These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The main FW topics Q1 2013

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#41 - 2013-01-07 16:26:58 UTC
Farmers wouldn't be an issue if they had no impact on the war at large (ie. old mission whores), that is what LP for plexing gave us .. whomever has the most alts "wins" .. tier system is secondary.

My suggestions, basically seperate ISK/LP (PvE) and system control (PvP):
- Keep tier system as is, tweak benefits slightly to account for below.
- Add reverse modifier to plex timers, doesn't have to much, 33% worst case ((T1 vs T5) so "coming back" is a little easier))
- Move all the LP into kills (within plexes to mitigate farming) and missions.
- Add poison pills to missions and restrict them to hostile space.
- Some notification system to tell if a system is being actively plexed (Militia interface issupposedly 'upgradeable' .. use it!)
- Add portion (or all) LP gained for kills in a system to the VP pool of said system.

That and tweak plex NPCs and spawn rules (shouldn't be stopped!) so that one can't do everything up to a large with a frig ..

Will be many moons before devs return to our neighbourhood though so we should have plenty of time to flesh out a 'most desired' list.

PS: Why on earth and in space does friendly mission NPCs aggress me? Someone mess up the code?
Gritz1
Ice Fire Warriors
#42 - 2013-01-07 18:24:52 UTC
I think everyone here is hitting on a similar topic. The whole idea of spinning buttons and restricted plex sizes really goes against a lot of what eve is. If this was decoupled from taking systems, then I would have less of a problem with it. But when 30 - 40 frigates or cruisers show up in my home system and you can only muster 10+15 people, you should have options. Not just be SOL. Restricting how you play, how you defend your home system with real consequences such as losing access to your station and ships should not be affected by spinning buttons and ship restrictions. I really wish I could offer an alternative way, but I really can't think of anything. I am just finding that the sand box is getting rules and restrictions that are against what eve is supposed to be.
Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2013-01-07 18:42:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Andre Vauban
Gritz1 wrote:
I think everyone here is hitting on a similar topic. The whole idea of spinning buttons and restricted plex sizes really goes against a lot of what eve is. If this was decoupled from taking systems, then I would have less of a problem with it. But when 30 - 40 frigates or cruisers show up in my home system and you can only muster 10+15 people, you should have options. Not just be SOL. Restricting how you play, how you defend your home system with real consequences such as losing access to your station and ships should not be affected by spinning buttons and ship restrictions. I really wish I could offer an alternative way, but I really can't think of anything. I am just finding that the sand box is getting rules and restrictions that are against what eve is supposed to be.


I strongly disagree with this. This is what makes FW different than the rest of Eve. If you want unrestricted sov level warfare, that is what 0.0 is for. Granted 0.0 sov warfare is horribly broken, but hopefully that is what CCP tackles next to fix it like they did FW. Hopefully fixing 0.0 will also fix the "bored 0.0 alliances dropping in on FW fights because they are bored and need something to do to keep their members occupied" problem.

What makes FW great is that to take systems you have to dominate at 2 of 3 of the following (should be 4 until CCP fixes DT large plex spawns): T1 Frigs, T1/T2 Dessies and down, and T1/T2 cruisers and down. Then you have to be able to bust the ihub where anything goes. You also need to dominate in those plexes for more than 12 hours a day. The FW timer system is so much better than 0.0 because there are almost no structure grinds except for the IHUB which can be ninja-killed by 5 dreads in < 5 minutes. The timer counts at the same rate whether you have 3 guys or 100 ensures the best strategy is to spread out. Spreading out means more small gangs and less blobs. This is what makes FW fun. If one side blobs, the other side can go ahead and take every other system. The blobbing side cannot possibly play whack-a-mole on every system.

I think FW is pretty close to perfect at this point. The only real changes needed are:

1. implement a rollback to 0 feature on the plex timers if nobody is currently running the button to discourage farmers from leaving and coming back later.

2. Remove missions all together. They are free LP for farmers which hurts the ISK/LP ratio that the PVPers need to make a living. If CCP insists on keeping them, the LP should be seriously nerfed and shouldn't get impacted by militia tier level.

3. Scale back the LP bonuses for the higher tiers. I'm not sure to what degree, but the current levels are a bit much.

4. CCP needs to look at the map and make sure there are decent non-FW lowsec systems adj to FW space for each faction to base from should they ever be pushed out of too many station systems. I personally like the station lockout as it is a strong motivation to fight and it isn't that difficult to get your stuff compared to 0.0 should the system fall. If they cannot do that, then I can see scrapping station lockout and instead moving to a you can dock, but all station services (repair, fitting, etc) are not available.

.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#44 - 2013-01-07 21:04:35 UTC

Here's my 0.02 isk from my time in FW.....

1.) The plex system is actually a very good system for taking control of systems. The size restrictions and grid/gate setup creates interesting tactical environments. The time limits of plexes create a sense of urgency in responses. The station lockout mechanics provide consequences for not defending your territory... Overall, I think CCP has a very good system going here, but it does have some wrinkles that need ironing out.

2.) FW plexes should primarily focus on PvP, and NOT be such an efficient PvE only activity. Leave LP farming to FW mission runners... When carebear plexers are playing the major role in sov flipping, there is an issue. THE reasons for the NPC changes was to limit the afk farming carebear crap that plagued FW. In truth, when a person is running a plex, they should be rewarded for holding the ground and engaging an incoming opponent. For example:
  • This is an off-the-cuff idea, but imagine if for every ship destroyed inside the plex, there is a Bonus LP payout when capturing the plex.. If you bring too many people to fight, your enemy runs away and you don't get a "bonus" when you take a site... .When there is a large engagement within the plex, the plex bonus payout may be huge.... (which may be enough to encourage the opponents reshipping for round 2).

    • Note: Given that EvE's player base has a propensity to abuse mechanics, , I'm sure that thoroughly vetting the bonus system is necessary to prevent billion LP payouts.

    Note 2: You can never really get risk-adverse players to fight when they think they risk not getting paid... What you can do, is limit the rewards they get when they are not taking risks. As such, I would actually recommend reducing the base payouts of all plexes, and move most of that LP payout to PewPew Bonuses.
    Sokor Loro
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #45 - 2013-01-08 07:36:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Sokor Loro
    Andre Vauban wrote:

    The FW timer system is so much better than 0.0 because there are almost no structure grinds except for the IHUB which can be ninja-killed by 5 dreads in < 5 minutes.


    I don't see how the FW system is any better. One has you sitting next to a station shooting it for a long time, one has you orbiting buttons for a long time.



    I'll go ahead and share my thoughts;

    In general, I hate plexing. I don't do it, unless we have a fleet up and it just happens to be something we do. I will almost never run a plex solo, and to be honest, I hate how the sovereignty system is tied to who has the most plexers- rather than who can control pvp battles. It annoys me to no end that the group who can win engagement after engagement, whoever it is, is ultimately irrelevant in who gets control of a system. Rather, the faction that is "winning" tier wise gets the most people who plex the most systems for that faction (most of which have no interest in actually getting in a fight), and the problem just gets worse.

    The only part I like about plexing is the ship restrictions. I love flying frigates, destroyers and cruisers. I love that they are low SP ships that any new-bro can hop into, I love that they are inexpensive, and I like the way they fly. And due to the ship restrictions, I don't have to worry about being up-shipped.

    However, due to my above complaints about the sovereignty system, I couldn't care less about it. If we take a system, cool. If we lose a system, cool. Except in very isolated situations where we run pvp fleets in a concerted effort to take a system, Dal most recently, for example, I have no interest in who holds sovereignty because 99% of the time that sovereignty wasn't determined by PvP, it was by PvE.

    Unfortunately, I have no decent solutions for my complaints so it's really just bitching. I treat the FW zone as a highly populated pvp area, with nifty ship restrictions to shape a fight, and having targets that I can shoot without having to deal with gate/station guns. I'm ok with that set up, and I have fun playing in it. It seems like most people have fun too.
    Gunship
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #46 - 2013-01-08 09:43:51 UTC
    Hidden Snake wrote:
    OGB has nothing to do with FW .... BTW ....


    It's true that it is used many other places in eve, but the impact on FW is HUGE, here is why:

    OGB in FW are "not in FW" so they don't show up as as a Valid War Target & gate guns protect them (low sec).

    Most fights in FW takes place in frigs & Cruisers, so a T3 OGB has almost zero risk of being engaged, especially since most cloak after jump , also we can't create warp bubbles in Low Sec.

    OGB makes frigs tackle @ 36km and Web @ 15km that is a massive advantage in FW PvP they also provide a massive boost in speed, often see a Wolf doing 6-7km/sec.

    We see far too often a small army of OGB jumping into system before any fighting takes place. This is completely stupid and I frankly never understood why OGB was created in the first place, did CCP run out of real ideas. I often hear that it was to allow small elite gangs an advantage, the reality check is not surprising that it is used by the blobs and those who already have a massive advantage in Isk and skills.

    What we are asking is that OFF-grid becomes ON-grid and the fact that you're boosting a fleet member in fraction warfare makes you a valid fraction warfare target and that this is indicated (flashing orange).



     How To use a Probe Scanner in Eve Online

    Colt Blackhawk
    Doomheim
    #47 - 2013-01-08 09:52:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Colt Blackhawk
    Quote:
    It's true that it is used many other places in eve, but the impact on FW is HUGE, here is why:

    OGB in FW are "not in FW" so they don't show up as as a Valid War Target & gate guns protect them (low sec).

    Most fights in FW takes place in frigs & Cruisers, so a T3 OGB has almost zero risk of being engaged, especially since most cloak after jump , also we can't create warp bubbles in Low Sec.

    OGB makes frigs tackle @ 36km and Web @ 15km that is a massive advantage in FW PvP they also provide a massive boost in speed, often see a Wolf doing 6-7km/sec.

    We see far too often a small army of OGB jumping into system before any fighting takes place. This is completely stupid and I frankly never understood why OGB was created in the first place, did CCP run out of real ideas. I often hear that it was to allow small elite gangs an advantage, the reality check is not surprising that it is used by the blobs and those who already have a massive advantage in Isk and skills.

    What we are asking is that OFF-grid becomes ON-grid and the fact that you're boosting a fleet member in fraction warfare makes you a valid fraction warfare target and that this is indicated (flashing orange).



    +1
    Agreeing 100%
    But CCP won´t do.... anything. LOL

    edit: btw ogb makes ab drams practically invulnerable vs missiles as I saw today. Again great job CCP.

    [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f****** amarr flag and s*** on their smoking wrecks.
    FistyMcBumBasher
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #48 - 2013-01-08 13:28:53 UTC
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

    Here's my 0.02 isk from my time in FW.....

    1.) The plex system is actually a very good system for taking control of systems. The size restrictions and grid/gate setup creates interesting tactical environments. The time limits of plexes create a sense of urgency in responses. The station lockout mechanics provide consequences for not defending your territory... Overall, I think CCP has a very good system going here, but it does have some wrinkles that need ironing out.

    2.) FW plexes should primarily focus on PvP, and NOT be such an efficient PvE only activity. Leave LP farming to FW mission runners... When carebear plexers are playing the major role in sov flipping, there is an issue. THE reasons for the NPC changes was to limit the afk farming carebear crap that plagued FW. In truth, when a person is running a plex, they should be rewarded for holding the ground and engaging an incoming opponent. For example:
  • This is an off-the-cuff idea, but imagine if for every ship destroyed inside the plex, there is a Bonus LP payout when capturing the plex.. If you bring too many people to fight, your enemy runs away and you don't get a "bonus" when you take a site... .When there is a large engagement within the plex, the plex bonus payout may be huge.... (which may be enough to encourage the opponents reshipping for round 2).

    • Note: Given that EvE's player base has a propensity to abuse mechanics, , I'm sure that thoroughly vetting the bonus system is necessary to prevent billion LP payouts.

    Note 2: You can never really get risk-adverse players to fight when they think they risk not getting paid... What you can do, is limit the rewards they get when they are not taking risks. As such, I would actually recommend reducing the base payouts of all plexes, and move most of that LP payout to PewPew Bonuses.



    I agree 100% with your first point. LP for plexes are a great conflict driver. It would be nice with more Larges though, BC's and above are sorely lacking currently.


    Since we cannot control farming and we know that Eve players will abuse mechanics, lets make the best of a ****** situation. Why not just normalize offensive and defensive LP payouts for plexes to tier 3 levels? If you have one side getting 225% LP at tier 5 as we currently have in the Gal/Cal front, where will the incentive come for any caldari to actually plex at 50% reduced payout? Even if they do try and push a system, the farmers will come in and make more money defensive plexing than they will offensive plexing. Plexing is boring enough, but doing it for less than 1/5th of the income to your opponent would just you more incentive to switch over to the winning side. Nothing is more soul crushing than this feeling and causes a lot of the players in FW for the pvp to think ''Why the hell should I care about plexing, since what one person does, a trible boxing farmer can do much more effectively''

    If the payouts were normalized then the side with more WZ control and more farmers would thereby be more susceptible to farmers pushing the WZ since there is no . This would create a little bit more chaos and a more varied landscape, hopefully creating a push/shove not really present in the current iteration.

    One other thing I would like to see is only being able to do missions in hostile territory. Make it so that on accepting the mission you are sent to a hostile area, and even if the system is flipped while the mission is still valid you are still able to do the mission there.
    Andre Vauban
    Federal Defense Union
    Gallente Federation
    #49 - 2013-01-08 14:21:24 UTC
    Sokor Loro wrote:
    Andre Vauban wrote:

    The FW timer system is so much better than 0.0 because there are almost no structure grinds except for the IHUB which can be ninja-killed by 5 dreads in < 5 minutes.


    I don't see how the FW system is any better. One has you sitting next to a station shooting it for a long time, one has you orbiting buttons for a long time.



    I'll go ahead and share my thoughts;

    In general, I hate plexing. I don't do it, unless we have a fleet up and it just happens to be something we do. I will almost never run a plex solo, and to be honest, I hate how the sovereignty system is tied to who has the most plexers- rather than who can control pvp battles. It annoys me to no end that the group who can win engagement after engagement, whoever it is, is ultimately irrelevant in who gets control of a system. Rather, the faction that is "winning" tier wise gets the most people who plex the most systems for that faction (most of which have no interest in actually getting in a fight), and the problem just gets worse.

    The only part I like about plexing is the ship restrictions. I love flying frigates, destroyers and cruisers. I love that they are low SP ships that any new-bro can hop into, I love that they are inexpensive, and I like the way they fly. And due to the ship restrictions, I don't have to worry about being up-shipped.

    However, due to my above complaints about the sovereignty system, I couldn't care less about it. If we take a system, cool. If we lose a system, cool. Except in very isolated situations where we run pvp fleets in a concerted effort to take a system, Dal most recently, for example, I have no interest in who holds sovereignty because 99% of the time that sovereignty wasn't determined by PvP, it was by PvE.

    Unfortunately, I have no decent solutions for my complaints so it's really just bitching. I treat the FW zone as a highly populated pvp area, with nifty ship restrictions to shape a fight, and having targets that I can shoot without having to deal with gate/station guns. I'm ok with that set up, and I have fun playing in it. It seems like most people have fun too.


    The difference between 0.0 sov and FW sov is that in order to hold sov in FW you actually have to live there and defend it 23.5/7. All of the systems that nobody lives in just get to be ping ponged back and forth by the farmers. You cannot ignore these systems and hope to hold them by dropping a blob into them from time to time. While not ideal, I see no way to make these systems sov determined by "pvp" since there really isn't any meaningful pvp "winner" in those systems. Who is the "pvp" winner, the guy who drops a massive blob into the system once in a while or the guys who can close plex after plex in the system unmolested? While the latter can be farmers, it could also be pvpers who live there. I'll take the latter. Is that really so bad?

    The other beautiful thing is that when running a complex, it doesn't matter if I have 1 guy or 500 as it still takes a fixed amount of time to take. In 0.0, the more people I bring, the faster I grind through a structure. 0.0 mechanics encourages blobs while FW mechanics discourages blobs. In 0.0, I have plenty of time to move my giant "safe" blob from system to system dealing with timers as they come up. In FW, you need to spread out and take as many plexes as possible using the bare minimum amount of people to take each plex in order to maximize the total number of plexes capped per unit time.

    .
    Andre Vauban
    Federal Defense Union
    Gallente Federation
    #50 - 2013-01-08 14:28:13 UTC
    Gunship wrote:


    What we are asking is that OFF-grid becomes ON-grid and the fact that you're boosting a fleet member in fraction warfare makes you a valid fraction warfare target and that this is indicated (flashing orange).





    Under the current crime watch system, what you are proposing would be to make any booster get a suspect flag or get a limited engagement with anybody that somebody that they are boosting has aggressed. This is dumb and overly complicated. KISS. All you need is to make boosters be on-grid and the problem is 99% solved for FW. I'm not sure how much this will mess up the 0.0 guys though.

    .
    Dan Carter Murray
    #51 - 2013-01-08 15:26:14 UTC
    Andre Vauban wrote:
    Gunship wrote:


    What we are asking is that OFF-grid becomes ON-grid and the fact that you're boosting a fleet member in fraction warfare makes you a valid fraction warfare target and that this is indicated (flashing orange).





    Under the current crime watch system, what you are proposing would be to make any booster get a suspect flag or get a limited engagement with anybody that somebody that they are boosting has aggressed. This is dumb and overly complicated. KISS. All you need is to make boosters be on-grid and the problem is 99% solved for FW. I'm not sure how much this will mess up the 0.0 guys though.


    or just stop allowing module activation within a POS along with giving sec loss and criminal flag every time someone does anything criminal while being boosted

    http://mfi.re/?j7ldoco 50GB free space @ MediaFire.com
    Andre Vauban
    Federal Defense Union
    Gallente Federation
    #52 - 2013-01-08 16:03:18 UTC
    Dan Carter Murray wrote:
    Andre Vauban wrote:
    Gunship wrote:


    What we are asking is that OFF-grid becomes ON-grid and the fact that you're boosting a fleet member in fraction warfare makes you a valid fraction warfare target and that this is indicated (flashing orange).





    Under the current crime watch system, what you are proposing would be to make any booster get a suspect flag or get a limited engagement with anybody that somebody that they are boosting has aggressed. This is dumb and overly complicated. KISS. All you need is to make boosters be on-grid and the problem is 99% solved for FW. I'm not sure how much this will mess up the 0.0 guys though.


    or just stop allowing module activation within a POS along with giving sec loss and criminal flag every time someone does anything criminal while being boosted



    I agree with the first point as an alternative "KISS" solution, but not the second. Let's not turn the new clean easy to understand crime watch system into swiss cheese again.

    .
    X Gallentius
    Black Eagle1
    #53 - 2013-01-08 16:24:43 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
    In the end I think the station lockout mechanic is what is driving most of the pvp in FW.

    Tying plexes to sovereignty forces us to be out in space and available for fights (and not spinning ships in station).

    The LP for plexes allows us to stay "on field" for long periods of time without having to take time out to go PVE.

    The system is distorted when one side decides to not defend a system - then it turns into boring PVE just like grinding for SOV when the losing side chooses to not defend. This is an EVE-wide phenomena in that the "winner" still has to do a lot of structure/plex grinding to prove he has actually won.

    The criticism of farmers in plexes is pretty much something we have to live with. Farmers are gonna farm. It has been reduced by quite bit (Caldari were at 75k VP/day before the "October surprise" patch!). It is creeping back up and I hope CCP can tune the plex rats accordingly. (T1 frigs should not be able to kill the rats in a medium plex!).

    IMO, the tier system is here to stay and at least it has been dialed down a bit so that everybody can stay and fight in FW even at Tier 1. It's a shame that farmers will jump onto the side with the highest Tier. All we can hope for is that CCP can adjust the plex rats accordingly to slow their progress.

    L4 missions are a bit out of line with the rest of the rewards, but CCP whatever said they want people to be able to farm stuff in low sec to get it more populated. So, IMO there's nothing we can do about it other than run them ourselves to make massive LP in a short amount of time.

    Other than that, I hope CCP buffs the empire faction cruisers soon because I have about 80 of them mothballed in station waiting to be used. Big smile Free the ENI!
    Sokor Loro
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #54 - 2013-01-08 17:08:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Sokor Loro
    Andre Vauban wrote:

    The difference between 0.0 sov and FW sov is that in order to hold sov in FW you actually have to live there and defend it 23.5/7. All of the systems that nobody lives in just get to be ping ponged back and forth by the farmers. You cannot ignore these systems and hope to hold them by dropping a blob into them from time to time. While not ideal, I see no way to make these systems sov determined by "pvp" since there really isn't any meaningful pvp "winner" in those systems. Who is the "pvp" winner, the guy who drops a massive blob into the system once in a while or the guys who can close plex after plex in the system unmolested? While the latter can be farmers, it could also be pvpers who live there. I'll take the latter. Is that really so bad?

    The other beautiful thing is that when running a complex, it doesn't matter if I have 1 guy or 500 as it still takes a fixed amount of time to take. In 0.0, the more people I bring, the faster I grind through a structure. 0.0 mechanics encourages blobs while FW mechanics discourages blobs. In 0.0, I have plenty of time to move my giant "safe" blob from system to system dealing with timers as they come up. In FW, you need to spread out and take as many plexes as possible using the bare minimum amount of people to take each plex in order to maximize the total number of plexes capped per unit time.


    These are all good and valid points, but the "blob" has simply taken another form in FW compared to null. A faction may not have the largest fleet to "blob" an enemy, but they can have the most farmers to "blob" the warzone. If this "blob" was the pvpers, then fine, they are holding a system 23.5/7, but it's not. PvPers might go scare off some farmers, but they'll just move to another system and come back later. Sovereignty in FW is all just another grind with a different face than 0.0.

    Still, I do like the FW sov grind more, but lets not sing it's praises against 0.0 because it's not THAT much better. Say what you want about "blobs" in 0.0, but there if you want to take a solar system from someone, you must have the ability to beat them in a PvP engagement; not orbit buttons while they are asleep and then ninja-killing the ihub in 5 minutes.

    If there was some way to actually defend an IHUB, I think it would make the system a lot better. Right now, people either ninja it, or if an enemy fleet shows up they peace out and do it later. On top of that, the defender simply wants them to take the system because it's easier and gives more LP to just replex it back yourself. The mechanic should be that if you successfully "defend" the IHUB, the whole system resets back to 0% vulnerable. It could just be a long king-of-the-hill plex timer, forcing you to stay on field and defend the thing (which would probably create some pretty epic battles), whatever.
    X Gallentius
    Black Eagle1
    #55 - 2013-01-08 17:18:23 UTC
    Sokor Loro wrote:

    A faction may not have the largest fleet to "blob" an enemy, but they can have the most farmers to "blob" the warzone. If this "blob" was the pvpers, then fine, they are holding a system 23.5/7, but it's not. PvPers might go scare off some farmers, but they'll just move to another system and come back later. Sovereignty in FW is all just another grind with a different face than 0.0.


    Farmers do not affect sov in home systems. They affect sov in far off areas where nobody else cares to operate. The sov map doesn't have an "importance scale", but you should. And when you filter the map through that lens, fighting for sov is more fun. (Basically, kick the damn bastards out of their home/mission systems!)

    Quote:

    If there was some way to actually defend an IHUB, I think it would make the system a lot better. Right now, people either ninja it, or if an enemy fleet shows up they peace out and do it later. On top of that, the defender simply wants them to take the system because it's easier and gives more LP to just replex it back yourself. The mechanic should be that if you successfully "defend" the IHUB, the whole system resets back to 0% vulnerable. It could just be a long king-of-the-hill plex timer, forcing you to stay on field and defend the thing (which would probably create some pretty epic battles), whatever.

    IHUBS are just another EHP impediment designed to get an occasional large fleet fight. They are boring and ought to be removed. Sov should be on a sliding scale from -100% to 100%, with 0% being the defining point for sovereignty. Station lockouts ought to occur at +/- X% (maybe 33%) so that there is a time where both sides can dock in the same system (because it reflects a time when nobody really "owns" the system).

    But, what we have is not so bad that we can't live with it.
    FistyMcBumBasher
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #56 - 2013-01-08 17:39:51 UTC
    X Gallentius wrote:
    Sokor Loro wrote:

    A faction may not have the largest fleet to "blob" an enemy, but they can have the most farmers to "blob" the warzone. If this "blob" was the pvpers, then fine, they are holding a system 23.5/7, but it's not. PvPers might go scare off some farmers, but they'll just move to another system and come back later. Sovereignty in FW is all just another grind with a different face than 0.0.


    Farmers do not affect sov in home systems. They affect sov in far off areas where nobody else cares to operate. The sov map doesn't have an "importance scale", but you should. And when you filter the map through that lens, fighting for sov is more fun. (Basically, kick the damn bastards out of their home/mission systems!)

    Quote:

    If there was some way to actually defend an IHUB, I think it would make the system a lot better. Right now, people either ninja it, or if an enemy fleet shows up they peace out and do it later. On top of that, the defender simply wants them to take the system because it's easier and gives more LP to just replex it back yourself. The mechanic should be that if you successfully "defend" the IHUB, the whole system resets back to 0% vulnerable. It could just be a long king-of-the-hill plex timer, forcing you to stay on field and defend the thing (which would probably create some pretty epic battles), whatever.

    IHUBS are just another EHP impediment designed to get an occasional large fleet fight. They are boring and ought to be removed. Sov should be on a sliding scale from -100% to 100%, with 0% being the defining point for sovereignty. Station lockouts ought to occur at +/- X% (maybe 33%) so that there is a time where both sides can dock in the same system (because it reflects a time when nobody really "owns" the system).

    But, what we have is not so bad that we can't live with it.


    If there were no IHUB shoots then there would never be any use for dreads or carriers. The EHP of them makes the option for fights to escalate up from cruisers and BC's which used to be everywhere.
    Veshta Yoshida
    PIE Inc.
    Khimi Harar
    #57 - 2013-01-08 17:42:25 UTC
    Sokor Loro wrote:
    ...If there was some way to actually defend an IHUB, I think it would make the system a lot better. Right now, people either ninja it, or if an enemy fleet shows up they peace out and do it later. On top of that, the defender simply wants them to take the system because it's easier and gives more LP to just replex it back yourself. The mechanic should be that if you successfully "defend" the IHUB, the whole system resets back to 0% vulnerable. It could just be a long king-of-the-hill plex timer, forcing you to stay on field and defend the thing (which would probably create some pretty epic battles), whatever.

    Not sure if it is possible to let it reset like that or what should constitute a 'defense', but the problem is very real and what was designed to b major fleet battle magnets has become <5 minute ninja dread drop (or gayer still farming SB swarms).

    Here is what I'd do:
    - Triple all defensive VP (not LP) until next DT once a system goes vulnerable.
    Makes emergency defensive plexing (ie. saving vulnerable) much more viable and forces an attacker to pursue defenders aggressively .. if we can't have a bunker fight, lets have plex fights!

    - If a vulnerable system exists at DT it will be at 75% contested when server comes back up.
    Put in to prevent obvious exploit of above. Since farmers are the main VP earners and are generally not doing their thing when a bunker fleet is possible some amount of reigning in of farmers should occur from those interested in occupancy.

    Note: That is only if LP stays as part of the plexing part in the first place, which I am entirely against Smile
    Sokor Loro
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #58 - 2013-01-08 17:43:14 UTC
    X Gallentius wrote:


    Farmers do not affect sov in home systems. They affect sov in far off areas where nobody else cares to operate. The sov map doesn't have an "importance scale", but you should. And when you filter the map through that lens, fighting for sov is more fun. (Basically, kick the damn bastards out of their home/mission systems!)


    Yeah, I mean I agree with this. I'll join a fleet and plex for a long time if we're specifically going for an enemy staging/missioning system. It just sucks that we will usually be at tier 1 or tier 2 all of the time. Not for me in particular, as I don't make my money in FW, but there are guys who use it to sustain their pvp habits. And frankly, tier 1 or even tier 2 produces pretty bad isk/hr. On that scale it's hard to ignore. I'd also like to see them remove tiers altogether, as our un-equal farming alt problem would likely go away.

    X Gallentius wrote:


    IHUBS are just another EHP impediment designed to get an occasional large fleet fight. They are boring and ought to be removed. Sov should be on a sliding scale from -100% to 100%, with 0% being the defining point for sovereignty. Station lockouts ought to occur at +/- X% (maybe 33%) so that there is a time where both sides can dock in the same system (because it reflects a time when nobody really "owns" the system).

    But, what we have is not so bad that we can't live with it.


    I don't know, I like the idea of having a "finish" to a system. And I like large-medium fleet fights, which we rarely if ever see in FW. I agree that what we have is ok and that we can live with it...but as I'm sure you're aware, we should push to make it better :P
    Mutnin
    SQUIDS.
    #59 - 2013-01-08 17:56:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Mutnin
    Andre Vauban wrote:


    I strongly disagree with this. This is what makes FW different than the rest of Eve.

    What makes FW great is that to take systems you have to dominate at 2 of 3 of the following (should be 4 until CCP fixes DT large plex spawns): T1 Frigs, T1/T2 Dessies and down, and T1/T2 cruisers and down. Then you have to be able to bust the ihub where anything goes. You also need to dominate in those plexes for more than 12 hours a day.



    You are happy with the current system because it revolves around being in the biggest blob which you happen to enjoy. This is all they have done with FW, is created null sec like blob warfare. It doesn't matter that the timing is different and we don't smash sov structures.. It still just revolves around who can bring the most numbers.. (pretty much CCP's motto for getting more subs, but it actually kills the game, as we have seen with the emptiness of null sec)

    Also saying you need to dominate 3 plex sizes is really not true. When you bring a big enough blob you really only need 2 ship sizes, frigs & destroyers. With the frig & dessie buff's they are more than enough when you have 40 of your closest BFF's sitting in the system with you.

    This is the problem with FW is that it's become nothing but blob warfare and there is no real tactics out side of bring MOAR people. We already have that with null sec Sov war, we didn't need it with FW as well, which was one of the few places where small gang PVP was possible.

    The old system was 100 times better because it forced the blobs to spread out if they had a specific target system in mind, because they had to search the entire region for plexes. This meant that a small out numbered group still had a chance to fight back unlike today system of once you out number the other side it's just sit in system with it locked down waiting for plex re-spawns every 30 mins.

    Add in the LP farmers doing all the work and the whole system is a bigger joke than current null sec Sov War system.

    I'd really love to know who it was at CCP that honestly said "hey guys, I have a great idea for FW, lets give them LP for farming plexes that cause station locks outs". Serious who honestly thought that would actually not create the hundreds of farmers that have essentially ruled the Sov War since it started not the PVPers.
    X Gallentius
    Black Eagle1
    #60 - 2013-01-08 18:10:37 UTC
    Mutnin wrote:
    tl:dr - I don't log in and so I don't know wtf I'm talking about.
    Fixed.