UTC
Bad Messenger wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Frozen Fallout wrote:
BolsterBomb wrote:
but you must dual or triple box, if your willing to do that then you are really making that money over TWO characters not one.

When EVE starts gimping my isk because someone wants to dual or triple box and then say "that is the norm" is balogne.

What is the normal amount of isk you can generate with ONE account, and for the record the ishtar would die if FW was populated more.

I remember jumping through a gate in a gila....and it dieing in a blaze of fire due to a roam. Thats what happens when you do it solo, real risk.

Dual boxing and triple boxing is not solo


Solo if I was a squid I could make about the same as my Ishtar with warp while cloak which is better then the Ishtar with the mwd cloak trick. I could easly make a billion isk in one sitting completely solo no dual boxing. I would think the Caldari could do about the same with even less risk. It comes down to NPCs and ships that can do the missions. Even doing it with a friend I make about the same with a cepter and SB or 2. With a cepters and an SB we normally do a set or two of missions netting us a half billion+ worth of isk in under 3 to 5 hours of work. Its just to easy for the risk which is almost none if you are in warp while cloak ships and cepters. Even the Ishtar with mwd and cloak is almost impossible to catch with out a good cepter bumping ship with a gate camp.

And its not just about be able to solo or dual box them its about how damn easy they are for the risk involved. If you say had to actually bring a small fleet to actually do the mission you would have a chance for PvP but the way it is now I don't think I have seen any mission running fleets of SBs and cepters go after anything other then the very odd gank. Almost every time they cloak up and run and hide. Not even a chance at really catching one mission running fleet unless your lucky and they are stupid,

The point is they are just to damn easy as they are which is why there are 6000 people in Caldari militia and only 100 PvPers. Make them a fleet activity and you will have more PvPers and less PvEers IMHO.



I think there is an imbalance in the races. Running missions for Amarr you get painted by the rats and get hit with lots of missiles. If you want to solo the missions you need a drake and even then I have to do frequent warp outs. Everytime you warp out and back you are at greater risk of getting caught on the gate. I think the difficulty of amarr fw missions is really pretty well balanced.

IMO Make the other races similar to amarr, and tie the lp to vp or pvp and missions are fixed.

Edit and that drake is entirely pve fit.


I use same tactic for all races and i do not have problems to do those. Speed tank and bomber does all fine.

Edit: also minmatar fw missions are easiest to do, still caldari has most people, so no, it is not rats that affects caldari numbers.



Yes you can do them with a speed tanker and dps. I do not consider 2 ships to be solo even if one is a speed tank.

I haven't tried an ishtar solo for amarr but given the problems the amarr missions give my pve drake I think it would be difficult in an ishtar. Maybe the smaller sig radius would help but given the painters I doubt it. Even if you can do them in an ishtar with the same difficulty I have with my drake I don't see a problem.

High sec level 4s can be done in a pve ishtar or drake. Why not low sec?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#271 - 2012-01-25 16:09:01 UTC  |  Edited by: BolsterBomb
The problem with all of mecha's argument is that you consider bomber and inty solo. Its not. Can you run two ships on one eve program? No you have to dual box.

Your argument is I am playing two accounts and doing two peoples jobs and counting the money as one character???

No

Two accounts = income split between two ways.

Now if you can solo in a frig (pick one) and by solo I mean ONE SHIP. Then yes we have a problme. However the current method of FW missions align up perfectly with pirate 00 missions.

The reason people come to lowsec to farm missions is because lowsec is generally safer from anyone coming and killing you.

You have to worry about sec status if you kill someone and you are not in FW, and the FW members are to lazy to interupt someone missioning.

You can EASILY stop a mission runner, but it is boring as hell. And that is why we dont do it. When you get into a system and you dscan a ship to see that its a bomber running the mission, who really tries to go kill it? No one. Its too much work to try and catch it. You could prevent it and frusterate the hell out of him but that takes time to.

Just because you dont do the options that would prevent/limit mission running does not mean it is OP.

EDIT

And if you have to solo in an ishtar, there is real risk. The cost of the ship vs the mission is abslutely worth it. I tell you this, if I see an ishtar on dsacn running a mission you bet your ass I am going to try and catch it

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#272 - 2012-01-25 16:29:27 UTC
BolsterBomb wrote:
The problem with all of mecha's argument is that you consider bomber and inty solo. Its not. Can you run two ships on one eve program? No you have to dual box.

Your argument is I am playing two accounts and doing two peoples jobs and counting the money as one character???

No

Two accounts = income split between two ways.

Now if you can solo in a frig (pick one) and by solo I mean ONE SHIP. Then yes we have a problme. However the current method of FW missions align up perfectly with pirate 00 missions.

The reason people come to lowsec to farm missions is because lowsec is generally safer from anyone coming and killing you.

You have to worry about sec status if you kill someone and you are not in FW, and the FW members are to lazy to interupt someone missioning.

You can EASILY stop a mission runner, but it is boring as hell. And that is why we dont do it. When you get into a system and you dscan a ship to see that its a bomber running the mission, who really tries to go kill it? No one. Its too much work to try and catch it. You could prevent it and frusterate the hell out of him but that takes time to.

Just because you dont do the options that would prevent/limit mission running does not mean it is OP.

EDIT

And if you have to solo in an ishtar, there is real risk. The cost of the ship vs the mission is abslutely worth it. I tell you this, if I see an ishtar on dsacn running a mission you bet your ass I am going to try and catch it


As i said earlier it is not efficient to run those solo with bomber, you make faster lp/isk with 2 char that solo bomber.

Also any ship can escape as easily than bomber in lowsec mission. Those escape in 0.0 too so it does not really matter what ships people are using.
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#273 - 2012-01-25 16:38:40 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Bad messenger - your posts consistently defend the system as being perfectly fine, as you argue with every single person that offers up any idea to change it.

By basically telling all the Faction Warfare pilots to stop complaining about everything, the result is that you sound like someone who is quite happy to farm missions and wants the system to be left alone.

Do you actually think the system could use improvement, and if so, what do you suggest?


There is lot of noise about FW in forums, but if you really look how many people are complaining about example missions it is not much compared to amount how many play FW.

I do not say that FW is perfect , it has lot of things that need to improve, but ways you usually propose it to done is something that just does not work.

Good example about how to refresh plexing was to spawn lot of plexes, no one really proposed that but ccp figured it out them self. I trust that ccp will find lot of better solutions as general than any of you can imagine.

EVE is really complex product , fw missions are really small part of eve economy and i do not see any problem how it affect as whole. Only reason why you complain about is that someone is making isk out of those easily while you beat your own head to wall without reason. There is lot of guides how to farm those effectively but it is up to you if you want to use those methods or not.
Sishen Gzi
Hellion Support Services
#274 - 2012-01-25 16:55:54 UTC
I don't really understand why people are trying to nerf missions to make fw "better". The problem with fw is that many people join it with out any reason, at the end of the advanced tutorials they get a certificate that allows them to join on their fist day if they grind the tutorials. Half of Caldari pilots right now are hi sec mission runners and not at all active in low sec. For those that do nerfing missions is not going to force them into pvp, they will most likely leave and go do incursions or exploration or something else lucrative and safer.

The missions right now go along with the storyline of the undeclared war. It is a guerrilla war where you go in your stealthy ship and kill a target, ambush a convoy, or blow up a structure. Missions also provide the isk that is needed to counter ship loses, the ability to earn 100 million isk in an hour or two makes someone more willing to risk expensive ships like well fitted bcs and hacs.

The problem with missions is that plexing is lacking in any real incentive. Great you took a system, so what. Did you get any reward, a slight boost in standing is all. Is the other side inconvenienced at all, no, they can still dock at their stations, the agents will still give them missions. If you want to "fix" factional warfare "fix" plexing. Give it a reward or something that's better then just tags, maybe limited faction mod drops or something. Also tie it in with a penalty for losing systems, for example make it so that if you losing a constellation means losing docking rights at the militia stations in that constelation, and also make it so that if you don't hold the enemy constellation you can't dock at the militia stations.
Frozen Fallout
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#275 - 2012-01-25 17:19:30 UTC
BolsterBomb wrote:
The problem with all of mecha's argument is that you consider bomber and inty solo. Its not. Can you run two ships on one eve program? No you have to dual box.

Your argument is I am playing two accounts and doing two peoples jobs and counting the money as one character???

No

Two accounts = income split between two ways.

Now if you can solo in a frig (pick one) and by solo I mean ONE SHIP. Then yes we have a problme. However the current method of FW missions align up perfectly with pirate 00 missions.

The reason people come to lowsec to farm missions is because lowsec is generally safer from anyone coming and killing you.

You have to worry about sec status if you kill someone and you are not in FW, and the FW members are to lazy to interupt someone missioning.

You can EASILY stop a mission runner, but it is boring as hell. And that is why we dont do it. When you get into a system and you dscan a ship to see that its a bomber running the mission, who really tries to go kill it? No one. Its too much work to try and catch it. You could prevent it and frusterate the hell out of him but that takes time to.

Just because you dont do the options that would prevent/limit mission running does not mean it is OP.

EDIT

And if you have to solo in an ishtar, there is real risk. The cost of the ship vs the mission is abslutely worth it. I tell you this, if I see an ishtar on dsacn running a mission you bet your ass I am going to try and catch it



As I said before and I guess I have to say it again. It has nothing to do with Solo and everything to do with risk. There is no risk with the current missions at all if done right.

Im not saying its completely broken and that its destroying the game. Im just trying to come up with simple things that could add to FW and make it more of a PvPers game then a PvEers. Right now I would bet more people use FW for PvE and isk farming then for PvP.

Sounds to me like CCP doesn't like FW the way it is currently and if we don't find something better to fix it it sounds like from the CMS minutes that they are going to change the whole thing and make us 0.0 guinea pig. Maybe they will leave missions the way they are and let us farm them for LP until the T1 faction BS are worth 200 million or they will completely change it. From the sounds of it CCP are looking to completely overhaul the system.

I think one of the problems we have in FW at least when it comes to talking to CCP is that there are 3 different type of people in FW right now. PvPers who just want to shoot ****, PvEers who just want to farm the missions, and people who use missions to pay for PvP.

I don't want Missions nerfted I just want there to be risk and probably even better pay out. Not risk from NPCs as Bad Messenger seemed to think I was saying but from Players. And yes I would love to see you doing missions in BC fleets Bad Messenger at least then we could have a chance for PvP even if as it sounds you think your PvE group would smash our PvP group because you have billions of isk in Titans and Faction ships.
BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#276 - 2012-01-25 17:24:50 UTC
Frozen Fallout wrote:
BolsterBomb wrote:
The problem with all of mecha's argument is that you consider bomber and inty solo. Its not. Can you run two ships on one eve program? No you have to dual box.

Your argument is I am playing two accounts and doing two peoples jobs and counting the money as one character???

No

Two accounts = income split between two ways.

Now if you can solo in a frig (pick one) and by solo I mean ONE SHIP. Then yes we have a problme. However the current method of FW missions align up perfectly with pirate 00 missions.

The reason people come to lowsec to farm missions is because lowsec is generally safer from anyone coming and killing you.

You have to worry about sec status if you kill someone and you are not in FW, and the FW members are to lazy to interupt someone missioning.

You can EASILY stop a mission runner, but it is boring as hell. And that is why we dont do it. When you get into a system and you dscan a ship to see that its a bomber running the mission, who really tries to go kill it? No one. Its too much work to try and catch it. You could prevent it and frusterate the hell out of him but that takes time to.

Just because you dont do the options that would prevent/limit mission running does not mean it is OP.

EDIT

And if you have to solo in an ishtar, there is real risk. The cost of the ship vs the mission is abslutely worth it. I tell you this, if I see an ishtar on dsacn running a mission you bet your ass I am going to try and catch it



As I said before and I guess I have to say it again. It has nothing to do with Solo and everything to do with risk. There is no risk with the current missions at all if done right.

Im not saying its completely broken and that its destroying the game. Im just trying to come up with simple things that could add to FW and make it more of a PvPers game then a PvEers. Right now I would bet more people use FW for PvE and isk farming then for PvP.

Sounds to me like CCP doesn't like FW the way it is currently and if we don't find something better to fix it it sounds like from the CMS minutes that they are going to change the whole thing and make us 0.0 guinea pig. Maybe they will leave missions the way they are and let us farm them for LP until the T1 faction BS are worth 200 million or they will completely change it. From the sounds of it CCP are looking to completely overhaul the system.

I think one of the problems we have in FW at least when it comes to talking to CCP is that there are 3 different type of people in FW right now. PvPers who just want to shoot ****, PvEers who just want to farm the missions, and people who use missions to pay for PvP.

I don't want Missions nerfted I just want there to be risk and probably even better pay out. Not risk from NPCs as Bad Messenger seemed to think I was saying but from Players. And yes I would love to see you doing missions in BC fleets Bad Messenger at least then we could have a chance for PvP even if as it sounds you think your PvE group would smash our PvP group because you have billions of isk in Titans and Faction ships.


You keep saying add player risk however its avaliable to you. GO kill them or prevent them from doing the mission. LOL

Just because you arent doing it doesnt mean its not avaliable. You are trying to adjust missions to do something that eve is not intended to (computer driven via AI) . This is a sandbox go stop the mission runners.

You may not be able to kill a bomber in a mission but you sure can STOP them from doing it.

And if you cant catch an ishtar running missions then thats your problem. They cant use covert op cloaks....

So my question to you is this then Froz

If players are currently allowed to enter anothers mission, kill them, interupt them, prevent them from doing the mission what more would you like to see? We are not talking about how to complete the mission (bomber and inty) but how to add player interaction to stop a mission runner?

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#277 - 2012-01-25 17:34:02 UTC
BolsterBomb wrote:
We are not talking about how to complete the mission (bomber and inty) but how to add player interaction to stop a mission runner?


Mission is not only place where you can kill those, you can kill them on station where they are getting those or something else. Just use your imagination and make research how mission runners do things and then strike where it is easiest and possible.
Frozen Fallout
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#278 - 2012-01-25 17:49:26 UTC
BolsterBomb wrote:
Frozen Fallout wrote:
BolsterBomb wrote:
The problem with all of mecha's argument is that you consider bomber and inty solo. Its not. Can you run two ships on one eve program? No you have to dual box.

Your argument is I am playing two accounts and doing two peoples jobs and counting the money as one character???

No

Two accounts = income split between two ways.

Now if you can solo in a frig (pick one) and by solo I mean ONE SHIP. Then yes we have a problme. However the current method of FW missions align up perfectly with pirate 00 missions.

The reason people come to lowsec to farm missions is because lowsec is generally safer from anyone coming and killing you.

You have to worry about sec status if you kill someone and you are not in FW, and the FW members are to lazy to interupt someone missioning.

You can EASILY stop a mission runner, but it is boring as hell. And that is why we dont do it. When you get into a system and you dscan a ship to see that its a bomber running the mission, who really tries to go kill it? No one. Its too much work to try and catch it. You could prevent it and frusterate the hell out of him but that takes time to.

Just because you dont do the options that would prevent/limit mission running does not mean it is OP.

EDIT

And if you have to solo in an ishtar, there is real risk. The cost of the ship vs the mission is abslutely worth it. I tell you this, if I see an ishtar on dsacn running a mission you bet your ass I am going to try and catch it



As I said before and I guess I have to say it again. It has nothing to do with Solo and everything to do with risk. There is no risk with the current missions at all if done right.

Im not saying its completely broken and that its destroying the game. Im just trying to come up with simple things that could add to FW and make it more of a PvPers game then a PvEers. Right now I would bet more people use FW for PvE and isk farming then for PvP.

Sounds to me like CCP doesn't like FW the way it is currently and if we don't find something better to fix it it sounds like from the CMS minutes that they are going to change the whole thing and make us 0.0 guinea pig. Maybe they will leave missions the way they are and let us farm them for LP until the T1 faction BS are worth 200 million or they will completely change it. From the sounds of it CCP are looking to completely overhaul the system.

I think one of the problems we have in FW at least when it comes to talking to CCP is that there are 3 different type of people in FW right now. PvPers who just want to shoot ****, PvEers who just want to farm the missions, and people who use missions to pay for PvP.

I don't want Missions nerfted I just want there to be risk and probably even better pay out. Not risk from NPCs as Bad Messenger seemed to think I was saying but from Players. And yes I would love to see you doing missions in BC fleets Bad Messenger at least then we could have a chance for PvP even if as it sounds you think your PvE group would smash our PvP group because you have billions of isk in Titans and Faction ships.


You keep saying add player risk however its avaliable to you. GO kill them or prevent them from doing the mission. LOL

Just because you arent doing it doesnt mean its not avaliable. You are trying to adjust missions to do something that eve is not intended to (computer driven via AI) . This is a sandbox go stop the mission runners.

You may not be able to kill a bomber in a mission but you sure can STOP them from doing it.

And if you cant catch an ishtar running missions then thats your problem. They cant use covert op cloaks....

So my question to you is this then Froz

If players are currently allowed to enter anothers mission, kill them, interupt them, prevent them from doing the mission what more would you like to see? We are not talking about how to complete the mission (bomber and inty) but how to add player interaction to stop a mission runner?



When you have 3 people running missions each taking 6 missions each thats 18 missions they do on one run. You cant stop them from doing a mission you can only delay. They just go to the next one. And chasing 20 million isk ships around for hours on end isn't fun for anyone, I would rather go out and fight pirates which put up more fights then the Caldari at the moment. As for catching an Ishtar its so rare to see some one with the balls to actually run missions in a destructible ship it might as well never happen.

Im just throwing out Ideas because CCP has made it clear they want to wipe the whole system and make it a new. Missions was just one of the many things that need to be looked at and I would rather we as players of FW would work together and present some good ideas to CCP because it seems CCP is going to destroy that which we love if we dont.

I suppose if you just want to sit back and wait to see what CCP does and not offer any good ideas (just attack others) you might just get what you want. Here's to CCP destroying one of the best play grounds in Eve for PvP Cheers Mate.
BolsterBomb
Perkone
Caldari State
#279 - 2012-01-25 18:04:37 UTC



The reason I am busting your chops on this is because you are right we do need to offer good ideas. But IMO your ideas are bad and unessacary (for fw missions only)

The missions are fine, it is not CCPs fault that players do not want to stop other players from farming isk. The ability is there and you can do it.

Heck half the time fw players are surfing the internet anyway while online. Do it while camping the mission gate once you push them out.

If you hinder enough of them you can shut down systems. Why not camp the agents station? All the mechanics that are avalaible for other missions outside FW are avalaiable and the same to FW players. That is my point. You are making suggestions to something that does not need to be tweaked in FW. Go after the plexing purpose first.

In my experience you do not suggest items that need minor tweaking or are fine by the majority of the players you only suggest the areas that need to be fixed less you break something all together. Do not yell for a nerf bat or adjustments to this nature before you fix the real purpose. If you "fix" missions you are only depleting the fw player base even more. Even if they only come to fw for missions, they are still there. So your crusade has yeilded no results.

Brig General of The Caldari State

"Don" Bolsterbomb

Traitor and Ex Luminaire General of The Gallente Federation
Frozen Fallout
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#280 - 2012-01-25 18:13:18 UTC
BolsterBomb wrote:



The reason I am busting your chops on this is because you are right we do need to offer good ideas. But IMO your ideas are bad and unessacary (for fw missions only)

The missions are fine, it is not CCPs fault that players do not want to stop other players from farming isk. The ability is there and you can do it.

Heck half the time fw players are surfing the internet anyway while online. Do it while camping the mission gate once you push them out.

If you hinder enough of them you can shut down systems. Why not camp the agents station? All the mechanics that are avalaible for other missions outside FW are avalaiable and the same to FW players. That is my point. You are making suggestions to something that does not need to be tweaked in FW. Go after the plexing purpose first.

In my experience you do not suggest items that need minor tweaking or are fine by the majority of the players you only suggest the areas that need to be fixed less you break something all together. Do not yell for a nerf bat or adjustments to this nature before you fix the real purpose. If you "fix" missions you are only depleting the fw player base even more. Even if they only come to fw for missions, they are still there. So your crusade has yeilded no results.


So let me get this strait you think FW should be all about camping gates, camping stations and camping missions? Sounds boring to me and I don't think very many people in FW would agree that it should be all about camping.