These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Inferno Features on Singularity

First post First post
Author
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#121 - 2012-05-02 16:59:21 UTC
Rara Yariza wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Rara Yariza wrote:
CCP RubberBAND wrote:


Without going into exhaustive detail:
1. Cannot dock in stations that are in systems controlled by an enemy
- Example: Minmatar cannot dock in stations in a FW system controlled by the Amarr/Caldari
- You also cannot use station services if you docked before system flipped
- Ninja Edit: This does not affect neutrals




Being unable to dock is a very poor mechanic, this isn't 0.0. If it isn't going to be changed then make it so players can't dock in the highsec stations of their opposing faction aswell. Only fair.


FW area's are war zones, thus subject to (in effect) Martial Law. It's not that difficult to understand.

It's not like you would not be able to stage a system or two away.


I understand it just fine and whatever rp reasons you like, it doesn't change the fact this is not a good thing. it slows down roaming gangs, promotes more blobs and changes facwar into a more grindfest orientated arena. Not to mention you can lose a system during your sleep cycle and come back to either being camped in or locked out of your ships. it's not a well thought through idea.


I'm not discussing rp reasons, I'm discussing game design reasons.

Not being able to dock in a single system does NOTHING to slow down roaming gangs, does nothing to encourage blobs (in fact the opposite), and encourages participation.

If you don't understand why, take a closer look at Null sec Sov battles, and then realize how this will be affected by your "war zone" being surrounded by systems where they can dock freely. Then take a moment and consider that when Sov changes hands the whole upgrade process will need to begin from scratch, thus giving neutral parties living there a strong incentive to support the owning faction to ensure a stable (favorable) environment.

Yes, you will have some neutrals that support whoever is winning. You will have others that have a vested interest in one faction over another being successful in holding Sov (read Data Core price/availability). Other incentives would be a good idea, to motivate a larger percentage of the population, but this is a good first step... one I might add that actually is detrimental to me currently unless (wait for it) I put a character into FW.

As far as losing a system during a sleep cycle is concerned, I sincerely doubt that will be possible. We will have to see what the final determination is on timer length and go from there. If the similarities to Null Sec Sov mechanics hold, it is more likely the timer would end up being in the 24/48 hour range.

Smart players would not put a large portion of their assets into a station likely to be contested often, and if they did you will have options for getting those assets out (via neutral alts or other parties) that Null Sec alliances don't have.

Someone just posted that large alliances outside of FW will simply move in and take over. Big smile
You do realize that it is quite likely that YOU will control those upgrades, and can take them away... and that outside alliances can not. Instead, all it does is give them a reason to support and assist you.

In effect, this is a more civilized form of Sov warfare... complete with perks and benefits to the combatants that Null Sec inhabitants do not enjoy.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

000Freedom Fighter000
Rising Eagle Mercenary Corp
#122 - 2012-05-02 17:02:41 UTC
Blake Armitage wrote:
"This is the Singularity test server.

Can you smell the fumes of rocket exhausts? Hear the grinding innards of spinning turrets? Is there mangled space debris covering the Singularity login screen? That is because the missile war starts right here right now!"

Nice


HURRY UP AND PATCH DAMMIT! Lol
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
SE7EN-SINS
#123 - 2012-05-02 17:03:47 UTC
Hey, a question - have you changed the Drake model so it doesn't have the fake launchers anymore?

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Ismahel Redoran
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#124 - 2012-05-02 17:06:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Ismahel Redoran
Who, I never realized that Faction Warriors were such a bunch of crybabies. Impressive. Anyway, these seem like promising changes, can't wait to see them implemented.
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#125 - 2012-05-02 17:06:45 UTC  |  Edited by: MotherMoon
Damar Rocarion wrote:
Stalking Mantis wrote:
Speaking of numerically superior the words of Damar are still echoing in my head about how this will encourage people to join the winning side to reap the benefits. Leaving only the most devout to fight for their respective sides. A fight that without others to support is a losing fight.


This at least comfirms me to remove myself from FW the moment these changes go live. Alliances allowed meant Matar got hundreds of more people to their side against already outnumbered Amarr. And only be clever tactics have Caldari been able to fight against Gallente blob (Even so, prime time saturday there is nothing to do but stay docked more or less).

Now there is nothing left. Sides with currently biggest blob win and there will be no pendelum swinging back since profit > boredom everytime in Eve so Gallente & Matar will happily grind away isk for themselves. Big pvp corps in militias will simply drop out from militia and go pirate rather than face the risk of losing station access when people flip systems while their members are sleeping or working.

Oh and Soundwave (And Danten Fenix above) says people join losing side to farm datacores? How does giving farmers more options translate as "people willing to join pvp gangs". Tell me, do the current "I dual box with my inty and stealth bomber" mission farmers ever bring a ship into militia fleet to shoot someone?


How about if they increased LP gains for killing targets and taking plexes and such when your on the losing side? They could make a simple system that gives up to 50% more or less LP based on 10 levels like everything else. If your losing really bad your actions gives you twice the reward they would if you were on the winning side.

This would be an interesting solution because the wining side gets a huge 50% discount on LP items, but the losing side gets a 50% bonus in LP. So the more active you are, the more LP you'll make, so if you save it up untill your side is winning, your LP will be worth more as everything is now cheaper.

On the other hand if your winning, you won't feel a sting, you'll just have cheaper LP items but get less LP from actions in FW.

Maybe we would have to pick and choose which FW actions would get this Benefit. Say.... Taking out a control bunker would give a massive chunk of LP based on participation like incursions. However the more you're losing, the more taking a system back pays out. Giving both an incentive to fight back for the losing side, and to keep winning, so you get a nice LP discount with your now very large collection of LP.

This would basically introduce a supply and demand mechanic right into the underbelly of Faction warfare. The losing side is willing to offer more rewards for brave pilots.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

BarryBonez
Viper Sovereign
#126 - 2012-05-02 17:07:50 UTC
I was going to ask a bunch of questions, but I think i will just install SiSi and see for myself Bear
Andre Vauban
Aideron Robotics
#127 - 2012-05-02 17:09:39 UTC
Danfen Fenix wrote:
Stalking Mantis wrote:


Speaking of numerically superior the words of Damar are still echoing in my head about how this will encourage people to join the winning side to reap the benefits. Leaving only the most devout to fight for their respective sides. A fight that without others to support is a losing fight.



I think that is where the idea behind linking Datacores to FW comes in to it. If one side dominates another, then the prices for datacores with the other will rise, causing more people to join them to make a profit and so on P

E.g. Amarr faction owns the minmatar space. Amarr datacore prices plummet, while prices for minmatar datacores rise. This would hopefully then see more people joining the minmatar faction, to take advanatge of the prices/try to lower them, and thus a fighting effort takes place, beating back amarr.


This is incorrect. What will happen is that this will encourage outsiders to stick an alt into the losing militia to farm LP. They will plex in back water systems as far away from anybody as possible. They may even use an alt in the opposing militia to contest a system so they can immediately decontest it (ie double dipping). They will also continue to ninja run missions. They will then make crazy amounts of isk to take back to their 0.0 mains.

Besides, if the losing side were to get more people, how are they supposed to take systems back if they cannot base near those systems?



.

Stalking Mantis
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#128 - 2012-05-02 17:09:42 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
Damar Rocarion wrote:
Stalking Mantis wrote:
Speaking of numerically superior the words of Damar are still echoing in my head about how this will encourage people to join the winning side to reap the benefits. Leaving only the most devout to fight for their respective sides. A fight that without others to support is a losing fight.


This at least comfirms me to remove myself from FW the moment these changes go live. Alliances allowed meant Matar got hundreds of more people to their side against already outnumbered Amarr. And only be clever tactics have Caldari been able to fight against Gallente blob (Even so, prime time saturday there is nothing to do but stay docked more or less).

Now there is nothing left. Sides with currently biggest blob win and there will be no pendelum swinging back since profit > boredom everytime in Eve so Gallente & Matar will happily grind away isk for themselves. Big pvp corps in militias will simply drop out from militia and go pirate rather than face the risk of losing station access when people flip systems while their members are sleeping or working.

Oh and Soundwave (And Danten Fenix above) says people join losing side to farm datacores? How does giving farmers more options translate as "people willing to join pvp gangs". Tell me, do the current "I dual box with my inty and stealth bomber" mission farmers ever bring a ship into militia fleet to shoot someone?


How about if they increased LP gains for killing targets and taking plexes and such when your on the losing side? They could could be a simple system that gives up to 50% more or less LP based on 10 levels like everything else. If your losing really bad your actions gives you twice the reward they would if you were on the winning side.

This would be an interesting solution because the wining side gets a huge 50% discount on LP items, but the losing side gets a 50% bonus in LP. So the more active you are, the more LP you'll make, so if you save it up untill your side is winning, your LP will be worth more as everything is now cheaper.

On the other hand if your winning, you won't feel a sting, you'll just have cheaper LP items but get less LP from actions in FW.

Maybe we would have to pick and choose which FW actions would get this Benefit. Say.... Taking out a control bunker would give a massive chuck of LP based on participation like incursions. However the more you're losing, the more taking a system back pays out. Giving both an incentive to fight back for the losing side, and to keep winning, so you get a nice LP discount with your now very large collection of LP.

This would basically introduce a supply and demand mechanic right into the underbelly of Faction warfare. The losing side is willing to offer more rewards for brave pilots.


ARE YOU READING THIS CCP?

Amarr Liason Officer Extraordinare -->Check Out Amarrian Vengeance/Amarr FW History from 2011 to 2014 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=352629&find=unread

Shaak'Ti
The Public Enemy.
#129 - 2012-05-02 17:11:26 UTC
When a CCP someone sad "we make FW like 0.0" the FW was over.. 0.0 and FW was different.
while 0.0 needs capitals, pilots, every day, going to CTAs every timezones, big fleets, and numbers, the FW needs small fast gangs, good tactics, where every member of the fleet choices can change the fight. That's why we come to FW.
CCP now kill FW, don't know why, don't know what was the problem.
When this patch comes, so many players will left militia and maybe the game.
Rara Yariza
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#130 - 2012-05-02 17:12:18 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:


...HURFBLURF I DONT KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT...




It will promote blobbing, it will hinder roaming gangs, it will be a grindfest. Anyone can see that. If that was a troll then well played, but if not.. haha, oh wow. Lowsec should not be more like 0.0.
Oppon's Pull
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#131 - 2012-05-02 17:15:21 UTC
Agree with Rara - if we wanted grinding structures to be our bread and butter we would have moved to Null long ago. We live in FW because we want nothing to do with Null mechanics.
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
SE7EN-SINS
#132 - 2012-05-02 17:15:25 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
How about if they increased LP gains for killing targets and taking plexes and such when your on the losing side? They could could be a simple system that gives up to 50% more or less LP based on 10 levels like everything else. If your losing really bad your actions gives you twice the reward they would if you were on the winning side.


To be honest, I don't think that's going to be a particularly powerful incentive for the losing side to keep fighting. If I'm going to risk my ship and my pod against a numerically and tactically superior force, I'm gonna want a stronger incentive than "more loyalty points than they'll get if they kill me".

I think each individual system should have, like, some bonus attached to it. Like Damar is always constantly trying to capture Intaki, and he should have some much stronger incentive to do that than just "because I want to". Like, capturing Intaki should give industrial bonuses to the whole of STPRO and industrial penalties to the whole of FDU or something like that, whereas by default the FDU has the bonus, but no penalty is given to Caldari because the Gallente are supposed to own that system.

Likewise all the systems in Black Rise give a bonus to Caldari but no penalty to Gallente for owning them, but Gallente flipping them cause them to give their bonus to Gallente and impose a penalty on Caldari.

Meanwhile, losing systems to your enemy gives you a seperate series of bonuses to the ease of capturing systems, especially their own. I generally think the bonuses should be rigged up so that you have more of an incentive to capture back your own systems first before trying to capture enemy territory. I also think there should be a "front line" of some sort such that you CAN capture systems way behind enemy lines, but it's much easier to do it if you advance sequentially.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#133 - 2012-05-02 17:16:31 UTC
Capitol One wrote:
Echoing Oppons above, will the time/amount of plexes needed to capture a system be changed at all?
Or can I expect to wake up to a station locked because we don't have complete domination of all timezones?



I would actually look at it the opposite way. I would look at it like it would be better if you could flip the system back quickly to get access to your stuff again.

Consider if you could flip the system in under an hour. You could form a fleet and take it back before the other side could blob up on you.

Ok I haven't entirely thought this through but it seems to me the shorter time to flip systems leads to more fun dynamic gameplay and less of a matter of blob wins.

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

Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#134 - 2012-05-02 17:17:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
MotherMoon wrote:

lol what, have you ever flown a bomber? if you get shot, your dead. if drones deal 15% more damage it won't matter, flying a bomber is fun because you know your going to die. I even made an alt just for flying a bomber recklessly!


I probably did more kills with bombers than you with everything else.
Just try fitting MSE to your bomber, really, try it. Helps against getting instapopped and against drones too, even lights. But with that drone damage mod it might get a problem.
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
SE7EN-SINS
#135 - 2012-05-02 17:17:59 UTC
I think unique per-system bonuses, plus a little story fluff for each system and constellation's description like you have for the regions (like the stuff Seriphyn Inhonores writes here) would go a long way to adding story depth to FW without actually doing very much work.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#136 - 2012-05-02 17:18:29 UTC
Rara Yariza wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:


...HURFBLURF I DONT KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT...




It will promote blobbing, it will hinder roaming gangs, it will be a grindfest. Anyone can see that. If that was a troll then well played, but if not.. haha, oh wow. Lowsec should not be more like 0.0.


You do realize that no matter how many times you say something, it does'nt make it any more true.

Lets take an easy one.

Explain to me just how not being able to dock in the target system will hinder roaming gangs.

I'll wait.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#137 - 2012-05-02 17:20:50 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
MotherMoon wrote:

lol what, have you ever flown a bomber? if you get shot, your dead. if drones deal 15% more damage it won't matter, flying a bomber is fun because you know your going to die. I even made an alt just for flying a bomber recklessly!


I probably did more kills with bombers than you with everything else.
Just try fitting MSE to your bomber, really, try it. Helps against getting instapopped and against drones too, even lights. But with that drone damage mod it might get a problem.


Sorry Mother, I have to agree that solo kills in a bomber are a lot of fun and quite doable.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#138 - 2012-05-02 17:25:53 UTC
CCP RubberBAND wrote:
MotherMoon wrote:
That's low sec only right? just making sure, other than that I look forward to the changes : ) anything is better than the lack of updates for the past what... 2-3 years?


Correct. This only applies to the FW systems (I.e. they are all Low Sec systems, this will not extend to Empire or Nullsec). Certainly we realize that FW requires much love and we have some very nice work going on the UI front for FW that will make it into Inferno also. In addition we intend to keep working on improving FW post Inferno with the same dedication seen for this expansion.

Looking forward to the feedback.



You already have feedback on this issue of locking people out of stations. People in faction war hate it. People who do sov null sec love it. This shouldn't be surprising, because it makes faction war more like sov null sec.

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

MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#139 - 2012-05-02 17:31:12 UTC  |  Edited by: MotherMoon
I've said it before and I'll say it again.

The sec of the systems in FW should be dynamic. The closer a system is to enemy space, the lower the sec should be. This would laser focus FW pvp into the border zone. Kinda like star trek TNG's neutral zone.

Plus it would allow for people to move up their base of operations as they take systems. As new "high" sec* systems are created. This has the amazingly hilarious side effect of people keeping thier ships and equipment close to enemy space. So if you take over a chunk of space that was being used as a forward operations base for the other side, you just locked the other team from a station full of supplies.

It gives an incentive for players to actually move their assets into these stations that could be taken over, and an incentive to fight to get them back if taken.

Also make sure if you've been in FW a all in the past month, you can't dock with the stations. Else people will just jump out of the FW npc corp, dock with a station, repair and buy stuff, rejoin FW, and then undock. That doesn't make sense. Maybe we should be super mean and never let anyone who joins a side in FW ever dock with the other side? unless they grind up standings and join their side?

this way it's a lot hard to just jump ship to the winning side.

by *high* sec I mean much easier to defend systems that are somehow harder to take or something? Make players feel safe about moving deeper into FW space.


also shouldn't there be some advantage for being a FW in your own Low sec space over some random pirates? Would be nice if maybe.... gate guns don't shoot at you if your in a system you own, That would ake fighting pirates much easier, muhahaha.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Rara Yariza
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#140 - 2012-05-02 17:33:26 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:


You do realize that no matter how many times you say something, it does'nt make it any more true.

Lets take an easy one.

Explain to me just how not being able to dock in the target system will hinder roaming gangs.

I'll wait.


Your first sentence is ironic, just so you know.

Example 1) lets take a small gang on a roam in other faction space, even though they own the systems. We can take buffer fits, hmm what if we get in a fight and do win, we have to make our way back to our systems to repair and hope we dont get caught with this damage already on us.
Well what about active fits? sure hope we dont run out cap boosters or nanite paste etc.. cuz we gotta make our way bac.... you see where this is going?

argument 1) - jump out to highsec to replenish - if we are in the opposing faction space the surrounding highsec is their faction not ours. lets hope no-one is around to pin us down and let the navy take us out.

argument 2) - bring logi - lets hope he doesnt get popped hey! cuz who primaries logi?

argument 3) - fit local remote reps - so we have to gimp our fits to fight ?

Say what lets not take small gangs, just bring the biggest amount of people we can find and grind systems back. constantly.