These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

FW: rebalancing NPCs and you

First post First post
Author
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#201 - 2012-07-13 17:36:39 UTC
Saul Elsyn wrote:

At the very least they could give us distress calls from complexes in the militia channel...

This is the Caldari Naval Station in Tama, we are under attack... repeat, we are under... *static* Deploying Cyno!

We know that the NPC navies have titans... how about CCP put one in the militia's home systems and use them to jump bridge us to combat zones.


I agree that the more information we have regarding who is attacking where, the better. Alerts for plexing would be a great conflict driver, and are perfectly in the spirit of Faction Warfare content. It's why our complexes and missions show up on the overview, its why we have the cool new 3D menu in our FW interface showing which systems are under attack.

The next logical step would be alerting players directly to specific plexing activity, so response times can be reduced even further. it's more fun and less of a grind to chase an attacker out of his plex than it is to defensively run it down, we want to reach the point of intervention, not clean up work after the attacker has nabbed his LP and ran. I know exactly how we can accomplish this, but for the details you'll have to wait for the CSM minutes to be released, there will be much more I can elaborate on once you guys see what CCP's been up to on their end. Sorry to tease, but you won't have to wait long, they'll be out very soon!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#202 - 2012-07-13 23:24:14 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The next logical step would be alerting players directly to specific plexing activity, so response times can be reduced even further. it's more fun and less of a grind to chase an attacker out of his plex than it is to defensively run it down, we want to reach the point of intervention, not clean up work after the attacker has nabbed his LP and ran. I know exactly how we can accomplish this, but for the details you'll have to wait for the CSM minutes to be released, there will be much more I can elaborate on once you guys see what CCP's been up to on their end. Sorry to tease, but you won't have to wait long, they'll be out very soon!


This would need to be handled carefully, Sometimes local is empty when I open a plex sometimes not, I then expect or at least prepare for some form of fight and often I am even trying to provoke a fight by opening the plex that is the notification. Having everyone within a couple jumps swarm in would do little to encourage PVP.

That said if I remain alone in the plex for a period of time then perhaps this could be escalated to the militia interface say five minutes into plexing a minor longer for tougher plexes.

I would prefer an indication on the map rather than broadcasts in a channel that could end up as spam. Perhaps such intel should be restricted to systems local to the player so an element of roaming/patrolling is still required.

I still feel NPC rebalance is the key to the plex issue.

Minor plexes feel balanced. NPC resistance is light and approaches to within small weapon range or can be handled by a few drones. I do not feel they deter PVP and a wave can be dealt with within a minute.

The problem with the harder plexes is it become more worthwhile to speedtank rather than fight due to the increased NPC resistance, I can kill and tank the waves in but it takes longer increasing the time I am vulnerable to attack from both player and NPC (either I don’t mind but not together). If shield fit it attacks my primary form of defence and if armour tanked it completely strips my shield buffer and running active tanks put me under cap pressure before a PVP fight even occurs. Also the NPC engagement range can be from further out forcing me to leave the timer zone if not in a ship with decent DPS projection.

The aim should be for fight with NPC’s to be infrequent over the course of the timer and easily dealt with in an appropriate PVP ship.

NPC’s could be changed to spawn within the timer zone.

NPC resistance should lighter with fast tackle in Major plexes. webbbing and warp disruption maybe but no scrams as that would disrupt PVP fit ships.

Mixing faction militia NPC’s would introduce a third damage type encouraging omni tanking and specific PVE style high resistance fits would be less viable, DPS needs to be reduced accordingly as omni tanking is harder.

A specific end of plex wave with a value NPC ship that has to be destroyed I still feel could be the final piece to prevent speedtanking, If it takes an appropriate amount of DPS to deal with it. It could also be programmed to warp away if it receives a certain amount of damage unless pointed by the player encouraging players to fit points again promoting PVP fits. It could return after a time fully repped or the plex could just close and tough you lost your reward.


Dynast
Room for Improvement
Good Sax
#203 - 2012-07-13 23:53:08 UTC
Consider putting the LP on the NPC rats guarding the plex, rather than the capture event. i.e. each time you pop one of the various State/Federation/etc NPCs, you get LP, and the total LP for all the waves of NPCs is roughly equivalent to current payouts. This would accomplish several things:

  • Remove incentive for non-combat ships, speed tanking the plex alone would not be enough.
  • Reward the pilots who participated the most in capturing the plex, rather than just whoever is there at the end.
  • Make it easy to code fleet splitting of LPs (as with bounties) to reward pilots who are in fleet, but guarding the acceleration gate.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#204 - 2012-07-14 03:23:53 UTC
Alticus C Bear wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The next logical step would be alerting players directly to specific plexing activity, so response times can be reduced even further. it's more fun and less of a grind to chase an attacker out of his plex than it is to defensively run it down, we want to reach the point of intervention, not clean up work after the attacker has nabbed his LP and ran. I know exactly how we can accomplish this, but for the details you'll have to wait for the CSM minutes to be released, there will be much more I can elaborate on once you guys see what CCP's been up to on their end. Sorry to tease, but you won't have to wait long, they'll be out very soon!


This would need to be handled carefully, Sometimes local is empty when I open a plex sometimes not, I then expect or at least prepare for some form of fight and often I am even trying to provoke a fight by opening the plex that is the notification. Having everyone within a couple jumps swarm in would do little to encourage PVP.


I have to say plex fights where random people from both militias just show up are some of the best pvp fights I have ever been in. People in militia a few jumps away just all coming to a plex not knowing exaclty what to expect. Its great.

I really don't know what you mean. A notification system that pulls in random militia pilots would be awesome. Its long overdue.

As for the rest of your post I agree. Minors are pretty well balanced. The trick is to figure out how to make the bigger plexes balanced.

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

Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#205 - 2012-07-14 08:21:51 UTC
I am not against the idea in principle and have supported your previous thread.

Cearain wrote:

I have to say plex fights where random people from both militias just show up are some of the best pvp fights I have ever been in. People in militia a few jumps away just all coming to a plex not knowing exaclty what to expect. Its great.

I really don't know what you mean. A notification system that pulls in random militia pilots would be awesome. Its long overdue.

As for the rest of your post I agree. Minors are pretty well balanced. The trick is to figure out how to make the bigger plexes balanced.


This is true to an extent if both sides pile in but my fear is it will be used to blob single targets.

My point is only that it is quite possible to get pvp between well balanced forces in and around plexes. If I spend time dscanning a system judging ship types and who is in local even convoing fellow militia pilots then opening a plex to start a fight or following a target into a plex then I do not necessarily want three additional war targets suddenly appearing in local within 30seconds or even three allied pilots this may ruin good fights and promote small scale blobbing.

A defence should be scrambled. Defenders should not immediately be informed a major plex is opened it gives them almost 20 minutes to prepare a ship and get there (you could almost travel the entire warzone in this time) plus they may get there and find 10 other allies already chased the war target into hiding. Notification towards the end of the timer 5min to go as an example means that local fights can have already taken place that the plexer only has to hold out for a period of time and can only be engaged a few times by those within a few jumps.

Pilots should not be able to just remain docked up waiting for a notification then setting out to get PVP, keeping notifications to be within half a dozen jumps may encourage people to still roam/patrol to cover more ground. More people actively in space increases the chances of PVP.

It also has implications for a faction that has less numbers or holds fewer systems, with so much free intel it would become almost impossible to plex even the backwater systems, it becomes too easy to defend, I would suggest alerts are only received for systems at a certain contested percentage. 50% or even higher.
Deerin
East Trading Co Ltd
#206 - 2012-07-14 11:21:01 UTC
I had put this one on the other thread but appearently this thread is where the main conversation is done. So I'll post it also here. It adresses the alerting, plex alt and snowballing issues.

Here are my (wall of text) 2 cents on the subject:

I couldn't read all posts up to here but I've seen some very nice ideas. Some of them are blended within my suggestions below.

Station Lockouts:

All we wanted before inferno was to make occupancy of a system matter. If CCP removes station lockout completely from game we'll arrive back at old occupancy system. I think some sort of lockout must still be implemented.

Binding the station lockouts to level of ths system is a good idea. This way we have to keep spending LP/defending the system if we want to deny docking rights to an enemy. A tiered system like

L1=agent denial
L2=services denial
L3=Complete lockout looks ok.

Furhtermore I'd like to make following suggestion:

Make upgrade levels limited by the contest amount of the system.
0%-20% contested Upgradeable up to L5
20%-40% contested Upgradeable up to L4
40%-60% contested Upgradeable up to L3
60%-80% contested Upgradeable up to L2
80%-100% contested Upgradeable up to L1

Thus if you want to keep the level of your system at a certain value you need to defend it. Right now there is very little incentive to keep the level of a system high though. To change that:

To flip a system your warzone control level must be up to a certain tier.

If you control 0%-20% of warzone you need to have a minimum T1 warzone control to be able to flip a vulnerable system.
If you control 20%-40% of warzone you need to have a minimum T2 warzone control to be able to flip a vulnerable system.
If you control 40%-60% of warzone you need to have a minimum T3 warzone control to be able to flip a vulnerable system.
If you control 60%-80% of warzone you need to have a minimum T4 warzone control to be able to flip a vulnerable system.
If you control 80%-100% of warzone you need to have a minimum T5 warzone control to be able to flip a vulnerable system.

This way the more systems you control, the higher the upkeep becomes to be able to capture more systems. You'll need to keep levels of your systems high if you want to be able to continue capturing more systems, thus you'll need to do defensive plexing to be able to continue on offense.

Then modify defensive plexing. Make it so that a defender does have NO effect at all on a plex of its own faction. The timer can only be ran by enemies and counts back when there are no enemies in the plex. To decontest system you need to run plexes belonging to the opposite faction which begin spawning in a system once it becomes contested and despawn once the system is no longer contested.

Change minmatar rats to projectiles and caldari rats to hybrids. The playground must be evened out. Yes this will result in more speed tanking, which brings the next point.

As a final touch. Change the way to run down the counter. To run the counter one pilot needs to go in capturing range of button and interact with it for (insert RP reason here). Once the connection to bunker is established timer begins counting and the pilots warp drive turns off. To turn the warp drive back on the pilot needs to sever the connection, which results in stopping of the timer. Severing the connection can be done by just interacting with the button. It takes 100 seconds for the warp drive to re-initialize. Optionally during these 100 seconds the pilot also might get a %50 penalty on speed, though it would ruin kiting setups (Just don't sever the connection and you get no speed penalty). Running the timer all the way down and capturing plex does not involve this 100 seconds wait time.

So when you begin the timer you are dedicated to it. If nobody cares for defending the system you can get away with just speed tanking. If enemy shows up you cannot immediately warp off. You'll have to fight. So you better be prepared.

Caerain had an idea about alerting plexing presence. I believe this can be connected to the upgrade level of the system.

At L1 there will be no alerts.
A L2 system wil alert if there are any offensive plexes open in system. On the FW tab these systems will have a different hue. When mouse hovers on the system normally there is only name.
A L3 system will make a list of open plexes sizes in the system and put it below name of system on mouseover.
A L4 will colorize those being actively run as green.
A L5 system will give you plex timers.

For example Lets assume Amarr are offensive plexing in Auga. There are 2 minors and a med open and there is a slicer in minor and a Omen Navy Issue in Med.

If Auga were a L1 system it would be just another system on the FW map.
If Auga were a L2 system its system color would turn from light blue to dark blue on FW map. (For defending side that is)
If Auga were a L3 system, when you get your mouse over it you would see the name followed by minor, minor, medium
If Auga were a L4 system, one of the minors on the list and the medium would turn green
If Auga were a L5 system, you would get the timer information along with the sizes.

So if you want to have an information network going on you should at least have L2. To see if the plexes are actively being ran or not would require the system to be minimum L4.

Well...that would be all I guess.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#207 - 2012-07-14 11:39:47 UTC
Alticus C Bear wrote:
I am not against the idea in principle and have supported your previous thread.

Cearain wrote:

I have to say plex fights where random people from both militias just show up are some of the best pvp fights I have ever been in. People in militia a few jumps away just all coming to a plex not knowing exaclty what to expect. Its great.

I really don't know what you mean. A notification system that pulls in random militia pilots would be awesome. Its long overdue.

As for the rest of your post I agree. Minors are pretty well balanced. The trick is to figure out how to make the bigger plexes balanced.


This is true to an extent if both sides pile in but my fear is it will be used to blob single targets.

My point is only that it is quite possible to get pvp between well balanced forces in and around plexes. If I spend time dscanning a system judging ship types and who is in local even convoing fellow militia pilots then opening a plex to start a fight or following a target into a plex then I do not necessarily want three additional war targets suddenly appearing in local within 30seconds or even three allied pilots this may ruin good fights and promote small scale blobbing.

A defence should be scrambled. Defenders should not immediately be informed a major plex is opened it gives them almost 20 minutes to prepare a ship and get there (you could almost travel the entire warzone in this time) plus they may get there and find 10 other allies already chased the war target into hiding. Notification towards the end of the timer 5min to go as an example means that local fights can have already taken place that the plexer only has to hold out for a period of time and can only be engaged a few times by those within a few jumps.

Pilots should not be able to just remain docked up waiting for a notification then setting out to get PVP, keeping notifications to be within half a dozen jumps may encourage people to still roam/patrol to cover more ground. More people actively in space increases the chances of PVP.

It also has implications for a faction that has less numbers or holds fewer systems, with so much free intel it would become almost impossible to plex even the backwater systems, it becomes too easy to defend, I would suggest alerts are only received for systems at a certain contested percentage. 50% or even higher.


I agree with your concerns but keep in mind:

1) I was thinking both sides would get the notifications. Hopefully it won't just be the defenders.

2) Also keep in mind plexes will be entered and exited constantly thoughtout the war zone. So if the militia wants to send all their forces to one pilot in a plex they can. But that will not be a very efficient use of their resources. The better use would be to just send what is necessary for each plex. Plus you will get people who aren't on coms just randomly rolling in and out of plexes.

I do imagine though that whereas i will usually get about 1-2 defenders in dal when i run a plex, I will get many more after this change (assumign ccp does it). I think I will need to pop open a plex in a farther back water like ebolfer or ardar to get 1-2 players coming in.

So I think it will tend to spread the war zone out. From the amarr minmatar perspective - If you want a big gang then run a plex in kourmonen or kamela. if you want a medium sized gang I think dal or vard would be good. If you want smaller scale stuff then minmatar space up past frerstorn. Of course you never know what you get for any given plex because that is eve but in general I think this sort of pattern will develop.

But yeah I agree they should keep an eye on it. I don't see how it could go wrong, but if it causes some problems hopefully they will tweak it.

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

Justin Cody
War Firm
#208 - 2012-07-14 22:30:05 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alright folks, as stated in the latest FW blog, there are certain points in Factional Warfare that still need to be looked at after Inferno.

One of these are the NPCs; we all have grown to hate them as they jam you non stop for 5 minutes, or laugh at them when speed tanking them while capturing a complex. So, let's try to find ways to make them interesting here.


We have some ideas floating around, one of them is to:


  • Upgrade their AI with target switching mechanics - just like Sleepers and Incursion Sanshas
  • Revamp their attributes to be more on par with PvP fits, while still allowing new pilots to compete (FW barrier of entry is supposed to be low)
  • Cut their respawn numbers - they should be used as an activity if there is no PvP going around, but not impair PvP when it is happening
  • Possibly use them to assist a losing faction; for example, have tougher NPCs than usual spawn for a faction with less solar systems, or attack opposing members at gates (not neutrals)


Remember, all of these are just high-pitch ideas at the moment that are posted here to get your constructive input and a discussion going. So stay cool and remember, the spice must flow.


Another point where your feedback would be most appreciated is regarding your own experience facing them as they are right now:


  • Think a FW NPC is plain broken, crap or annoying? Post its exact name here, and explain why and what. Again, please remember, this discussion is about FW NPCs, not mission / deadspace / Incursion / Sleepers or whatever (we know there are a lot of them to fix in other features as well, but let's not get lost here shall we?).
  • What do you think about Navy NPCs when you go to enemy high-security space? What would you do about that?
  • What about the standing mechanic that govern NPC attack behavior? When do you feel they should engage you? Low standings? Capturing a complex?



Thanks for your feedback.


Force the room to be cleared of npc's in order to complete the capture of the beacon. You already do this in missions for players to complete objectives. It is a simple if/then statement. Easy fix.
Atfal alNudjum
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#209 - 2012-07-18 12:29:20 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

What I want everyone asking themselves is this - if I could flush the inside of the plex out and replace it with anything in the world, what do I want inside? NPC's ? No NPC's ? Incursion-style rats that you HAVE to kill, turning FW sov into a race to complete mini-incursions? Or simply a dash of incurion AI into some new custom NPC's that don't FORCE PvE, but still cut out the alt-farming?

I just hate to see us limit ourselves by focusing too much on the must-kill-all-rats issue, when that was only one quick fix and there's other more elegant solutions that push FW sovereignty towards PvP, not PvE.

The "Holy Grail" solution would a sov system that doesnt require PvE (or button orbiting) at all - and is heavily PvP centric. But to achieve that there needs to be more brainstorming (don't just rely on CCP to come up with that for you), or more contemplation and consensus with regards existing ideas.


TL,DR: Instead of waiting for the better idea to be developed, WE should be developing the better idea *right now* instead of settling for yet another band-aid. Winter is a golden window to get some major work done on plexes, lets not let it go to waste!

If we can't come up with something better to pitch to CCP, we'll be left with an upgraded PvE-based Sov system, plain and simple. If thats what everyone wants, great, they've said they can beef up the PvE aspect. But if thats NOT what you all envision for the feature, we gotta pull together and nail down the alternative now, or forever hold our peace.


Han's...haven't read ahead to the later posts but personally I think if there was a way to do the following it would be good for FW;

A) Remove rats from a plexes all together - Alternative, not sure on what would be the best option here but see suggestions below.

B) Make all FW missions able to be completed by both sides. A defender should be able to shut down an open plex without having to shoot their own side. Seeing as missions are supposed to be PvE then make teh defender hold the site (button run if they have to)

C) Combine 1 & 2 together. All missions become the plex, defenders and attackers have to fight to win it, each with some form of closing it down if not stopped. Mission level dictates ship types and sizes allowed. eg
Lvl 1 Agent -> Minor Restricted - T1 Frig Only (Non faction) & possibly destroyers
Lvl 2 Agent -> Minor Plex - All Frigates & Destroyers
Lvl 3 Agent -> Medium Plex - As per current medium
Lvl 4 Agent -> Major Plex - As per current Major
Lvl 5 Agent -> Major Unrestricted (possibly allow cynos for big fleet fights P )


I like the transport option which does, I think, also lend itself to something like option C. If you incorporate dust FPS games into it, then each game would spawn a plex for the duration of the game. Button / Transport in plex, sides have to hold it...If it is contested then no orbital bombardment available for the guys on the ground. If it isnt contested, Dust guys can call in fire..These types of plexes could be broadcast on both militia channels and the size of the game dictates the size of the plex, eg 4v4 = minor, 8v8 = medium, 16v16 = Major, 32+ a side Unrestricted.

Just thoughts.
Dynast
Room for Improvement
Good Sax
#210 - 2012-07-21 00:24:45 UTC
One other thing to be mindful of, vulnerable systems should not grant LP for further offensive plexing. Right now it's more advantageous to leave a system vulnerable than to flip it, it's an infinite LP faucet, and the result is showing in Gallente/Caldari FW, we have several dozen vulnerable systems and nobody flips them unless they're doing an organized LP dump. While the organized LP dumps are probably a good thing (they reward organization and teamwork), the tons of systems being left vulnerable and perma-farmed are not.
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Spaceship Bebop
#211 - 2012-07-25 17:16:49 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Whatever CCP comes up with for NPC balance, future plexing mechanics, whatever... I hope they follow the principles below:

• Offensive plexing should be rewarded more than defensive plexing because offensive plexing drives conflict. (Defensive plexing is a reaction to offensive plexing.)
• Plexes (both offensive and defensive) should be run most efficiently by the appropriately sized ship. (Frigs/Dessies for L1, Cruisers/T2 frigs for L2, BC/T2 cruisers for L3, BS/T2 BCs for L4)
•Plex mechanics should encourage pvp, not pve.

Potential Solutions:

• (Much) higher LP rewards for offensive plexing.
• Timer slows down if appropriately sized ship is not running the button. Ex: If frigate is on timer of L4 plex, then plex timer should slow down by a factor of eight.
• Timer move toward baseline if no ship is close to button. This enables players interested in pvp to run off those not interested in pvp and still be successful. (This has been discussed extensively elsewhere).
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#212 - 2012-07-25 19:14:35 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Whatever CCP comes up with for NPC balance, future plexing mechanics, whatever... I hope they follow the principles below:

• Offensive plexing should be rewarded more than defensive plexing because offensive plexing drives conflict. (Defensive plexing is a reaction to offensive plexing.)
• Plexes (both offensive and defensive) should be run most efficiently by the appropriately sized ship. (Frigs/Dessies for L1, Cruisers/T2 frigs for L2, BC/T2 cruisers for L3, BS/T2 BCs for L4)
•Plex mechanics should encourage pvp, not pve.

Potential Solutions:

• (Much) higher LP rewards for offensive plexing.
• Timer slows down if appropriately sized ship is not running the button. Ex: If frigate is on timer of L4 plex, then plex timer should slow down by a factor of eight.
• Timer move toward baseline if no ship is close to button. This enables players interested in pvp to run off those not interested in pvp and still be successful. (This has been discussed extensively elsewhere).


I agree with you, except the whole "appropriate sized" ship stuff. If i want to fight a cruiser in a frigate(s) or a bc in a cruiser(s) i should be able to. I shouldn't be punished. Typically it will be several frigates against a cruiser or a few cruisers against a bc. But whatever, I love those sorts of fights.

Until we see that amarr can actually fight their way back then I would say we shouldn't even consider any lp for defensive plexing. At this point I think ccp should consider giving missions a slight nerf to the lp payout as well.

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

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Spaceship Bebop
#213 - 2012-07-25 20:05:49 UTC
Cearain wrote:


I agree with you, except the whole "appropriate sized" ship stuff. If i want to fight a cruiser in a frigate(s) or a bc in a cruiser(s) i should be able to. I shouldn't be punished. Typically it will be several frigates against a cruiser or a few cruisers against a bc. But whatever, I love those sorts of fights.

Until we see that amarr can actually fight their way back then I would say we shouldn't even consider any lp for defensive plexing. At this point I think ccp should consider giving missions a slight nerf to the lp payout as well.

I did say that completing a plex should be done most efficiently with an appropriately sized ship. Current plex size restrictions would still hold. You could fight with destroyers in any size plex. This thread is not about FW missions.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#214 - 2012-07-27 14:01:22 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Cearain wrote:


I agree with you, except the whole "appropriate sized" ship stuff. If i want to fight a cruiser in a frigate(s) or a bc in a cruiser(s) i should be able to. I shouldn't be punished. Typically it will be several frigates against a cruiser or a few cruisers against a bc. But whatever, I love those sorts of fights.

Until we see that amarr can actually fight their way back then I would say we shouldn't even consider any lp for defensive plexing. At this point I think ccp should consider giving missions a slight nerf to the lp payout as well.

I did say that completing a plex should be done most efficiently with an appropriately sized ship. Current plex size restrictions would still hold. You could fight with destroyers in any size plex. This thread is not about FW missions.


Right but if you try to run a say a medium plex with 3 destroyers instead of 1 cruiser the timer would take longer under your proposal.

The thread is about plexing. If we "nerf" plexing so you can't run them in frigates you are indirectly buffing missions. Its important that ccp understand that connection, or their whole goal of making plexing pay better than missions won't be achieved.

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

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#215 - 2012-07-27 14:10:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
I tried running some majors with a cyclone asb fit pvp ship. I wanted to see if it was viable to do them in a pvp ship post ewar removal.

Conclusion: No go even on the closed plexes. I was using cap boosters too fast and without the ability to dock and resupply my cargo it is not really doable. Its extremely unlikely I would take a fight in a major plex even if the enemy ship was quite a bit smaller. Its just stupid to think people will actually pvp in these things with the rats doing so much damage. Unfortunately for pvp I am limitted to the medium and minor plexes.

I run medium plexes in a faction cruisers. They are still not doable in most of my regular t1 pvp cruisers. (although yes they can be done in a caracal) Even with the faction cruisers if the spawn has continued to build up it is a no go.

Minor plexes are fine. No real complaints there.

It does appear that the elimination of ewar has allowed amarr to speed tank major plexes in gunnless frigates.

I still recomend the following:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1463058#post1463058

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

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#216 - 2012-07-27 17:24:12 UTC
Cearain wrote:
I tried running some majors with a cyclone asb fit pvp ship. I wanted to see if it was viable to do them in a pvp ship post ewar removal.

Conclusion: No go even on the closed plexes. I was using cap boosters too fast and without the ability to dock and resupply my cargo it is not really doable. Its extremely unlikely I would take a fight in a major plex even if the enemy ship was quite a bit smaller. Its just stupid to think people will actually pvp in these things with the rats doing so much damage. Unfortunately for pvp I am limitted to the medium and minor plexes.

I run medium plexes in a faction cruisers. They are still not doable in most of my regular t1 pvp cruisers. (although yes they can be done in a caracal) Even with the faction cruisers if the spawn has continued to build up it is a no go.

Minor plexes are fine. No real complaints there.

It does appear that the elimination of ewar has allowed amarr to speed tank major plexes in gunnless frigates.

I still recomend the following:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1463058#post1463058



Awesome work doing the research on the plex rats, Cearain - this kind of field testing is very helpful as we approach the time when the developers resume working on the NPC's. I totally agree the DPS on field is just too much, this is clearly a holdover from old-school mission design where you tanked a whole room full of red crosses, and it needs to go away in order to make plexes PvP-friendly. I think we need fewer rats, less incoming DPS, and they should be easy to kill - but could perhaps have a scram or a web and be fairly fast, to pose a threat to those running the plex.

Subsequent spawns should be similar- not too DPS heavy, just enough of a threat that you want to quickly dispatch them and go back to defending against players. The goal as I see it is to create content that will kill if you're AFK or unarmed, but be easy to handle in a wide variety of conventional Tech 1 PvP ships (according to plex size). We hit those two points, and we'll be light years ahead of where we stand now.

Theres probably another couple weeks before they get fully underway with the winter expansion, everyone's trickling back in from summer vacation. Minutes should be out at the beginning of the week, so everyone has plenty of time to read up, see where everything stands, and chime in with your feedback early in the process. Thanks to everyone who's been patient and kept up all the contributions in the meantime!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#217 - 2012-07-27 17:39:54 UTC
The other thing they may want to consider is only having the rats spawn as the timer runs.

It seems that once triggered the rats keep spawning even if no one is in the plex. Often I will get to these plexes that have no time off the timer but several spawns of angry red crosses. When this happens even the mediums are not doable in a faction cruiser - at least not if you plan on fighting with it.

As far as scrams and webs on the npcs I think that will cause problems. Especially if you mean a scram that shuts off your mwd. The webs also would really kill most solo pvp fits. Unless of course the rats stop attacking when an enemy comes in.

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

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#218 - 2012-07-27 17:45:57 UTC
Just out of curiosity, have any of you played the Dust beta? There's some game play there involving the capturing of objectives that I could see applying to plex design, as far as breaking up the single-button-orbit monotony. I can't really explain exact what I'm referring to exactly cause its NDA, unless you're also in the Dust beta (in which case you should private convo me some time if you have any thoughts) - but

Get ahold of me if any of you guys are testing Dust and we brainstorm some more, if you've been playing you know what I'm referring to. If not, you guys SHOULD run and grab the Dust beta if you have a PS3, its very fun! They have a mercenary pack you can buy for instant access if you've been having trouble waiting for a key, you get all the money back in Aurum after the beta resets and becomes official, so its worth it in my humble opinion.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Spaceship Bebop
#219 - 2012-07-27 17:48:20 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Cearain wrote:
Right but if you try to run a say a medium plex with 3 destroyers instead of 1 cruiser the timer would take longer under your proposal.

The thread is about plexing. If we "nerf" plexing so you can't run them in frigates you are indirectly buffing missions. Its important that ccp understand that connection, or their whole goal of making plexing pay better than missions won't be achieved.

There is an idea earlier in this thread where you would assign points to ships.

BS/T2 BC = 8
BC/T2 Cruiser = 4
Cruiser/T2 frig = 2
Frig/Dessie = 1

and points to Plexes:
L1,L2,L3,L4 = 1,2,4,8 respectively

Plex timer rate = min(1x, sum(ship points)/Plex Level).

So two dessies could run a medium as efficiently as one cruiser. Seems fair to me.

Likewise, you could scale the plex LP payouts exponentially as well so that 8 frigs running a major L4 would receive the same LP payout as one frig running a minor.

IMO, that fixes plex exploitation (especially once they rebalance the NPCs for winter expansion).

Adding the "timer reset to zero" option would really go a long way towards helping pvp'ers defend plexes against pve'ers as well.

Missions - Gimme the damn poison pill option for griefing missions and the exploitation of missions by PVE-centric farmers will be removed from the game! Big smile The risk would be on scale with the potential reward. They could also decide to lower mission LP, or perhaps have mission completion count toward occupancy. Whatever. I'm in the minority, but I like moving about in enemy low sec running missions more than I like orbiting buttons to earn isk.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#220 - 2012-07-27 17:49:08 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Unless of course the rats stop attacking when an enemy comes in.


This would be MONEY if they could pull it off. I mean it makes sense - ever notice in action movies when the leaders of two opposing armies clash in the middle of a war? the grunts clear out, and give the two champions space to duel it out. I'd love to see rats that did this as well. That way you'd only be PvE-ing when there was no one around.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary