These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: I-hub and system upgrades

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#421 - 2012-09-05 15:32:28 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Nice words, Julius.

While I agree we need to have the rats shoot you in a defensive plex if at all plausible from the programming end, I still maintain that the absolute priority is making sure the proper PvP incentives are in place. Making plexing dangerous because of the likelihood of PvP will do far more to cut down on farming than any NPC-based solution.

NPC's are only part of the equation, all they do is guarantee that your victim is in something other than a gunless, warp stabbed, nano-frigate. They dont make it more likely that the victim will stick around in the first place.

If we can get CCP to implement the timer rollback and institute some kind of alert system to bring PvPers out to the plexing (offensive and defensive alike), the PvP risk inside plexes will dwarf the risk caused by rats. Once farmers realized there is no hiding their plexing efforts, they'll cease to become risk-averse farmers and become consensual PvPers whenever they enter the plex.

So yes - rat aggro for both types of plexing is great, the PvP incentives are better and I hope others keep speaking up in support of this. Otherwise all we'll be left with is farmers using new ships and still running constantly to plex wherever they can hide from the PvP crowd, little will have changed. PvP incentives are king this winter - they are the most badly needed fixes.

CCP hasn't ruled these out, they're still discussing this internally, so I could use your support in bringing plexing to the place we've wanted it to be all along - the premiere venue for guaranteed sub-cap PvP.



Hans

Consider the confounding variables. They existed in inferno and no attempt is being made to isolate what is broken in fw.

You have identified the 2 things that needed to happen to begin with. Have them do this before they dedicate resources to changing the tier ssytem and lp payouts which will likely just break faction war in new ways.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#422 - 2012-09-05 15:37:29 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Have them do this before they dedicate resources to changing the tier ssytem and lp payouts which will likely just break faction war in new ways.


If I could dictate the order in which they work on things, this would be the way I'd do it. I've already sent the message loud and clear that these are the most important fixes. Unfortunately, CCP is free to do things their own way, and in this case they've committed to the other changes first. I dont know whether this is because they dont want to fix them or haven't figured out exactly how yet, all I know at this point is they are talking about it.

I can't wait for the day where I can just "have them do" anything I want, really. It would make my job so much easier! Cool In the mean time, all I can do is keep the pressure on publicly and continue to negotiate privately. I'm on it.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#423 - 2012-09-05 16:02:28 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Have them do this before they dedicate resources to changing the tier ssytem and lp payouts which will likely just break faction war in new ways.


If I could dictate the order in which they work on things, this would be the way I'd do it. I've already sent the message loud and clear that these are the most important fixes. Unfortunately, CCP is free to do things their own way, and in this case they've committed to the other changes first. I dont know whether this is because they dont want to fix them or haven't figured out exactly how yet, all I know at this point is they are talking about it.

I can't wait for the day where I can just "have them do" anything I want, really. It would make my job so much easier! Cool In the mean time, all I can do is keep the pressure on publicly and continue to negotiate privately. I'm on it.



Well, all you can do is give them advice. They can choose to ignore you, and you can let the players know that. There is nothing more we can ask.

Unfortunately, I think some of the changes they already "committed to" will break faction war in new ways. But it still might work.

If i had to choose I would rather 1) be caldari and get a lot more pvp in the new system, than 2) remain amarr and get less pvp as in the current system.


Of course Id rather be able to remain amarr and get more pvp in plexes. But if that is too much to ask then I will go with 1.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#424 - 2012-09-05 16:07:13 UTC
Julius Foederatus wrote:

By shifting farmers over to defensive plexing, there's a very likely danger that the meta will swing all the way from one extreme to the other. The front will be so stagnant that no one will want to offensive plex in any meaningful way, and system occupancy will grind to a halt. If people can't win, they won't want to play, and we'll be back to the bad old days when no one cared about plexing or system occupancy.
+1. This is exactly what will happen.
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#425 - 2012-09-05 16:12:36 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:


I think its even easier than that - we already have militia channel, which can and is used to relay intel about enemy movement.

What we need is a more useful minimap - the current map only shows contested systems as flashy, which is redundant as we already have that information listed in a column to the right. Instead I think it would be so much more useful to just have the minimap flash whenever a plex is being taken in that system.

It doesnt dumb things down, you still need scouts to determine what plex they are in and who's inside, it just makes it impossible to sneak around and hide your plexing efforts. Plexing becomes instant bait for PvP, as its intended to be.


Militia is overrun with trolls, spammers, and spies. Extracting rational thought from the militia channel is non-trivial. Extracting actionable intel is nigh impossible. The very nature of the channel renders it pretty much useless for gathering intelligence.

An enhanced UI is a prefer alternative to NPC intel channels, but it terms of how much work it would entail from CCP vs using already existing mechanisms to communicate the same information, I don't know if it is worth it (as in, I actually don't know, since I have no idea how much work it would entail).

I'm also a little skeptical of the value/desirability of broadcasting incredibly vague intel across the whole. I think more specific information within a limited range would be more useful for generating pvp.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#426 - 2012-09-05 16:28:57 UTC
Milton Middleson wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:


I think its even easier than that - we already have militia channel, which can and is used to relay intel about enemy movement.

What we need is a more useful minimap - the current map only shows contested systems as flashy, which is redundant as we already have that information listed in a column to the right. Instead I think it would be so much more useful to just have the minimap flash whenever a plex is being taken in that system.

It doesnt dumb things down, you still need scouts to determine what plex they are in and who's inside, it just makes it impossible to sneak around and hide your plexing efforts. Plexing becomes instant bait for PvP, as its intended to be.


Militia is overrun with trolls, spammers, and spies. Extracting rational thought from the militia channel is non-trivial. Extracting actionable intel is nigh impossible. The very nature of the channel renders it pretty much useless for gathering intelligence.

An enhanced UI is a prefer alternative to NPC intel channels, but it terms of how much work it would entail from CCP vs using already existing mechanisms to communicate the same information, I don't know if it is worth it (as in, I actually don't know, since I have no idea how much work it would entail).

I'm also a little skeptical of the value/desirability of broadcasting incredibly vague intel across the whole. I think more specific information within a limited range would be more useful for generating pvp.


I would agree with you about mlitia chat, and as long as all the intel channel does is pop up when a plex is entered, if its open to all militia its still going to be just as useless and / or abused. Rather than a chat channel, some form of alert is needed at least. CCP's already going to be moving the email spam into a notification UI, I'd be fine with plexing intel ending up here as well. The problem that some players have with this is the idea of hand-holding and explicitly telling players exactly what do do and "dumbing the game down" I agree we don't want to do this, which is why I've suggested an active-intel minimap as a compromise.

Regardless of the form this alert takes in the end, I'm quite flexible on it, the point is that these kinds of PvP-friendly features don't even appear on CCP's official radar right now for winter. This, along with the timer rollback for unoccupied plexes to discourage fleeing all the time, are badly needed and we as a community need to continue to send the message that plexes are for PvP, not just gravy NPC content to be farmed quietly without interruption.

Until we hear that they plan to implement some of these fixes, or until we hear an explanation as to why they're not being implemented, we gotta keep the conversation going. We can't afford to miss the chance to fix FW's main plexing issue and settle for an NPC band-aid that will only mean that players run away in bigger ships to continue farming elsewhere in private.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#427 - 2012-09-05 16:34:02 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Julius Foederatus wrote:

By shifting farmers over to defensive plexing, there's a very likely danger that the meta will swing all the way from one extreme to the other. The front will be so stagnant that no one will want to offensive plex in any meaningful way, and system occupancy will grind to a halt. If people can't win, they won't want to play, and we'll be back to the bad old days when no one cared about plexing or system occupancy.
+1. This is exactly what will happen.



I think this is true too - maybe. With defensive plexing and a system that promotes joining the side that is currently winning everyone will join the winning sides.

But there will always be 2 winning sides.

If the two winning sides are enemies things won't be so bad. The fight will go on even though there will only be 2 factions. If the two winning sides are allies then we will have the stagnation and the system will be broken. I think eventually the 2 winning sides will be allies but it might take a while.

Right now people might think that the winning sides would be minmatar and caldari. But if the measures taken by ccp really do reduce the farmers that might not be the case.

Plus whoever can captue and upgrade their systems right before the winter patch hits will have a huge advantage. Every lp they invest right before the patch will be worth several times that after the patch when we consider the increased costs and fees.

On the whole I don't know that giving bigger rewards for higher tiers but then charging larger fees to hit those tiers makes much sense outside of a cashout situation. I'm not sure why they build in a diminishing returns fee instead of just lowering the reward. If you want to reduce the concequences just reduce the concequences. Is there a reason to do it with fees?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#428 - 2012-09-05 19:31:31 UTC
Cearain wrote:
...But there will always be 2 winning sides...

Isn't that the whole point of this exercise, to come up with a system where that is no longer true?

Problem so far has been the complete lack of a mechanic that would allow an underdog to fight the odds without quadrupling in size over night .. suggestions to include diminishing returns for a steamer and their reverse for the dogs came out immediately after the FF presentation so has been poked and prodded to death with no one having been able to point out a significant downside to such a thing.

Once you surrender to the premise that there will always be only 2 militias then FW is lost for good. Won't matter how much you tweak PvE, PvP, Incentives and what not if half the people involved will either be having a crappy experience or be forced to resort to gaming the system.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#429 - 2012-09-05 21:02:22 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Cearain wrote:
...But there will always be 2 winning sides...

Isn't that the whole point of this exercise, to come up with a system where that is no longer true?

Problem so far has been the complete lack of a mechanic that would allow an underdog to fight the odds without quadrupling in size over night ..




Actually the current system does this.

Amarr has been the smallest militia and that has been especially true leading up to and after inferno. Currently we have 4 systems in our control 32 systems vulnerable and five over fifty percent contested. We need to get another 25 or so in order to hit tier 5.

There are 2 things that slow our progress.

A) minmatar fighting us off in the plexes so we cant capture them.(pvp)

B) minmatar running defensive plexes. (currently mostly pve)

Because there is no lp for defensive plexing there is a strong incentive to use the first tactic, as opposed to the second.

But also because there is no lp for defensive plex the smaller militia is comparing its total number of miltiia (and allied miltiia) who are willing to plex for lp gain with the enemies militia (and their allied militia) that is willing to plex for no lp.

Generally speaking the number of players who are willing to plex for lp is greater than those who want to do it for nothing. So the smaller side can make a comeback. the comeback is basically 2 steps.

1) Get enough systems vulnerable to hit tier 5.

2)flip enough to hit tier 5 before the other side starts flipping system back to themselves.

I think its pretty clear amarr can do the first step but its not so clear they can accomplish the second. That is the question we really haven't tested yet for the amarr. Nulli started flipping systems at tier 4.

The question is can the underdog do both of these steps? I think we can, but for the sake of argument lets say we can't. Then the solution (assumign you want faction war to be somewhat balanced) is going to depend on what step is causing us trouble.

If we can't accomplish step 1 then the solution would be to further disincentive defensive plexing. So maybe instead of each defensive plex being worth 20 vp points toward decontesting a system it would only be worth 15. Or you could say each defensive plex is only worth 10 vp unless the pilot opts to pay an additional 1,000lp per additional vp. Obviously though giving lp for defensive plexing will hurt the underdog and make it easier for the winning team to stay winning.

If we can accomplish step 1 but not step 2 (I think this is the more likely scenario) then the solution would be a bit different. We would perhaps make it take longer to flip systems overall. This would give the underdog more time to get out there and try to flip systems before the winning side could start flipping them back. They could also make it so that its just harder to flip a system that has just been flipped. So the first 2 weeks after a system is flipped each plex only counts .035% to system contested but then after it has been flipped for 2 weeks it counts the full .07%. etc.


So bottom line I think the current system does indeed allow the underdog an opportunity to get back in the game. If not its pretty close and a few tweaks will correct this.

Unfortunately instead of tweaking this system ccp seems intent on entirely replacing it with a system where there is no economic balance at all.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#430 - 2012-09-05 21:09:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Vyktor Abyss
I can't stress enough that tinkering with plex NPCs merely to make them attack people (even while defending their own systems) purely to deter farmers is narrow-minded and idiotic.
It is merely a stopgap solution to a new problem CCP is creating with the new proposed changes and farmers will quickly adapt and find a new method to circumvent the NPCs attentions to maximise their grinding time LP to ISK.

The REAL issues with defensive plexing are stated right below because the topic is getting convoluted:

1. Defensive plexing is boring
2. There is no real incentive to do it because system upgrades are totally rubbish right now - except for perhaps in home 'station' systems
3. Farmers and alts only doing it for the easy LP

So CCP's current proposed solution is to try to fix 2. and add incentive to defensive plexing by only handing out yet more LP and not really improving the upgrades.
If you can't see this action is completely wrong Hans then God help us all, because:

a) Handing out more LP is rubbish because It exacerbates problem 3.
and
b) it detracts from the other two main reasons

The proper solution involves:

i) Making defensive plexing less boring - yes alerts like the pings in the Militia system overview map and such will help this out.
ii) Very important - Make the system upgrades actually worthwhile in all systems, not just the very few station systems that happen to have R&D/Manufacturing slots
iii) Put only a fraction ( 1/4 to 1/2 of the LP value of the plex back into the system I-hub upgrade's LP with 2x the LP total) and make DF plexing a strategic incentive to defend territory and save your 'precious' system upgrades *[see end] - not a 'personal' farmable LP incentive.
iv) Add a 'personal objective' to defensive plexing to help make it more appealing compared to just LP - something along the lines of a defensive VP league table within each militia or medals, ranks and promotions within militia that actually have some meaning or consequence. Even having it so defensive plexing VPs enables the pilot to run some unique one-off COSMOS style FW missions as some 'fun' bonus-style content in the longer term as an objective after you earn so much VP. I'd take a 24 hour Opux Luxury Yacht cruise as a delivery mission for my gazillion VP or a T2 blueprint for Exotic Dancers for example.... The point is:- a personal reward worth more sentimental value than just some LP to ISK conversion rate for a farmer to calculate.

The changes should be focusing on making us want to upgrade the systems in the first place and want to defend them 'because they're worth it'. That is the crux of 'defending space' not handing out yet more LP so we can cash out and buy more elite pew pew ships for alts etc...

If i) to iv) are done well enough then changing the NPCs to effectively give no help or make no difference whatsoever to PVP during plex fights actually ruins a lot of what is interesting about plex fighting. The "can we take the enemy on even with their NPC help?" question people have to ask before going in to PVP in a plex helps make PVPing in plexes more interesting. NPCs need rebalancing yes, but should they really need to shoot me for sitting in a plex in my own militias upgraded space because I'm trying to help my own team defend our upgrades? - No. Just no. Only once personal LP is handed out does that become even a valid argument.

By effectively removing another factor (the NPCs) in a PVP environment you're not actually helping more people PVP, you're just making people's decision to PVP or not an easier one. Most folks have already decided if they will fight or not before going out to plex, and it is the 'plexing for LP' crowd that are inevitably the ones running away from fighting and it is that playstyle needs attacking with rollback timers and stuff. Kick them out by making LP harder to earn, not easier with the likes of tier changes offering LP multipliers and LP for defensive plexing.

A character should be offensive plexing for personal LP and defensive plexing for the 'team' rewards like useful system upgrades.

  • - System upgrades should be personal or corporate anchored structures that have some actual value of time/effort and such attached to get them installed and not just some dumping ground for excess LP to help you gain yet more excess LP... that logic only promotes more farming.

    • Tacking onto this concept : system upgrades should become vulnerable to destruction/disabling as the system becomes more contested, forcing people to actually get out and defend their systems for the sake of their asset structures.
    Higher value and effect structures (yes like a cynojammer) should become vulnerable before the basic upgrades like a cheaper clone cost upgrade structure for example:
    • A Tier 5 upgraded system still bought with donated LP allows A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I J K structures to be anchored, but I,J, K structures will go vulnerable and can be attacked and disabled at 50% contested, E,F,G,H structures then go vulnerable at 75% contested, with C and D only going vulnerable the I-hub is vulnerable, and structures A and B exploding or unanchoring after the I-hub is taken.
    • A Tier 4 system could allow A to F to anchor under the same ruleset
    etc etc

    The key to promoting more fights, making FW more dynamic and adding more content to FW is in providing us content like system upgrades to actually fight over. For evidence to support this look at POCOs and their help in giving lowsec more to fight about - structures that arguably have begun to instigate most of the more interesting lowsec territory fights.

    FW need to be more about enabling player groups to take risks invest in goals and put targets out there to be shot at helping create our own content, and less about grinding buttons and earning LP solo to fly shinier ships.


    I've written too much again, Sorry, this will be my last word on it all.
    Veshta Yoshida
    PIE Inc.
    Khimi Harar
    #431 - 2012-09-05 21:15:56 UTC
    And without the horribly broken bits, where is your illusory "underdog can prevail" then?

    The obvious error (why wasn't this caught in testing is beyond me) that allows infinitely vulnerable systems.
    Low-skilled alts doing vast majority of orbiting.
    Etc.

    What tweaks could possibly 'fix' something as fundamentally flawed as the current FarmFest?

    Yes. Underdogs can 'function' within the current system provided they can gather enough firepower (read: dreads) for the couple of hours it takes to jump around nuking the 50+ bunkers.
    But is that really what you want? 99% of the time spent dual-boxing an alt to get a thirty minute window in which to cash out knowing full well that the enemy might not be getting full value, but is getting a slightly lower value almost non-stop regardless of your actions?

    You may not be my enemy, but you sure sound like you are the enemy of fun* Smile

    * Fun meaning all parties involved enjoying themselves by challenging each other in a constant gay-as-can-be frolicking game of "Shoot the other guy in the face!"
    Cearain
    Plus 10 NV
    #432 - 2012-09-05 21:33:57 UTC
    Veshta Yoshida wrote:
    And without the horribly broken bits, where is your illusory "underdog can prevail" then?

    The obvious error (why wasn't this caught in testing is beyond me) that allows infinitely vulnerable systems.
    Low-skilled alts doing vast majority of orbiting.
    Etc.

    What tweaks could possibly 'fix' something as fundamentally flawed as the current FarmFest?

    Yes. Underdogs can 'function' within the current system provided they can gather enough firepower (read: dreads) for the couple of hours it takes to jump around nuking the 50+ bunkers.
    But is that really what you want? 99% of the time spent dual-boxing an alt to get a thirty minute window in which to cash out knowing full well that the enemy might not be getting full value, but is getting a slightly lower value almost non-stop regardless of your actions?

    You may not be my enemy, but you sure sound like you are the enemy of fun* Smile

    * Fun meaning all parties involved enjoying themselves by challenging each other in a constant gay-as-can-be frolicking game of "Shoot the other guy in the face!"




    I think you are conflating 2 different problems. Problem 1 is whether the underdog can ever make a comeback. Problem 2 is that plexing is a pve farmfest.

    The tier system is not what makes this a farmfest, but it does effect whether an underdog can make a comeback. The proposed tier changes will not make this any less of a pve farmers paradise than the current system. You will just farm in cruisers and bcs instead of frigates. The tier system is relevant to helping an underdog. But it is irrelevant as to whether the system is pve farming or pvp.

    What makes this a farmfest is the ability for farmer to hide in back water systems and plex and the ability of farmers to just jump back and forth to plexes everytime they get chased out without losing any time on the thier coounters. Hans is correct as to what needs to be done to change this from an alt farmfest.

    As far as nuking bunkers,yes dreads help. But you can also use gank domis or tier 3 bcs. You have at least a 40 hour window. I believe 40 hours is the time it takes to flip a system assuming you have absolutely no resistance and plex every plex ever plex as soon as it spawns. With some resistance it will take longer.

    Again I agree this second step is the tricky one. But if the second step is the problem ccp can tweak the system to give you more time to flip the systems - I explained how above.

    Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
    Zarnak Wulf
    Task Force 641
    Empyrean Edict
    #433 - 2012-09-06 01:23:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Zarnak Wulf
    Over the last week I've seen the Amarr militia channel have between 48 - 131 pilots in it. How exactly is it expected that such a horribly outnumbered group is going to flip 40 + systems in a timely manner? The short answer is you're not. Any kind of Minmatar focus will turn an Amarr spike attempt into a fiasco. Amarr needs bodies more then anything else. People will fight for the sake of fighting. They will fight for the sheer reason that seeing fat cats rolling in cash pisses them off. Did people not suicide into incursion fleets in the past? The future tier one is nowhere near as soul crushing as it is now.

    On another note - farmers are min/maxers. At tier 5 they can grab 4 to 6 level 4 missions that will pay around 100k LP each. Knock those out in an hour. Or they can defensive plex a major every 20 minutes for 56k. 500k vs 168 k. Hmmm. Waves of defensive plexers is a stretch.
    Fon Revedhort
    Monks of War
    #434 - 2012-09-06 12:25:06 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • Q: HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT ADDING JUMP BRIDGES AS PART OF SYSTEM UPGRADES?

    • A: A bit, but we dismissed the idea. That is because we don't like instant travel as it lessens risk as a whole. If anything we should strive towards reducing instant travel, not the opposite.

    That's right.

    When will you start?

    "Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
    Cearain
    Plus 10 NV
    #435 - 2012-09-06 12:50:40 UTC
    Zarnak Wulf wrote:
    Over the last week I've seen the Amarr militia channel have between 48 - 131 pilots in it. How exactly is it expected that such a horribly outnumbered group is going to flip 40 + systems in a timely manner? The short answer is you're not. Any kind of Minmatar focus will turn an Amarr spike attempt into a fiasco. Amarr needs bodies more then anything else. People will fight for the sake of fighting. They will fight for the sheer reason that seeing fat cats rolling in cash pisses them off. Did people not suicide into incursion fleets in the past? The future tier one is nowhere near as soul crushing as it is now.

    On another note - farmers are min/maxers. At tier 5 they can grab 4 to 6 level 4 missions that will pay around 100k LP each. Knock those out in an hour. Or they can defensive plex a major every 20 minutes for 56k. 500k vs 168 k. Hmmm. Waves of defensive plexers is a stretch.


    If we can't accomplish that there is no way we will be able to flip and hold 12 systems on a permanent basis. Even when we had many more pilots that was just about impossible. Add in the way this system naturally snow balls to favor the winning side and you can forget it.

    If we are not able to flip the systems within the minimum 40 hours then we hit tier 4. Tier 4 is much better than the proposed changes where the underdog will almost certainly remain at tier 1 forever.

    However you must remember that a big part of the reason sytems can flip in very close to that 40 hours is due to the strength of the minmafarm. That farm should not be so effective if ccp takes measures to prevent farming. Even with their proposed changed the pilots should at least need to get in different ships for each of the different plexes instead of running them straight in a t1 frigate. So after efforts are made to stop farming we would be better able to accomplish the second step. However with lp for defensive plexing the first step will become impossible for all but maybe 1 or 2 systems.

    In sum the prevention of farming will drag out the time it takes to get systems vulnerable. This in itself would help the underdog with the flip stage - which is the trickiest stage for the underdog.

    Moreover in the current system perhaps some caldari would help us hit tier 5 by actually trying to chase off the farmers from the most contested systems we flip. It would be in thier best interest for several reasons.

    Lets assume the relative strengths after inferno 3.0 remain the same as they are now with caldari and minmatar dominant.

    1) In the current system caldari can help amarr farm systems but only amarr will benefit from actually hitting tier 5. Hence there is some reason to stay in the amarr militia. In the next system there is no reason at all to stay in the amarr militia unless you just want less isk. You will get just as much pvp as a caldari in the minmatar amarr front as you will as an amarr and you will make over 2xs as much isk.

    2) the current system gives people a reason to join the side that is currently low on war zone control because that is the side where you can make lp for offensive plexing. If you join the winning side now you are basically joining too late. The pilots who got the faction that high warzone control will have already benefited and cashed out. The people just trying to ride on their coattails will not as much benefit. With the new system its the opposite. The people who worked to pull the faction up by their bootstraps will get much less lp for per plex than the people who just join the faction after its winning.

    Even hans admits that there is no economic balance in the new system. Everything about this system says join the winning side. The current balances were thrown out because some minmatar felt they were being punished for winning. Personally I don't really think the "poor minmatars" plight is something that should take precedence over economic balance to the system. IMO its like kuehnelt said its like they are complaining their crown is too heavy.

    Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
    TrouserDeagle
    Beyond Divinity Inc
    Shadow Cartel
    #436 - 2012-09-07 09:44:14 UTC
    Why are all you FW bads in favour of things being harder for outlaws? Don't you like us? We're already playing on hard mode.
    Rengerel en Distel
    #437 - 2012-09-07 11:25:59 UTC
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    Why are all you FW bads in favour of things being harder for outlaws? Don't you like us? We're already playing on hard mode.


    Yeah, it must be hard to look at the overview, and know exactly where targets are ... i'm not sure how you guys handle all the adversity.

    With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
    Gabriel Darkefyre
    Gradient
    Electus Matari
    #438 - 2012-09-07 12:02:37 UTC
    For a Quick and Dirty Fix :-

    1. Remove LP from the Equation for Upgrades. Instead, have the Upgrade level dependant on how contested the system is.

    Level 5 Upgrade - Between Stable and 19.9% Contested.
    Level 4 Upgrade - Between 20% and 39.9% Contested.
    Level 3 Upgrade - Between 40% and 59.9% Contested.
    Level 2 Upgrade - Between 60% and 79.9% Contested.
    Level 1 Upgrade - Between 80% and 99.9% Contested.
    No Upgrade - System Vulnerable

    Flipping a system just changes the Sovereignty, new owners will need to Defensively Plex the system back from Vulnerable to get upgrades in place.

    2. Reduce LP from both Offensive and Defensive Plexing. Treat this LP as a Thank you from the Militia's rather than an Income source all of it's own.

    3. Make the Upgrades much better to give people a reason to both want to hold onto and take a system. This should be the primary driver for wanting to plex, not LP Income.
    Hans Jagerblitzen
    Ice Fire Warriors
    #439 - 2012-09-07 15:05:14 UTC
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    Why are all you FW bads in favour of things being harder for outlaws? Don't you like us? We're already playing on hard mode.


    Wait, what? Ugh

    CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
    King Rothgar
    Deadly Solutions
    #440 - 2012-09-07 18:05:59 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:

    Level1:
    * +5 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
    * 10% market tax reduction
    * 10% repair cost reduction
    * 5% manufacturing time reduction

    Level2:
    * +10 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
    * 20% market tax reduction
    * 20% repair cost reduction
    * 10% manufacturing time reduction

    Level3:
    * +15 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
    * 30% market tax reduction
    * 30% repair cost reduction
    * 15% manufacturing time reduction
    * 10% reduction to starbase fuel cost

    Level4:
    * +20 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
    * 40% market tax reduction
    * 40% repair cost reduction
    * 20% manufacturing time reduction
    * 10% reduction to starbase fuel cost

    Level5:
    * +25 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
    * 50% market tax reduction
    * 50% repair cost reduction
    * 30% manufacturing time reduction
    * 20% reduction to starbase fuel cost
    * Able to anchor Cyno Jammer


    Sorry Yitterbium, but I think you've missed the mark with this. None of these except repair cost reductions are relevant to FW players. I'm not opposed to most of these additions, but they are more a buff to neutrals in FW space than to the actual players involved in it.

    FW is about PvP with the ability to make some isk without running off to high or null sec to grind it. That is all. Anything you do that is not directly related to pvp or local isk generation is simply irrelevant to FW players. This is all industry stuff other than repair costs and the cyno jammer. And the cyno jammer you describe will never be used the way you think it will. Too expensive, too vulnerable and terribly easy to exploit if you're so inclined (think an amarr's alt in the minmatar militia putting one up in their lvl5 mission hub or capital base). I suggest you delete that entire section from your list of changes and try something else. Industry and cyno jammers simply are not compatible with the whole notion of FW.

    More appropriate benefits would be those limited to FW players that reduce the cost associated with pvp. Repairs are a good start. Something along the lines of a 20% reduction in cost per tier, with them being completely free at tier 5. A similar setup could be done for FW corp starbases with fuel usage. They shouldn't be fuel-less at tier 5, but greatly reduced fuel cost . This change once again should only apply to POS's belonging to a FW corp. Neutrals should receive no benefit.

    Another option is stronger belt rats and better non-FW complexes, just like with the null sec upgrades. Since FW is PvP oriented, there should not be any option for industry upgrades, all upgrades should be on the combat/exploration line. These would be largely limited to FW players since many of us would not hesitate to kill any neutrals trying to run them.

    Those are just a few ideas I have, plenty of other good ideas out there too.

    [u]Fireworks and snowballs are great, but what I really want is a corpse launcher.[/u]