These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#241 - 2012-08-22 16:16:03 UTC
Two birds (they can be Booby's if you want) with one stone:

Make the individual system and/or constellation worth protecting by using both carrot and stick.

Possible carrots (make it constellation based so that if a single system is lost the whole she-bang is in turmoil.
- Free repairs.
- Enemy denied docking.
- Awesome rat spawns/Exploration spawns.
- Super charged industry.
- Plexes taking longer to complete for enemy depending on upgrade level.
- Etc.

Possible sticks:
- Plexes taking less and less time for enemy to capture the deeper into contested a system drops. Wait too long and you'll never save it.
- Enemy can dock!!!!! Oh Noes!!!!
- Services start closing up shop as the enemy nears (contested status). NB: Hurts both sides until matter is settled (ie. Da Flip) .... would personally love to see this in a system like Amamake Smile
- Repairs becoming more and more expensive as the enemy nears (Fitting/Repair are the only services never to close, assumed to be part of the dock/hangar area).
- Etc.

That is the non-escalating-LP-faucet way of solving both the incentive to D.Plex and the willingness to engage hostile plexers.

Will require the entire system be redone from scratch though, so I bet we'll see the faucet opened wide for defensive work as well thus making the last 40-50 people (not counting the temporary alliances only there to farm) actually interested in PvP leave in disgust as so many before them.

But if rumour-mill is correct, then Winter will be the last "major" FW iteration for the time being so guess the cheap and dirty way is to just give LP for everything; consequences, fun and gameplay be damned Lol
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#242 - 2012-08-22 16:55:19 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Bad Messenger wrote:

I do not like the idea that NPC is the only defence, there should be some reason for players to defend.
Anyway if you remove all npc and players can be with pvp fitted ship does not change the fact that they escape too if you chase them away with too power full ship.

NPC is not the solution or the problem, there should be some reason/reward to chase enemy away or kill them and take the plex they started.


QFT. I fully support balancing NPC's should they remain in the plexing system, the feedback has been spot on about balancing tankability and DPS levels, but Bad Messenger is spot on here.

In the end, whether you have NPC's dictating ship types or not, this does not address the core issue of incentivizing two players fighting to the death over that plex to begin with. We can hold guns to people's heads and force them to fly whatever ship we want using the NPC AI, or we can give players enough of a reason to stand their ground and not run away all the time. Personally I think the latter of the two is more important.

How can we incentivize PvP in the plexes over constantly running away? Lots of ways. We can give players more visibilty, making plexers easier to locate and engage, so hiding your activity is much more difficult. We can address the fact that defensive plexing is an unpaid boring chore, effectively rendering half of all plexes undesirable as an activity to participate in. We can shorten the distance between the warp-in and the capture point, increasing the risk players take on and making that risk a PvP risk rather than a PvE risk. We can have timer progress slowly roll back when plexes are unoccupied, making it so players that bounce all the time whenever someone comes after them end up neither profiting nor contributing to the warzone.

Yes, this is a thread focused on the NPC balance itself, but Bad Messenger makes an outstanding point that even if you had no NPC's regulating fits at all, if the motivation is there to complete the plex (either offensively or defensively) and there is little reward in running away constantly, players will bring the fit they need to win against the PvP threat anyways.
I agree with pretty much everything said here..

Maybe i should have some faith in the CSM after all..

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#243 - 2012-08-22 16:55:42 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Two birds (they can be Booby's if you want) with one stone:

Make the individual system and/or constellation worth protecting by using both carrot and stick.

Possible carrots (make it constellation based so that if a single system is lost the whole she-bang is in turmoil.
- Free repairs.
- Enemy denied docking.
- Awesome rat spawns/Exploration spawns.
- Super charged industry.
- Plexes taking longer to complete for enemy depending on upgrade level.
- Etc.

Possible sticks:
- Plexes taking less and less time for enemy to capture the deeper into contested a system drops. Wait too long and you'll never save it.
- Enemy can dock!!!!! Oh Noes!!!!
- Services start closing up shop as the enemy nears (contested status). NB: Hurts both sides until matter is settled (ie. Da Flip) .... would personally love to see this in a system like Amamake Smile
- Repairs becoming more and more expensive as the enemy nears (Fitting/Repair are the only services never to close, assumed to be part of the dock/hangar area).
- Etc.

That is the non-escalating-LP-faucet way of solving both the incentive to D.Plex and the willingness to engage hostile plexers.

Will require the entire system be redone from scratch though, so I bet we'll see the faucet opened wide for defensive work as well thus making the last 40-50 people (not counting the temporary alliances only there to farm) actually interested in PvP leave in disgust as so many before them.

But if rumour-mill is correct, then Winter will be the last "major" FW iteration for the time being so guess the cheap and dirty way is to just give LP for everything; consequences, fun and gameplay be damned Lol


Nice upgrade ideas , though now we're getting a bit off topic and there's a whole nother thread for that stuff. Doesnt *really* matter though, CCP and I are monitoring both.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Nikita Alterana
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#244 - 2012-08-22 17:25:04 UTC
Overall suggestions:

You know what's not fun? Orbiting a stationary object for 10 minutes
You know what is fun? Spending ten minutes blowing up 60 stationary objects that take 10 seconds each to kill, some of which have huge pretty explosions, produce damaging clouds of debris and AoE effects.

Taking a plex should feel like taking out an enemy installation. There should be some static turrets to kill, but nothing difficult at first, there should be a random chance to spawn a group of hard (sleeper/incursion styled) rats, everytime you blow up a structure. It makes plex taking much more active, and provides lots of chances for pvp that the rats won't get in your way for.

Defensive plexing becomes protecting haulers while they set up/improve a base, and if the enemy blows up the haulers, the base doesn't get set up/improved.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#245 - 2012-08-22 17:36:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Cearain wrote:
There are numerous reasons why no direct reward for d-plexing is a good plan. Including encouraging pvp and allowing the smaller militia to establish a foothold. Giving rewards just does the opposite. It entrenches the winning team and it gives people a reason to stay docked while the enemy captures an offensive plex instead of fighting them for it.


Well, there is theory, and there's practice. I'll shelve theory for a second, and I'll even shelve suggesting a solution for one moment. Let's simply talk about some problems that are emerging on the server.

The bottom line is that defensive plexing in its current form is nearly 100% undesirable..

Ok I do not believe militias actually want to give systems to the enemy. If they do they do not want it to be widespread. There has been absolutely no evidence of this except on a very small scale. If they give their systems away they will not be able to hit tier 5. So while they may not mind if up to 10-15% of systems go to the enemy they generally don’t want to lose systems.

I do not think that is a substantial problem. If you think I am wrong on this let me know. Otherwise let’s assume that A) people like to cash out at tier 5 and further that B) they realize that in order to do that they need to hold the vast majority of systems. Most eve players will therefore see why it is in their interest to hold onto the vast majority of systems.

Right now there are 2 ways to hold onto your space in fw.

1) You can fight off people who try to capture an offensive plex before they capture it (always a pvp way)

or

2) You can run a defensive plex. (most often a pve method)

To the extent you reward the second way you are also effectively discouraging the first method of achieving their goal. The reverse is also true. To the extent the second method is undesirable the first option becomes the more common method.

This is why making defensive plexing undesirable is a good thing! It should be undesirable to defensive plex because it becomes your only option to keep your systems (and therefore tier benefits) if you do not fight people when they offensively plex your system.

If you want to make the occupancy plexing more of a pvp activity you should make the mostly pve options undesirable. If anything you should make it so that a player who runs a defensive plex must actually pay lp if they want that work to count to decontest the system. That is their tax for not defending their system in a pvp method. That will encourage people to choose the pvp method of defending systems.

There seems to be this assumption that every activity in eve should be rewarded and encouraged. I say reward the activities that make fw pvp, not the ones like defensive plexing which make it pve.

Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The profit is purely in offensive plexing, which means that for the dominant militia, there's more incentive in allowing the enemy to plex your system without resistance, so you can turn around and profit on the takeback. The winning militia is farming the underdog however you slice it, and to resist this advantage we have the nearly absurd situation of militias stopping at the point of taking space because it hands more money to the enemy. .


The above is pure theory that is no longer seen in practice. This may have happened earlier when amarr was gullible enough to immediately flip systems back to minmatar but now that no longer is the case. Minmatar was not just letting amarr get to tier 4. They were to some extent trying to fight in the plexes to prevent it. Kudos to qcats, em, and the minmatar in general.

Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The problem you fear is already taking place - pilots stay docked when the enemy comes to plex their system because its more profitable to plex once you've lost your space and are taking it back. Refusing to put up resistance to offensive plexing efforts is by definition an enormous missed PvP opportunity. .

I am all for giving incentives to encourage people to fight in plexes. However if you understand what I said above then it should be pretty clear that giving more rewards for them to wait till the enemy leaves and then open a defensive plex is not the answer.

If anything the opposite may be the answer. Make so that if you defensive plex a system it will not effect the level the system is contested unless the defensive plexer pays some lp. That way even more of the effort for keeping a system will be directed fighting in plexes instead of just running your own after the enemy leaves. We already have enough of that.

I can sit in busy minmatar systems running systems without anyone coming in. Then I come back the next day and someone dplexed it down again. I don’t know if they got some pvp in that plex but I know I don’t get any from that system.

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

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#246 - 2012-08-22 17:38:13 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

As I said at the CSM summit, this leads to deep frustration for FC's that want just want to fight a straight-up war, because pilots would rather sit in station, let the enemy take a system (or even help them bust the bunker) just so they can profit later, or in a diferent system. This is the opposite of encouraging conflict, its encouraging players to ignore each other for financial gain. ..


Hans your fears that this theory will happen are way overblown. Minmatar flipped one vulnerable system. Big deal. The effect of this strategy was just to save the amarr some ammo. Please this strategy is talked about but it hasn’t actually worked in practice yet and for very good reason.

Moreover let me ask you what balances this game at all other than no lp for defensive plexing? It seems to me this is the only thing the side that is down has to hang their hat on and being amarr I have thought about this for a long time. What other mechanic balances things for the side with fewer numbers and is down systems?

Don’t get mad. I am not accusing you of bias when I ask this. (In fact I know your not biased so lets get that out of the way) But let me ask:

Do you think it’s too easy for the side like the amarr to get back into the game? Is that why you want to tilt the scales in favor of the side that is winning and holding the systems? It’s a sincere question.

I mean largely due to the fact there is no lp reward for defensive plexing, amarr was able to make a push and started making systems vulnerable. Do you think that push to tier 4 was too easy for the amarr? I mean if you did then I think yes the answer would be to reward defensive plexing.

But I don’t think it was too easy. In fact I think it may be that it is still too hard and again maybe even lp would need to be paid if the defensive plexing is to count to decontest a system.


Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The whole mess of militias urself (and even there, efficiency encourages you to evade PvP offensively as well), none of this is providing the incentive for a militia to want to own all the systems, and to fight their best in every plex, and to chase off every attacker.

You may not see LP for defensive plexing as the solution Cearain, and that's fine, you're not alone in this opinion. But I think most players who have been active in Faction Warfare the last few months realize that the current incentive program is not doing a great job of encourage direct conflict over each and every individual plex, but rather fosters a trade mentality where you avoid conflict both offensively and defensively to chase the maximum profit in the system. ..


Well I gave you a very clear explanation of why rewarding defensive lp will make this game worse. Hopefully the fact that someone in militia chat or on your vent said it would be nice to get lp for defensive plexing, won’t trump some actual thought on the issue.

Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

Don't get wrong, we don't want a system where the winning militia can farm their own territory for LP endlessly through defensive plexing. I'm certainly not advocating that…..


Then the answer is easy. Don’t reward defensive plexing.

Keep in mind there probably are many people in your militia who would love a system where they can farm lp even more. This whole idea of giving lp for defensive plexing is mainly raised by minmatar who are upset that they milked the fw cow dry.

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
#247 - 2012-08-22 19:45:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Cearain wrote:
Do you think it’s too easy for the side like the amarr to get back into the game? Is that why you want to tilt the scales in favor of the side that is winning and holding the systems? It’s a sincere question.


It's also a leading question, much like "Hans, why do you want to kill all of lowsec PvP? Is that why you didn't cause a scene at the summit over Greyscale's proposed gate gun changes?" It contains a false premise, and is suggestive of the answer.

For the sake of clarity, I'll take the bait this once, but since this is a thread about NPC's lets try to stick to that discussion and move this elsewhere if it has to continue.

Quote:
Right now there are 2 ways to hold onto your space in fw.

1) You can fight off people who try to capture an offensive plex before they capture it (always a pvp way)
2) You can run a defensive plex. (most often a pve method)


There is a 3rd option here that is taking place, its not like these are the only two scenarios. The third option is to just let the enemy take the system, neither defensive plexing nor PvPing, and purely offensively plexing in the same system once its been flipped. You already pointed out that this "rollover" is only happening maybe 10-15% of the time - but that is well within what the winning militia can afford to lose and still maintain tier 5.

If the winning militia can lose 10-15% of the systems at any given moment, and still cash out at tier 5 100% of the time, than those 10-15% of systems being flipped for profit end up being the de facto strategy for all systems, its justs that the dominant militia is going to keep a watchful eye to see that this practice is contained as much as possible. Whether you give up your system to farm it back (knowing full well that the temporary loss wont affect your WZC), or whether you farm your own space, its essentially the same practice - using the fact that you know you can flip a system with your available manpower to farm it, without having to move.

The root of this problem isn't in the reward for individual plexes, its in the WZC tiers - the fact that it is price that is modulated and not payouts is directly responsible for this controlled flipping of systems because all anyone really cares about right now is spiking the market periodically, not actually maintaining themselves at a given tier for the sake of keeping the bonus income flowing at all times. This lack of real-time reward is precisely why you see opposing militias live at tier 1 constantly - nothing motivates them to actually intercept the enemy from bleeding them down everyday (providing the pew you and I are both after) the only motivation comes when your magical number of systems is threatened, and even than its easier to let one system fall if another is easier to take unopposed instead.

All mechanics discussion aside, the fact remains that the Amarr lost their space before rewards were implemented, and began to take it all back once they increased their numbers, cooperation, and concentrated their timezone presence - with groups like Fweddit and Nulli playing a large part in this. One came for PvP, the other for isk (so lets shelve the argument over what actually motivates people to enlist for the underdog for another day) but both were crucial in helping the Amarr begin to take back space - not because CCP suddenly switched off defensive plex payouts post-inferno. What motivates a faction to take back space isn't the one-sided payouts, its having the active manpower to begin with.

Quote:
There seems to be this assumption that every activity in eve should be rewarded and encouraged. I say reward the activities that make fw pvp, not the ones like defensive plexing which make it pve.


I understand what you're trying to say - lets reward offensive plexing because it fosters PvP (another false premise - this guide explains why PvP actually impedes offensive plexing efforts and is a waste of time) and not reward defensive because its merely PvE.

But the truth is that neither of these plexing styles are a PvP activity, and that's where we should be changing the status quo. All Faction Warfare changes have to be implemented in tandem - this means changing the nature of plexing itself as well as the reward system. Since we're working on the plex content too, there's no reason to base future recommendations regarding the payout system on a current model of plexing that we're trying to transform anyways.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#248 - 2012-08-22 20:52:45 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Nice upgrade ideas , though now we're getting a bit off topic and there's a whole nother thread for that stuff. Doesnt *really* matter though, CCP and I are monitoring both.

A bit off topic is putting it mildly, just wanted to try to show you and Cearain that there are options beyond straight up incentives for defensive plexing .. you two seem to be looping the loop with no end in sight.
Addressed the thread topic when it first opened ago and thread itself, as has the sister thread, has morphed into "larger scope" concepts as is proper if you ask me as FW's strength is that everything is interconnected (or should be at any rate) so that there is a place for everyone to do their thing.

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#249 - 2012-08-22 21:39:21 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Do you think it’s too easy for the side like the amarr to get back into the game? Is that why you want to tilt the scales in favor of the side that is winning and holding the systems? It’s a sincere question.


It's also a leading question, much like "Hans, why do you want to kill all of lowsec PvP? Is that why you didn't cause a scene at the summit over Greyscale's proposed gate gun changes?" It contains a false premise, and is suggestive of the answer.

For the sake of clarity, I'll take the bait this once, but since this is a thread about NPC's lets try to stick to that discussion and move this elsewhere if it has to continue. .



Hans anyone who followed what happens knows that no lp for defensive plexing was the key to our getting to tier four. To the extent you start rewarding defensive lp you erode that sole balancing factor. In practice this will just mean an even worse situation where everyone joins the winning side. Its already pretty bad.



Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Cearain wrote:

Right now there are 2 ways to hold onto your space in fw.

1) You can fight off people who try to capture an offensive plex before they capture it (always a pvp way)
2) You can run a defensive plex. (most often a pve method)


There is a 3rd option here that is taking place, its not like these are the only two scenarios. The third option is to just let the enemy take the system, neither defensive plexing nor PvPing, and purely offensively plexing in the same system once its been flipped.You already pointed out that this "rollover" is only happening maybe 10-15% of the time - but that is well within what the winning militia can afford to lose and still maintain tier 5.

If the winning militia can lose 10-15% of the systems at any given moment, and still cash out at tier 5 100% of the time, than those 10-15% of systems being flipped for profit end up being the de facto strategy for all systems, its justs that the dominant militia is going to keep a watchful eye to see that this practice is contained as much as possible. .


Contained in the other 80-90% of plexes! Thats allot of plexes you are trying to hold. And no you can’t hold a system by letting an enemy take a system. That’s not holding a system. Your whole premise is based on the notion that flipping your own systems is smart. But this strategy is foolish here. It has never worked well yet and even if it we do start to see that strategy it is easily countered. Amarr could just keep plexing the least contested non home system. Then which system will you flip?

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

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#250 - 2012-08-22 21:41:00 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

Whether you give up your system to farm it back (knowing full well that the temporary loss wont affect your WZC), or whether you farm your own space, its essentially the same practice - using the fact that you know you can flip a system with your available manpower to farm it, without having to move. .


This is hardly a concern. And it can be countered.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The root of this problem.


Hans you have not really offered a problem. There is no problem where minmatar are going around flipping systems to amarr so they can farm them back. They flipped labapi. And that did what for them? I think it just saved amarr some ammo and helped us hit tier4. Thanks minmatar great strategy.

You and susan black keep theorizing it’s a problem that factions will want to flip their own system but we are not actually seeing that in the game. Please don’t use this bogus nonsense as an excuse to start paying the minmatar farmers for defensive plexing.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

isn't in the reward for individual plexes, its in the WZC tiers - the fact that it is price that is modulated and not payouts is directly responsible for this controlled flipping of systems because all anyone really cares about right now is spiking the market periodically, not actually maintaining themselves at a given tier for the sake of keeping the bonus income flowing at all times. This lack of real-time reward is precisely why you see opposing militias live at tier 1 constantly - nothing motivates them to actually intercept the enemy from bleeding them down everyday (providing the pew you and I are both after) the only motivation comes when your magical number of systems is threatened, and even than its easier to let one system fall if another is easier to take unopposed instead.

This proposal is discussed else where and really not related to giving lp for defensive plexing.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

All mechanics discussion aside, the fact remains that the Amarr lost their space before rewards were implemented, and began to take it all back once they increased their numbers, cooperation, and concentrated their timezone presence - with groups like Fweddit and Nulli playing a large part in this. One came for PvP, the other for isk (so lets shelve the argument over what actually motivates people to enlist for the underdog for another day) but both were crucial in helping the Amarr begin to take back space - not because CCP suddenly switched off defensive plex payouts post-inferno. What motivates a faction to take back space isn't the one-sided payouts, its having the active manpower to begin with.


Hans you completely misunderstand why amarr started taking systems back. We started taking advantage of the rule that minmatar do not get lp rewards for defensive plexing and so we started to offensive plex instead of defensive plex and we stopped flipping systems immediately after they turned vulnerable. We did not have more numbers when we did that. In fact we had just lost a huge group of plexers in the entire 7th fleet alliance. And nulli wasn’t even in fw when we had 19 systems vulnerable.

Was it more organized? Well we were able to communiticate that people shouldn’t flip systems and that they should focus on offensive plexing but that is really it. Lots of prominent amarr thought we had given up and then found we had 19 vulnerable systems more than any other time post inferno!
If minmatar were getting lp for defensive plexing this would have made this much harder if not impossible.


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

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#251 - 2012-08-22 21:41:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Cearain wrote:

[quote]There seems to be this assumption that every activity in eve should be rewarded and encouraged. I say reward the activities that make fw pvp, not the ones like defensive plexing which make it pve.


I understand what you're trying to say - lets reward offensive plexing because it fosters PvP (another false premise - this guide explains why PvP actually impedes offensive plexing efforts and is a waste of time) and not reward defensive because its merely PvE. .

No you don’t understand. I am challenging your premise that miltias “don’t want those systems anyway.” Its false despite what susan says. And yes militias do want to hold onto systems because that allows them to hit tier 5. Even though they can lose up to 20% of their systems that does not mean they want to lose those systems.

Once you accept that militias really do want to hold systems there are only 2 ways to do it. Fight offensive plexers or defensive plex. Offensive plexing is mostly pvp I agree with that poster. But when you fight offensive plexers its always pvp. The problem is there is another way to hold a system other than that way which is always pvp. You can let the person capture the plex and then defensive plex after they leave system. That is a mostly pve way to hold onto systems. To the extent you reward people for that you can expect fewer to try to hold the system through the method that is always pvp.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

But the truth is that neither of these plexing styles are a PvP activity, and that's where we should be changing the status quo. All Faction Warfare changes have to be implemented in tandem - this means changing the nature of plexing itself as well as the reward system. Since we're working on the plex content too, there's no reason to base future recommendations regarding the payout system on a current model of plexing that we're trying to transform anyways.


The only thing ccp needs to do to fix this is let people know where others are running plexes and implement some sort of count down mechanic if you run when an enemy lands on grid.

If you start giving lp for defensive plexing though then this will really be broken.

People are still working out strategies for the tier and reward system. It’s not broken.


Edit: they do also need to adjust the npcs so they do not block pvp in plexes larger than a minor - like they do now.

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
#252 - 2012-08-22 23:25:26 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Nice upgrade ideas , though now we're getting a bit off topic and there's a whole nother thread for that stuff. Doesnt *really* matter though, CCP and I are monitoring both.

A bit off topic is putting it mildly, just wanted to try to show you and Cearain that there are options beyond straight up incentives for defensive plexing .. you two seem to be looping the loop with no end in sight.
Addressed the thread topic when it first opened ago and thread itself, as has the sister thread, has morphed into "larger scope" concepts as is proper if you ask me as FW's strength is that everything is interconnected (or should be at any rate) so that there is a place for everyone to do their thing.



You're right. I don't know why I bother, too much work and I've gotta read it all anyways wherever it ends up. Roll ISD - if you're reading this, feel free to allow whatever people want to talk about in this thread. :) As long as its about Faction Warfare. Any talk of space hats though please banhammer away.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Nikita Alterana
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#253 - 2012-08-23 00:14:28 UTC
To reiterate:

Nikita Alterana wrote:
Overall suggestions:

You know what's not fun? Orbiting a stationary object for 10 minutes
You know what is fun? Spending ten minutes blowing up 60 stationary objects that take 10 seconds each to kill, some of which have huge pretty explosions, produce damaging clouds of debris and AoE effects.

Taking a plex should feel like taking out an enemy installation. There should be some static turrets to kill, but nothing difficult at first, there should be a random chance to spawn a group of hard (sleeper/incursion styled) rats, everytime you blow up a structure. It makes plex taking much more active, and provides lots of chances for pvp that the rats won't get in your way for.

Defensive plexing becomes protecting haulers while they set up/improve a base, and if the enemy blows up the haulers, the base doesn't get set up/improved.


Changing the mechanic over like this would force PVP, because if you're defensive plexing operation is contingent around some target that your enemy can shoot at and blow up being left alone, then you can't exactly go hide and come back later to stop the enemy.

Also: the payouts in general needs to be modulated so that the slippery slope is not so much in effect. The more space a faction loses, the harder it should be to continue pressing forward, not easier. The enemy should be bonused towards the actions they do take when they are the underdogs. Yes, this really points out that there's no real way to win faction warfare, but there's never been a way to actually win faction warfare, so lets encourage the endless battles and give the underdog an easier time based on how badly they're doing.
Mortromain
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#254 - 2012-08-23 08:26:53 UTC
Cearain wrote:
There seems to be this assumption that every activity in eve should be rewarded and encouraged.


Of course it should, especially for FW.

you should be able to make a living out of every activity available in the game, and this is even more important for PvP activities where you actually loose stuff.

if defensive plexing is not desirable, remove it, but right now if you want to defend your territory, you either plex and get nothing, or you hunt for the attackers but they will flee and you will gain nothing. ( and the system will stay contested)

if you want to avoid farmers, make it so that plex rewards are less than mission rewards, farmers will do missions.
If you want people to engage in very uncertain fights, make system control worth it in the long run.

Also :

Cearain wrote:
The only thing ccp needs to do to fix this is let people know where others are running plexes and implement some sort of count down mechanic if you run when an enemy lands on grid.


while i agree with the second point, the first seems like a "join fight" button to me.
Intel gathering is an important aspect of Eve.

For the NPC modifs, the question is what do we want :
- NPC adds immersion
- if the NPCs are too strong, adapted fit will be used and pvp fight are less likely to happen

and i think plex should be captured faster if you are more in it, right now, you should split if you want to have a bigger impact.
Meditril
Minmatar Secret Service
Ushra'Khan
#255 - 2012-08-23 11:56:28 UTC
Here are my 2ct to this topic:


  1. Doing large plexes solo with a gun-less frigate should not be possible. Button should only count down if no NPC is on grid.
  2. NPC should have WH-AI to make them more intelligent. They should not fire contiuosly at a target out range and ignore targets in range etc. With regards to DPS and tank, NPC are fine as they are.
  3. Since the first change will have a massive impact on large plexes, reduce the timer. I propose make all plex timers 15 minutes at max.
  4. Large plexes should context / decontext a system significantly more than small ones.
  5. Stop LP payout for plexing if system is 100% contested / vulnerable.
  6. It should be impossible to contest a system more than 100%. It should be indeed possible to make a vulnerable system unvulnerable by just defensive plexing one plex. This will cause fights and pressure for the offender to stay in control of all plexes until der bunker is down. This gives a small defender fleet at least a chance to disrupt the offender even if he has a much larger fleet.
Mortromain
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#256 - 2012-08-23 12:36:33 UTC
Meditril wrote:
Here are my 2ct to this topic:


  1. Doing large plexes solo with a gun-less frigate should not be possible. Button should only count down if no NPC is on grid.
  2. NPC should have WH-AI to make them more intelligent. They should not fire contiuosly at a target out range and ignore targets in range etc. With regards to DPS and tank, NPC are fine as they are.
  3. Since the first change will have a massive impact on large plexes, reduce the timer. I propose make all plex timers 15 minutes at max.
  4. Large plexes should context / decontext a system significantly more than small ones.
  5. Stop LP payout for plexing if system is 100% contested / vulnerable.
  6. It should be impossible to contest a system more than 100%. It should be indeed possible to make a vulnerable system unvulnerable by just defensive plexing one plex. This will cause fights and pressure for the offender to stay in control of all plexes until der bunker is down. This gives a small defender fleet at least a chance to disrupt the offender even if he has a much larger fleet.


i agree with most point (or don't care) exept with the NPC AI, could you explain why you want an improved NPC AI? it seems to me that it will just limit the number of fit you can have while being in a plex
Meditril
Minmatar Secret Service
Ushra'Khan
#257 - 2012-08-23 12:58:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Meditril
Mortromain wrote:

i agree with most point (or don't care) exept with the NPC AI, could you explain why you want an improved NPC AI? it seems to me that it will just limit the number of fit you can have while being in a plex


The reason why I want an improved NPC AI is that it is simply stupid that people get a fast frigate into the large plex which recieves full aggro and move it 200 km of the rats. Then uncloak their StealthBomber and kill everything inside in AFK-mode without the rats being intelligent enough to switch the target. In addition to this they are at no risk, since they are not targeted in the StealthBomber and can therefore immediatelly cloak.

So with WH-AI the NPC rats will sooner or later switch their aggro to the SteathBomber which is from my point of view a reasonable behaviour. Then you have the choice to either speed tank the rats or warp of. Furthermore, this creates at least some risk to the plexer especially if he is playing the lazy AFK mode.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#258 - 2012-08-23 13:23:27 UTC
Mortromain wrote:
Cearain wrote:
There seems to be this assumption that every activity in eve should be rewarded and encouraged.


Of course it should, especially for FW.

you should be able to make a living out of every activity available in the game, and this is even more important for PvP activities where you actually loose stuff.

if defensive plexing is not desirable, remove it, but right now if you want to defend your territory, you either plex and get nothing, or you hunt for the attackers but they will flee and you will gain nothing. ( and the system will stay contested)

if you want to avoid farmers, make it so that plex rewards are less than mission rewards, farmers will do missions.
If you want people to engage in very uncertain fights, make system control worth it in the long run.


Yes of course, we should reward people for letting the enemy capture plexes in their systems. Lets reward them by giving them lp for doing a defensive plex after the enemy leaves. That will encourage pvp.



Mortromain wrote:

Also :

Cearain wrote:
The only thing ccp needs to do to fix this is let people know where others are running plexes and implement some sort of count down mechanic if you run when an enemy lands on grid.


while i agree with the second point, the first seems like a "join fight" button to me.
Intel gathering is an important aspect of Eve.

For the NPC modifs, the question is what do we want :
- NPC adds immersion
- if the NPCs are too strong, adapted fit will be used and pvp fight are less likely to happen

and i think plex should be captured faster if you are more in it, right now, you should split if you want to have a bigger impact.


If you like to waste hours warping around for looking for fights eve already offers allot for you. This is why the game is not hitting any sort of big numbers. You supposedly join the largest war dec and it still takes hours of warping to find a fight. Not everyone in the world has hours of free time warping around for every 2 minute fight.

Its absolutely insane that when an enemy attacks you faction military facility you have no way to know this unless you happen to stumble upon them while warping around.

But anyway I am not surprised that there are allot of people who are afraid their alts won't be able to hide and plex in fw. They are making allot of isk doing that after all.

I love the people who claim they want this to be pvp, but as soon as someone says well then lets have a system where the enemy knows where you are attacking their complexes, they complain.

Bottom line is your alts won't be able to plex anymore and whoever plexes better be ready to fight for it. If you don't like that then don't join in on the biggest pvp wardec in the game.

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

Mortromain
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#259 - 2012-08-23 14:14:42 UTC
Meditril wrote:
The reason why I want an improved NPC AI is that it is simply stupid that people get a fast frigate into the large plex which recieves full aggro and move it 200 km of the rats. Then uncloak their StealthBomber and kill everything inside in AFK-mode without the rats being intelligent enough to switch the target. In addition to this they are at no risk, since they are not targeted in the StealthBomber and can therefore immediatelly cloak.

So with WH-AI the NPC rats will sooner or later switch their aggro to the SteathBomber which is from my point of view a reasonable behaviour. Then you have the choice to either speed tank the rats or warp of. Furthermore, this creates at least some risk to the plexer especially if he is playing the lazy AFK mode.


yeah, you're right saying this is a problem, but i still think that an enhanced AI is dangerous for pvp. Maybe there is another solution but i can't think of a simple one.


Meditril wrote:
Yes of course, we should reward people for letting the enemy capture plexes in their systems. Lets reward them by giving them lp for doing a defensive plex after the enemy leaves. That will encourage pvp.


i also said that you should get rewards for protecting plexes, so you don't need to wait until they are gone, besides, killing guys gives reward too.
i also said that if you want people to fight over a plex, make system possession worth it on the long run.

Meditril wrote:
If you like to waste hours warping around for looking for fights eve already offers allot for you. This is why the game is not hitting any sort of big numbers. You supposedly join the largest war dec and it still takes hours of warping to find a fight. Not everyone in the world has hours of free time warping around for every 2 minute fight.


You are exagerating this, in FW, it takes less than 15 min to find a WT, and the enemy fleets positions are updated on the militia chan, It doesn't mean that you have a fight, but knowing where the WT is doesn't guarantee it either.

Meditril wrote:

But anyway I am not surprised that there are allot of people who are afraid their alts won't be able to hide and plex in fw. They are making allot of isk doing that after all.

I love the people who claim they want this to be pvp, but as soon as someone says well then lets have a system where the enemy knows where you are attacking their complexes, they complain.


That is why CCP should lower plex rewards below other farming activities
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#260 - 2012-08-23 14:28:02 UTC
Mortromain wrote:
Meditril wrote:
If you like to waste hours warping around for looking for fights eve already offers allot for you. This is why the game is not hitting any sort of big numbers. You supposedly join the largest war dec and it still takes hours of warping to find a fight. Not everyone in the world has hours of free time warping around for every 2 minute fight.


You are exagerating this, in FW, it takes less than 15 min to find a WT, and the enemy fleets positions are updated on the militia chan, It doesn't mean that you have a fight, but knowing where the WT is doesn't guarantee it either.

Meditril wrote:

But anyway I am not surprised that there are allot of people who are afraid their alts won't be able to hide and plex in fw. They are making allot of isk doing that after all.

I love the people who claim they want this to be pvp, but as soon as someone says well then lets have a system where the enemy knows where you are attacking their complexes, they complain.


That is why CCP should lower plex rewards below other farming activities



Just knowing the location of a fleet is not getting a fight. You then have the endless shipping up and down. Your original complaint was this is a "get fight button." Its not really that, but yes it would *greatly* help people who want to pvp to find fights. Which is a huge problem in eve whether you realize it or not.

As far as reducing the rewards - well if they make plexing a pvp mechanic people might actually need those rewards to buy new ships. If you are losing your ship and therefore not capturing every other plex that lp might be handy just to replace your ships. Reducing the rewards based on the current pve set up is not wise - unless the intent is to leave it as a pve mechanic.

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