These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Faction Warfare: Moving Forward.....

First post First post
Author
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#241 - 2011-10-23 01:11:25 UTC
Silence iKillYouu wrote:
Take away NPC corps
Take away NPC Navys
Make plex's worth fighting over. Make them more like mini incursions.
Fix the bombers-farming-missions problem

Should all be fairly easy


fypm
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#242 - 2011-10-23 07:14:42 UTC
I suspect Hans is a carebear.

The idea that fw is entry level pvp is idiotic.
Fw missions as a way to 'attract' more people is counterproductive.
Alliances joining FW will also completely break it.

Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it. The people who want it to stay 'safe' and those who think it should become more hardcore.

I am of the opinion that people have become mighty soft.
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#243 - 2011-10-23 07:47:17 UTC
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
I suspect Hans is a carebear.

The idea that fw is entry level pvp is idiotic.
Fw missions as a way to 'attract' more people is counterproductive.
Alliances joining FW will also completely break it.

Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it. The people who want it to stay 'safe' and those who think it should become more hardcore.

I am of the opinion that people have become mighty soft.



Wait you don't like roaming and seeing dozens of SBs running mission? WTF and here I thought that was only me.

Whats even funnier is the Null sec guys that clearly have alts in FW for the missions dropping their 2 cents in. Guess they dont wanna risk carrier site running, not when they can make 300m an hours in a SB.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.

ArmyOfMe
Teddybears.
Dead Terrorists
#244 - 2011-10-23 07:57:01 UTC
sYnc Vir wrote:
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
I suspect Hans is a carebear.

The idea that fw is entry level pvp is idiotic.
Fw missions as a way to 'attract' more people is counterproductive.
Alliances joining FW will also completely break it.

Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it. The people who want it to stay 'safe' and those who think it should become more hardcore.

I am of the opinion that people have become mighty soft.



Wait you don't like roaming and seeing dozens of SBs running mission? WTF and here I thought that was only me.

Whats even funnier is the Null sec guys that clearly have alts in FW for the missions dropping their 2 cents in. Guess they dont wanna risk carrier site running, not when they can make 300m an hours in a SB.

This does indeed look to be the truth sadly.
FW needs to be made more hardcore, and the ammount of isk u can make from missions needs to be changed as well

GM Guard > I must ask you not to use the petition option like this again but i personally would finish the chicken sandwich first so it won´t go to waste. The spaghetti will keep and you can use it the next time you get hungry. Best regards.

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
The Network.
#245 - 2011-10-23 13:53:24 UTC
It certainly appears Bengal Bob is correct, but just in case the Devs really are still reading this:

The Lowest of the "Low Hanging Fruit" tasks that could ever be accomplished by the Dev Team for this winter.

Plot FW Occupancy Heat Map as an absolute value rather than a relative value.

i.e. Heat(j) = amount_contested(j)/amount_need_to_make_vulnerable, where "j" it the jth system under consideration. This way FW pilots would know how critical it is for them to fight over a system. If the "heat" is low, then they can do other stuff, but if the "heat" is high then they ought to turn their attention to that system.

Currently the in game map plots a heat map to show which systems are contested and by how much they are contested relative to the most contested system. Something like Heat(j) = amount_contested(X(j))/max(amount_contested(X)), where X is the systems being interrogated. This makes it very difficult for somebody looking at the map to figure out whether or not they should spend their time helping out.

tl;dr Replace max(amount_contested) with amount_needed_to_make_system_vulnerable.

REPLACE ONE WORD IN YOUR CODE! Do it! Big smile
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
The Network.
#246 - 2011-10-23 13:56:08 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
sYnc Vir wrote:
Wait you don't like roaming and seeing dozens of SBs running mission? WTF and here I thought that was only me.

Whats even funnier is the Null sec guys that clearly have alts in FW for the missions dropping their 2 cents in. Guess they dont wanna risk carrier site running, not when they can make 300m an hours in a SB.
[/i]
Luminaire General X Gallentius signing up for anti-stealth bomber mission running duty. Give me the tools (poison pills) to take them down CCP! (see: Roleplay, and player enforced limits to exploits)
Lugalzagezi666
#247 - 2011-10-23 16:32:08 UTC
Hey, you already have the tools - you can sit cloaked and waste your time there, while farmer completes 5 other missions.Lol

No seriously, making fw missions be easily blitzable in bomber /or bomber + inty/ was stupid idea from the start. Something like being able to decline any number of fw missions without standings loss.LolLol

Berendas
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#248 - 2011-10-23 16:53:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Berendas
There is one thing I would like to see ESPECIALLY if FW was taken into high sec by way of faction police removal. It would be awesome if people with low sec status could join a militia and while a member could travel into high security space. A Dirty Dozen-esque 'serve to redeem yourself' mechanic would be a fun way to allow career PVPers to participate. Of course this would need to be balanced out so that pirates couldn't abuse it. Perhaps a certain number of solo or gang kills against enemy militias is required weekly/monthly for an outlaw to maintain their amnesty in high sec. This would also be a slight buff to low sec by giving pirates something to do when traffic is dead as well as access to high sec trade hubs.

This would need to be regulated (heavily) of course to prevent abuse, but I think the idea has some merit. I don't think it's over CCP's heads to invent a good system to keep this balanced. Anyone else have thoughts on this?
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
The Network.
#249 - 2011-10-23 18:08:54 UTC
Removal of FW NPC from high sec will lead to gay high sec RR docking games at mission and market hubs. \o/

All the veteran players will stay in low sec and not bother with them, younger players without alts will be griefed endlessly.
zero2espect
Space-Brewery-Association
Local Is Primary
#250 - 2011-10-23 20:09:36 UTC
while i applaud you for trying to get the biggest bunch of girlz in eve (EM) into FW - all of your ideas apart from removing big non faction alliances from FW space are tbh just bad. verging on idiotic.

all serious FW pilots should just boycot this thread.

what faction warfare needs is real rewards for plexing. bonuses (or non-reverse) bonuses for fights in FW systems.

not the ability for people who are cowards to join fw to blob it out while sucking moon goo out of 0.0.

i'd love to see faction pilots able to deploy interdictor bubbles in fw space as it adds another dimension to the game. no large bubble camps though.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#251 - 2011-10-23 20:22:04 UTC
Ruah Piskonit wrote:

Its really easy to spot who in this thread uses FW to make a profit, and who actually PvPs in it.


It's called a killboard, go use it.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#252 - 2011-10-23 20:34:40 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
"go ahead, take away my ability to bomb all the missions". Just make us able to earn the same income / hour with a gang, and we'll be good.




Also guys, please take the time to actually read previous posts before you go off half cocked and make ignorant statements.

I've consistently said that missioning should not be able to be abused for profit, and I've consistently said that the ability to solo missions should be nerfed, to encourage fleetwork not solo work.

I've also pointed out that the need to have an income potential from FW stems from the fact that we lose ships regularly, and I've also stated before that rewards should be stepped up in plexing, moreso than missions.

Lets keep this thread respectful, and if you're going to rant, read about **** first.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#253 - 2011-10-23 20:41:01 UTC
zero2espect wrote:

not the ability for people who are cowards to join fw to blob it out while sucking moon goo out of 0.0.


The reasons why Alliance participation does not mean blobbing if they fix the mechanics have been well documented in this thread.

Whether blobs form and fight each other or not has nothing to do with whether its Alliance members doing it or not, its the current plexing mechanics that discourage people from even using the plexes, and thus lead to blobbing on gates, belts, etc.

The militias blob themselves far too much, this has nothing to do with "filthy moon goo suckers", its a mechanics issue.

But clearly you've got a need to stereotype players, and hate on alliance members as if they're all the same and all use the same tactics.

If you want a medal for your bravado and swagger, I'll be happy to give you one. Everyone, zero2espect is a badass pilot, and has a bigger 3p33n than all of you. You're all cowards if you dont **** **** up as much as them.

Ok, hopefully now we can move on and get to discussing ideas again.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#254 - 2011-10-23 20:42:34 UTC
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:
Hey, you already have the tools - you can sit cloaked and waste your time there, while farmer completes 5 other missions.Lol

No seriously, making fw missions be easily blitzable in bomber /or bomber + inty/ was stupid idea from the start. Something like being able to decline any number of fw missions without standings loss.LolLol



Agreed, indeed. If we're going to have missions at all, they should not be blitzable in solo ship. The difficulty level should be set so the most effecient way to complete the missions is as a fleet.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

JamesCLK
#255 - 2011-10-23 20:57:05 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:
Hey, you already have the tools - you can sit cloaked and waste your time there, while farmer completes 5 other missions.Lol

No seriously, making fw missions be easily blitzable in bomber /or bomber + inty/ was stupid idea from the start. Something like being able to decline any number of fw missions without standings loss.LolLol



Agreed, indeed. If we're going to have missions at all, they should not be blitzable in solo ship. The difficulty level should be set so the most effecient way to complete the missions is as a fleet.


Which could be done with a system not dissimilar to Incursions.

And when we're talking Incursions, I think Minmatar incursions into Amarr space! Big smile
How cool would it be if you could assist the incursion force in taking control of the target space? Hell, make the actual inursion itself player driven!
If enough militia frequent a particular claimable system, give them the ability to start influencing this system's infrastructure.

And on the topic of infrastructure and prescence, what if you could turn lowsec into hisec and vice versa (with some limits) once enough militia frequented it?

Since FW is up for a complete redoing, it's practically a blank slate. Big smile

Also, <3

-- -.-- / -.-. .-.. --- -. . / .. ... / - --- --- / . -..- .--. . -. ... .. ...- . / - --- / ..- -. -.. --- -.-. -.- / ... - --- .--. / .--. .-.. . .- ... . / ... . -. -.. / .... . .-.. .--. / ... - --- .--.

Johnny Punisher
Blue Canary
The Birdhouse
#256 - 2011-10-24 00:09:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Johnny Punisher
X Gallentius wrote:
Removal of FW NPC from high sec will lead to gay high sec RR docking games at mission and market hubs. \o/

All the veteran players will stay in low sec and not bother with them, younger players without alts will be griefed endlessly.


^^ This.

Also it would move people out of lowsec and lowsec is already empty! Horrible idea imo.

And pvp in highsec is pain in the ass, damn complicated keeping track on all the neutrals. At least if you take out the npc navy, make it so that giving neutral-RR to any faction warfare member gives GCC (so if you RR militia ppl in highsec with neutral-RR, you get concorded). Hell, it should be like that even in lowsec... Anyway: it's better to keep the fighting in lowsec.

What you SHOULD fix:

1) pirate frigs not allowed into minor plexes. (edit: not anymore after winter patch buff to destroyers.)

2) no standing loss in remote repping friendly militia member who is pirate/gcc

3) make plexes worth doing / dont spawn most of them after dt
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#257 - 2011-10-24 00:23:16 UTC
Johnny Punisher wrote:

What you SHOULD fix:

1) pirate frigs not allowed into minor plexes.

2) no standing loss in remote repping friendly militia member who is pirate/gcc

3) make plexes worth doing / dont spawn most of them after dt


Thanks Johnny, controversy over higsec NPC's being removed aside, for those at CCP reading this, all three of the fixes you've posted here have been pretty much unopposed by the contributors of this thread and many others. If the devs are looking for concrete fixes that wont rock the boat, you've nailed it.

Its good to see after 13 pages of great ideas (on both sides of certain debates, including the removal of higsec NPC's) there are ideas like these that are clearly floating to the surface and could easily be implemented in time for Winter Expansion.

I also agree with those that say that this is not enough. These would only scratch the surface, and take care of the stuff that those of us involved in FW for years now have been asking for pretty much the whole time. I, and many others, would love to see this not stop here, and move towards a full overhaul of the Faction Warfare system even if it can't be done in time for Winter.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

BoneEater
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#258 - 2011-10-24 01:39:27 UTC
bump.... blog please?Sad
Marlakh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#259 - 2011-10-24 02:16:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Marlakh
Sorry if this has been suggested before, I've not really read this thread fully. But:

When establishments comes fully online, I'd like to be able to wear my uniform around in station that (1) reflects which faction navy I signed up with, and (2) what rank I'm at.

A new uniform reflecting the new rank may be issued each time when you've been promoted. This way, the same design may also be used multiple times with minor variations in each rank.

When a player reaches the highest rank (eg Divine Commodore), a special uniform (like the 12,000 Aurum Field Marshall cloak being sold now in Nex) may be issued, or partially given with Aurum purchase.

I know this suggestion flies in the face of the shift away from Nex clothing and Aurum sales, and Establishments, so this may not even be considered in the near to medium term. Nevertheless I think being able to wear (and show off) our faction uniforms will aid in the RP aspect of FW rewards. When the time is right, I'd love for this to be implemented.

Cheers.

M
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#260 - 2011-10-24 05:05:05 UTC
Marlakh wrote:
Sorry if this has been suggested before, I've not really read this thread fully. But:

When establishments comes fully online, I'd like to be able to wear my uniform around in station that (1) reflects which faction navy I signed up with, and (2) what rank I'm at.

A new uniform reflecting the new rank may be issued each time when you've been promoted. This way, the same design may also be used multiple times with minor variations in each rank.

When a player reaches the highest rank (eg Divine Commodore), a special uniform (like the 12,000 Aurum Field Marshall cloak being sold now in Nex) may be issued, or partially given with Aurum purchase.

I know this suggestion flies in the face of the shift away from Nex clothing and Aurum sales, and Establishments, so this may not even be considered in the near to medium term. Nevertheless I think being able to wear (and show off) our faction uniforms will aid in the RP aspect of FW rewards. When the time is right, I'd love for this to be implemented.

Cheers.

M


Would be fun, but like you said CCP isn't going to do any more NeX/Incarna stuff any time soon, its permanently on hold. The players have spoken and Hilmar's agreed, no more of that junk for now. It's all spaceship stuff the next few expansions (except for Dust, of course).

Also, they better not do it unless they take care of the ranking system first. The ranks should have something to do with kills, its total bullshit that you get called a general for going out and running a stack of NPC missions.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary